The Republican Party of Florida on Monday called for the resignation of Rep. Trey Radel (R-Fla.), who was sentenced last week for cocaine possession.
“The people of Florida’s 19th Congressional District need a Congressman who is 100 percent focused on the needs of Southwest Florida,” state GOP chairman Lenny Curry said in a statement. “Therefore, Congressman Radel should step down and focus his attention on rehabilitation and his family.”
Radel took a leave of absence and checked into a rehabilitation facility last week after he was sentenced in Washington to one year on probation for cocaine possession.
Radel, sworn into office just 10 months ago, had been celebrated as a tea party favorite. Among other things, he favored drug tests for food stamp recipients.
Terry Miller, chairman of the Lee County, Fla., GOP, told The Associated Press of his disappointment following Radel’s sentencing.
“We thought we had an up-and-coming star in the party,” Miller said.
When you see a graph like the one shown above it makes you wonder: what is it about this president, this particular president, that would make Republicans hate him so much?& A hate soo strong, that they’ve decided to do everything they can, even bringing the country to its knees, to make sure this president fails.
Their excuse is always the same – we are against the policies and the direction the president is taking the country. Yes, that would be admirable, but it’s not true.
The fact is, the policies Mr. Obama have implemented are not the left winged, Democratic wet dreams that Republicans must fight against. No, on the contrary. The president’s policies – maybe by design or purely unintentionally – are more center or right of center.
Take the Republican hated Obamacare for example. The idea of Obamacare was first instituted in Massachusetts by a Republican governor named Mitt Romney. And the dreaded “individual mandate” Republicans hate so much, was the brainchild of a right winged think tank called The Heritage Foundation.
But Obamacare was not all. There are more policies previously supported and even proposed by Republicans, that lost Republican favor when the president embraced those policies. A fact that even the President noticed, when he, on many occasions, called Republicans out for turning their backs on their own policies because those policies gained his support.
So if it’s not about policies, then it has to be about a man. What is it about the man that has Republicans so pissed off? So consumed with hate that they’re happily pushing the country over the edge hoping to point their finger to the man in charge and say, “see, he did it!”
It’s not Obama’s family that they hate, or his policies or even his party. And it’s not the president’s beliefs. What’s fueling the Republican’s hate is nothing more than the color of the President’s skin.
The graph above tells the whole story. All American presidents, a mixture of Democrats and Republicans. But the black dude on the left has seen more of his court nominations filibustered by Republicans than all the other presidents combined.
Republicans want you to think that they’re all for the Constitution. They’re the first to quote selected texts and point out what the Founding Fathers intended when they put the document together. But I’m sure they can’t find a passage in the Constitution that says one branch of government must do all they can to make sure the other branches fail… especially if the head of one of those branches is black.
America, we have a problem. And I am not talking about the usual problems, like the fact that Republicans are trying to take away your health care, take away your social security, take away your jobs and as soon as they have made your life as miserable as possible, they give you machine guns and send you on your merry way.
No America, these are just small insignificant problems. According to Joe the Plumber and his website however, our major problem is the President of the United States, who happens to be a Democrat… and who hapoens to be black!
Joe the Plumber. You remember him right? He is the same one who skyrocketed to Republican fame back in the 2008 election when he was seen on video asking then candidate Obama a question about his tax policy. Mr. Obama answered, then included this phrase in his answer, “when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
This statement was obviously taken out of context, but Joe was seen as a Republican hero for it. According to the Republicans, Joe got the President to admit his secret wish for “wealth redistribution and socialism.”
Joe the Republican hero plumber, also ran loosing campaign for the House of Representatives.
And now, Joe is back and he is armed with a website. And in one of the articles on Joe’s website the author details his reason for a white Republican in the White House.
That article, written by Kevin Jackson, challenges you to admit that you just miss the good old days when your President’s face was as white as snow. Now–you might start feeling like a little bit of a racist after coming to terms with your desire to have a white man leading your country, but don’t worry: the article was written by a black guy, allowing you to use it to justify your bigotry!
Isn’t this exciting?
Jackson, the monumental idiot, feels that:
election of a recognized black president was not supposed to change anything. In fact, it was supposed to (1) ease any perceived racial tensions, and (2) allow the government to focus on legislating without race. So America would be more free than ever to discuss the issues.
Not the case. And that is why having a white Republican president is best for the country.
So because Obama didn’t magically wipe out all racism, and North Carolina still exists, we need a white Republican in charge?
What in the hell are you smoking, Jackson?
The nutjob continues to prattle on about how blacks have never been called racist for being critical of a white President, accuses Democratic Presidents of racism (of course), and–the coup d’état, claims Ronald Reagan “ushered in a veritable Renaissance for blacks,” citing an article written by Michael Reagan, son of Ronnie…who certainly would never misrepresent his father’s legacy!
Joe, of course, uses the fact that a black man wrote an article that happens to, in a twisted way, justify his bigoted and horrible world views, to claim that it’s not just right to want a white Republican man in office–it’s the American way!
Well, Joe and his ilk’s sick version of America anyway
Butch Matthews is a 61-year-old former small business owner from Little Rock, Arkansas who used to wake up every morning at 4 A.M. to deliver canned beverages to retailers before retiring in 2010. A lifelong Republican, he was heavily skeptical of the Affordable Care Act when it first passed. “I did not think that Obamacare was going to be a good plan, I did not think that it was going to help me at all,” he told ThinkProgress over the phone.
But after doing a little research, Matthews eventually realized how much the law could help him. And on Tuesday, his local Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) provider confirmed that he would be able to buy a far better plan than his current policy while saving at least $13,000 per year through Arkansas’ Obamacare marketplace.
Matthews was self-employed between 1997 and 2010, meaning he had to purchase his own plan on the individual market. He chose a Blue Cross Blue Shield plan for himself and his wife that charged a $250 per month premium and had a $2,000 deductible. But the price of that policy kept rising even as it covered fewer of his costs, eventually devolving into his current rate of $1,069 per month with a $10,000 deductible. At this point, it doesn’t even cover his medication or doctors’ visits — particularly concerning considering he had to have two stents placed in his heart in 2006.
“I do not work now, I’m 61, and we do have assets saved up. But still, to come up with that $1,069 per month….” he said, trailing off. “I went to Blue Cross Blue Shield, and they don’t even sell that plan anymore, but I could not change it to anything else. So I was locked in with it.”
That all changed once Obamacare’s state-level marketplaces opened to the public on Tuesday. Matthews knew that, at his income level, the law would help him pay for insurance. But even he might not have expected just how good of a deal he could get: his new coverage will cost him absolutely nothing in monthly premiums after factoring in federal subsidies, and has a deductible of $750.
“Which is a lot different from $10,000,” he pointed out, laughing.
The mid-level “Silver” policy that he picked out also offers a significantly better benefits package. “It’s a lot better plan,” Matthews said. His old plan was considered to be “Bronze” and had much higher co-pays. Under Obamacare, when Matthews visits a doctor, it will no longer cost him around $150. It will cost $8.
So what would Matthews tell other Americans who are skeptical about Obamacare? “I would tell them to learn more about it before they start talking bad about it,” he noted. “Be more informed, get more information, take your time and study and not just go by just what you hear on one side or the other. Actually check the facts on it.”
“I still am a very strong Republican, but this… I’m so happy that this came along,” he continued.
Imagine that Mitt Romney were president. Romney took a far more hawkish line than Barack Obama did on Syria during the campaign. He wanted to arm the rebels, supported in-country cover ops, and so on. So if Bashar al-Assad had used chemical weapons during President Romney’s tenure, there’s every reason to think he’d be pushing for action too. And what, in that case, would Republicans now temporizing or opposing Obama be doing in that case? They’d be breathing fire, of course. There’s a lot of chest thumping talk right now about how a failed vote will destroy Obama’s credibility. I guess that may be to some. But to anyone paying attention, the credibility of these Republicans is what will suffer, and the vote may well come back to haunt some of them in 2016.
The Gold Weasel Medal goes to Marco Rubio, as others such as Tim Noah have noted. Back in April, Rubio thundered that “the time for passive engagement in this conflict must come to an end. It is in the vital national security interest of our nation to see Assad’s removal.” Removal! Obama’s not talking about anything close to removal. So that was Rubio’s hard line back when Obama was on the other side. And now that Obama wants action? Rubio voted against the military resolution in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week.
Ted Cruz? Just in June, Cruz wanted to go into Syria and rough ’em up. “We need to develop a clear, practical plan to go in, locate the weapons, secure or destroy them, and then get out.” Now? Syria is a distraction from, you guessed it, Benghazi. He said last week: “We certainly don’t have a dog in the fight. We should be focused on defending the United States of America. That’s why young men and women sign up to join the military, not to, as you know, serve as al Qaeda’s air force.”
There are many others. These two are worth singling out because they want to be president, and their craven and brazen flip-flopping on one of the most important issues to come before them in their Senate careers is more consequential than the flip-flopping of some time-serving senator no one’s ever heard of. But the whole picture is contemptible.
Michael Steele went on MSNBC’s Hardball today and called out certain members in his Republican party. The segment Steele was discussing had to do with the so-called Republican outreach or lack thereof, and the “bad behavior” by some elected members of the party when it comes to baseless, fact-less nonsense being spewed about President Obama and other minorities.
The moderator of the show pointed out some of the things elected Republicans have said about the President and he played a recording showing Rep. Blake Farenthold from Texas, who said that the original congress should have looked into President Obama’s birth and whether he was in fact an American citizen. He then turn to Steele, telling him that when elected Republican continue this baseless talking point, it reflects badly on the entire party. And then asked Steele what should be done to save the party.
Steele answered that comments like the ones from Farenthold should be dismissed by the leaders of the party. He also acknowledged that those comments draw the party down and “stereotypes the party into a very small casam of the idiot class who can’t figure out that America is changing and how to adopt to this change and become a part of it as opposed to resisting it.”
Well said Steele, well said. With views like this, we see now why they kicked you out from heading the RNC.
Over the last week, Rand Paul and Chris Christie have engaged in a war of words. And it was only a matter of time before one of two things happened – they would either take to the streets gladiator style, or the Rand Paul punk fest will begin.
Guess which scenario played out? Yes, the punk fest began and Rand Paul led the way.
Said Paul…,
“I didn’t pick this recent fight with the governor down in New Jersey, but I think the party does better if we have less infighting, so I would suggest if he wants to ratchet it down, I’m more than happy to.”
No word yet from Christie. Known to never back down from a challenge, we expect the New Jersey governor to use the ratchet and hit Paul over the toupee just one more time. Then, maybe, he’ll consider Paul’s request.
Just like a politician. Chances of reelection are not looking good for Chafee as an Independent, so the once Republican will now switch to the Democrats.
Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee (I) intends to run for reelection as a Democrat, according to two people familiar with his decision, a move that suggests that the first-term governor does not see a path to reelection as an independent.
Chafee, a former Republican senator, won the governorship in 2010 in a competitive three-way race. His prospects for a second term have looked dim, as polling shows his numbers are downright bad. Chafee’s made no secret about the fact that he has been considering switching to the Democratic Party. His decision signals that he believes his best chance for survival is competing in what is expected to be a competitive Democratic primary.
Chafee is expected to announce his decision shortly, possibly as soon as this week, the people familiar with his decision say.
It’s as if the party is driving across the Chesapeake Bay Bridge with its eyes closed. Nothing good can come of this. They’ve already alienated a majority of people by voting down background checks. And now they’re making noise that they will reject an immigration bill that has wide support and will address serious deficiencies in our system. Siding with big business on tax reform would be a sweet third strike as we move into next year’s election season. In fact, 2010 will be seen as the swan song of the far right; the last gasp of a fading and rudderless movement that will take up residence in the south and fight the good fight, 150 years after the last major battles.
The Democrats, by contrast, are beginning to move out of the morass they found themselves in after the 2010 elections. Yes, they are presently mired in scandal muck, but this too shall pass. The scandals might slow down their momentum, but as the GOP will use them as an excuse to do nothing, the population will see their tactics for what they are, and have always been, and will vote accordingly. The Democrats will probably not take the House, but they will make inroads on the path to a majority in 2016. They’ll also hold on to the Senate, but perhaps by a smaller margin than today.
From there, it will be up to the Republicans who are left to either help make this country better or continue their obstruction. Yes, they have Rubio, Paul, Ryan and Christie. But up against O’Malley, Cuomo, Clinton and Malloy, they don’t stand a chance.
So we mentioned Donald Trump and the very stupid partisan tweet he made in the midst of a national tragedy as FBI and local Boston police were trying to capture the suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings. Trump joked about ObamaCare, wondering if the injured bomber would receive coverage.
You just know that Trump was not going to be the only Republican making an off-the-mark and uncalled-for “joke.” Here’s another.
State Rep. Nate Bell (R-Mena), wrote on Twitter, “I wonder how many Boston liberals spent the night cowering in their homes wishing they had an AR-15 with a hi-capacity magazine?”
LOLOL. Get it? Now how funny is that? Are you cracking up from all this Republican humor? Yea, me neither, and neither did a whole lot of folks. Feeling the pressure to explain himself, Mr. Bell offered this “apology” on his Twitter and Facebook page;
“I would like to apologize to the people of Boston & Massachusetts for the poor timing of my tweet earlier this morning. As a staunch and unwavering supporter of the individual right to self defense, I expressed my point of view without thinking of its effect on those still in time of crisis. In hindsight, given the ongoing tragedy that is still unfolding, I regret the poor choice of timing.”
Yea, he’s apologizing for the “poor timing.” I’m not sure when would be the appropriate timing for that “joke.” Maybe if less people died in the next attack he can try his humor again.
They just can’t help themselves. It is obviously hopeless for the Republican party if the leaders cannot figure out what’s appropriate behavior or common human decency.
New Hampshire State Rep. Peter Hansen referred to women as “vaginas” in an email to colleagues sent on the legislature’s official internal listserv. In response to a message debating a “stand your ground” measure being considered by the State House, the Republican lawmaker wrote:
What could possibly be missing from those factual tales of successful retreat in VT, Germany, and the bowels of Amsterdam? Why children and vagina’s of course. While the tales relate the actions of a solitary male the outcome cannot relate to similar situations where children and women and mothers are the potential victims.
Hansen’s use of metonym outraged his Democratic and Republican colleagues, prompting Democratice State Rep. Rick Watrous to respond:
“Children and vagina’s”??!! Are you really using “vaginas” as a crude catch-all for women? Really? Please think before you send out such offensive language on the legislative listserve.”
NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire weighed in, too:
Shame on Representative Hansen — we will do everything in our power to ensure voters in his district know about his demeaning rhetoric. Women are more than their reproductive organs. We are daughters, sisters, mothers, students, professionals, and community leaders. We deserve more than being referenced by our body parts.
Hansen initially remained defiant in response to criticism, explaining that he had a “fairly well educated mind” and did not need his colleagues to act as “self-appointed wardens” to his speech. He went on to suggest that anyone offended by his use of female genitalia to describe women everywhere should “re-examine [their] psyche.”
But his critics persisted and Hansen relented over his figure of speech, at least a little:
was not, and is not, my intention to demean women at any time. It is apparent that the intent of my remarks has been misinterpreted, the true goal of the message lost and for that I apologize to those who took offense.
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By agreeing to this, we can analyze browsing behavior and unique IDs on this site. Declining or revoking consent may affect certain features.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
