Excerpt:

Last Tuesday the DM Register headlined the McKinley Task Force recommended changes to Iowa’s immigration laws. Don over at Cyclone Conservative gave the details of the proposal a thorough review last Tuesday and we here at TRS urge everyone to watch …

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

Glenn Greenwald has an interesting article as Salon about what bipartisanship actually means.

But more importantly, “bipartisanship” is already rampant in Washington, not rare. And, in almost every significant case, what “bipartisanship” means in Washington is that enough Democrats join with all of the Republicans to endorse and enact into law Republican policies, with which most Democratic voters disagree. That’s how so-called “bipartisanship” manifests in almost every case.

Many people, especially partisans, always believe that their own side is compromising too much and that the other side is always winning, so it’s best to consult objective facts in order to know how “bipartisanship” works. Here are the vote breakdowns by party over the last couple years on the most significant and contentious pieces of legislation, particularly (though not only) in the area of national security.

In almost every case, the proposals that are enacted are ones favored by the White House and supported by all GOP lawmakers, and then Democrats split and enough of them join with Republicans to ensure that the GOP gets what it wants.

Greenwald then lists through a bunch of votes that nearly all of the Republicans voted for it and the Democrats are split.

One reason for this is the demise of the moderate Republicans in congress.

Today, however, the animal on the brink of extinction comes from Congress’ own ranks: moderate House Republicans.

Their numbers have long been in decline, they were nearly wiped out in the midterm elections, and 2008 looks to be another bad year for this proud creature.

Republicans have long been purging their party of moderates, even encouraging primary opponents to run against moderate incumbents. However, Democrats are often very happy to continue to send incumbents back to Congress that continually vote against the interest of the Democratic party and against the interests of the people they represent.

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

Ed Fallon was a Ralph Nader supporter in 2000. He described Al Gore as “to the right of Bill Clinton” and said that “I can’t, I won’t and you shouldn’t [vote for Al Gore] either.”
So what was the platform of the far-right wing, DLC Democratic that Ed Fallon refused to support?
In Gore’s acceptance speech, he […]

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

From Andrew Sullivan…

“Rudy didn’t even care enough about conservatives to lie to us,” - Republican consultant, Nelson Warfield.

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

Last night, I read that John Edwards cancelled campaign stops in two states today to give a major speech in New Orleans on poverty. Today it is being reported that Edwards will be dropping out of the race.

The former North Carolina senator will not immediately endorse either candidate in what is now a two-person race for the Democratic nomination, said one adviser, who spoke on a condition of anonymity in advance of the announcement.

Edwards waged a spirited top-tier campaign against the two better-funded rivals, even as he dealt with the stunning blow of his wife’s recurring cancer diagnosis. In a dramatic news conference last March, the couple announced that the breast cancer that she thought Their decision sparked a debate about family duty and public service. But Elizabeth Edwards remained a forceful advocate for her husband, and she was often surrounded at campaign events by well-wishers and emotional survivors cheering her on.

Edwards ran a great campaign in Iowa and it showed with a strong 2nd place finish. Unfortunately, He was unable to spread his populist message in the other states, partly due to the condensed calendar and partly due to the media.

I would be shocked if Edwards endorsed Clinton with their differences on accepting money from lobbyists. Edwards has been campaigning on a theme of change and Barack Obama most closely matches Edwards rhetoric. It would be a big boost for Obama if Edwards would endorse before February 5th.

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

Rumor has it that John Edwards is abandoning his Presidential campaign. If so, his statements of last week that he was in the race for the long term, because his vision of a social welfare nanny state, grounded on the Marxian maxim of from each accordi…

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

The big hub bub over Obama turning away from Clinton at the State of the Union is actually a non-story. This picture shows Obama shaking Claire McKaskill’s hand while Hillary is shaking Ted Kennedy’s.

I think it would have been a bigger story if Obama snubbed McKaskill, a key supporter in Missouri.

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

Last night President Bush just might just have inflicted his most cutting blow on the Ds. Now that the Dems control Congress they have accessed the incumbents’ secret weapon, earmarks.Damascus Nancy, Dingy Harry and ABSCAM Jack spent the first six ye…

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

From Open Left…

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

After a lot of talk about Iowa and New Hampshire having too much impact and then questioning of the impact of the compacted schedule, the primary season seems to be working out pretty well.

Stephen J. Dubner of Freakonomics blog explains why this has been the best primary season ever.

I’d like to suggest an opposing view: this primary season has been remarkably successful at letting the public come to know the candidates and what they’re about. Why?

For one thing, there has been massive exposure to every significant candidate, thanks in part to the scattered primary schedule. There have been so many debates that a voter would have had to try hard not to at least read about them, let alone see them.

But the second reason is, I think, far more important. This year’s primary schedule has forced candidates to act a bit less like candidates and a bit more like managers — and, therefore, a bit more like an actual President.

Think about it. The schedule called for a dazzling array of primary variables: some were public caucuses and some were standard private votes; independents voted in some primaries and not in others; both parties held primaries on the same day in some states and on different days in others. And then there’s the intense clustering of many primaries in many states in a relatively short time.

So what have the candidates been forced to do? Strategize intensely, adapt to a slew of different circumstances and formats, and, most of all, figure out how best to allocate precious resources — money and time chief among them — in order to optimize their outcome.

Related Posts: