Rep.-elect Andy Harris (R-MD), a physician who ran to repeal the new health care reform law, "surprised fellow freshmen at a Monday orientation session by demanding to know why his government-subsidized health care plan takes a month to kick in," Politico reports.
By Tim Peacock
Writing for conservative TownHall earlier this week, Ann Coulter mocked everyone for accurately pointing out that free speech Constitutional protections only apply when a government entity restricts speech, and after making the case for private "free speech" protections called for the killing of the "[c]liche-spouting hack TV pundits" who supported the LGBT and African American communities in the wake of Phil Robertson's GQ Magazine interview. According to Coulter:
"We know A&E is not the government. It may shock your tiny little pea brains, but free speech existed even before we had a Constitution. Free speech is generally considered a desirable goal even apart from its inclusion in the nation's founding document.
Suppose TV networks were capitulating to angry Muslims by suspending people for saying they opposed Sharia law? Would that prompt any of you pusillanimous hacks to finally take a position on the state of free speech in America?
Or would you demand that we stop the presses so you could roll out your little cliche about a television network not being the government? [SNIP]
A&E didn't dare cross the gays, never anticipating that the Robertson family wouldn't back down -- and the rest of the country wouldn't, either. Even non-Christians can have only contempt for the network's utter cravenness in suspending Robertson for stating basic Christian doctrine.
The first time someone stands up to a bully and the sky doesn't fall, the tyranny is over. The gay mafia was out of control, drunk with power. This time, they got their wings clipped.
Christians, 1; Angry gays: minus 1,000. Cliche-spouting hack TV pundits: I recommend capital punishment." [emphasis mine]
Equating extremist beliefs of one religion (Sharia Law & Islam) to the equal treatment of citizens in our country aside, Coulter seems to be flailing a bit in her column. She can't make a legitimate argument against pro-gay pundits pointing out what the law actually is to those screaming "free speech violations!" (and yes Ann, people were actually legitimately making those allegations). Rather than offer a thought out argument on the tail end of a worn out topic, she offers a lot of bark with little bite.
At the end of the day A&E did exactly what conservatives have been preaching for years: they exercised their free market rights to engage in business as they saw fit. That their decision to suspend Robertson didn't mesh with fundamentalist Christians' ideals is what seems to be burning Coulter's biscuits.
And as a consequence of that outrage, Coulter apparently believes pro-gay pundits should be killed. Stay classy Ann.
"Republicans and conservatives around the country are cheering a great wall to be built at the border while crossing their fingers over a pipe dream of an Obama impeachment. Despite their fantasy, their own past might leave them with their jaws dropping.
November 6, 1986. That date might not seem to special to many people but it was the day that then President Ronald Reagan put pen to paper and signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Also known as the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, for Democrat Rep. Romano L. Mazzoli and Republican Sen. Alan K. Simpson who chaired their respected subcommittees, Reagan signed the bill into law with the hopes that the immigration issue would be taken care once and for all.
Among some of the bills provisions, it granted legal status to nearly 3 million illegal immigrants who entered the country before January 1, 1982 as long as they followed a plan to pay back taxes and fines. It also came down on employers who knowingly hired undocumented workers, while also attempting to secure the border. A noble effort, the results weren't as promising as fraudulent applications soured the bill's intentions, opening the door for more employees to hire a growing number of illegal immigrants entering the country.
Immigration reform has been a hot topic as Washington continues to make it the elephant in the room when it comes to today's current process. Everyone seems to know that it's an issue that must be tackled, but both sides of the political aisle get worried about the fallout. While Democrats argue over how far to take the immigration issue, Republicans question if they as a party can even afford to get it done. The overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants come from south of the border and the Republican party sees no light at the end of the tunnel if they stick with the status quo.
As the Hispanic population continues to grow, so does the voting base. According to the Pew Research Center, 11.2 million Latinos voted in the 2012 election, just over 48 percent of those who were eligible.
"Latino population has fueled quick growth in the number of Latinos eligible to vote (U.S. citizen adults). Between 2008 and 2012, the number of Latino eligible voters grew from 19.5 million to 23.3 million—an increase of 19%. By contrast, the number of Latino voters increased by 15% over 2008."
Republicans find their party at a political crossroads. They still cater towards an aging southern white population that doesn't typically support immigration reform, but they also know that if they want to have a chance in national elections moving forward, they can't appear to hard on immigration. Ronald Reagan gave it shot in 1986, but if he was doing that today, conservatives would be screaming "impeachment" with every movement of the signature of his pen. High profile Republicans, such as former VP candidate Sarah Palin, have called for President Obama's impeachment, but if they look back at their favorite leader's history, they might tone their rhetoric down or risk being called out over their own hypocrisy."
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) has doubled down on his call for an investigation into Justice Elena Kagan's involvement in shaping the health care reform bill that the Supreme Court upheld last week.