support them? i know that people who support labor rights, union members, people demonstrating in trenton are very angry with the democrats who peeled off on this. i think the difference between the democratic party and republican party and where this is significant is we have a party that s a big tent. we have lots of people in our party who believe in a lot of different things. we don t exclude people from our party because of votes they make. that s the hallmark of republicans. it s a litmus test. chris christie is living proof. he wants to check all the boxes so he can be somebody on the national stage. democratic party doesn t operate that way. and while we have disagreements about particular bills, the long-term history and the future of the democratic party is always going to be with labor. litmus test is one way to look at it. standards, core principles is another way to look at it. absolutely. and i think the reason this has been such a surprise to see the way this has
they voted no on a resolution explicitly authorizing the war, but then they voted no again when asked to stop the funding. does that count as a split decision from the president s war in libya policy? kind of. but there was less of a split than you might think. among the democrats who voted no on defunding the war were the majority of the progressive caucus. the democratic party s liberals in the house. and a progressive caucus put out a statement today clarifying that they are very much against the war in libya, raising the prospect that the reason a majority of them voted no on defunding is because, as some of them explained, that defunding bill, they thought, would not really defund the war. in other words, they really do want to defund the war, and they don t feel like they have had a real chance to vote for that yet. so no, it doesn t really look like a split decision from the house today on the president s war in libya. it looks like it more might be more like two thumbs down on
lot less money. a shift. that apparently is an outrage. but most bustle eautifully, then republicans are unwilling to participate in discussions, about the possibility of america not defaulting on our debts and potentially causing a global financial catastrophe, the reason they cannot even participate in that discussion, according to chris van hollen, is because democrats raised the possibility of ending taxpayer subsidies for corporate jets! that is the hill republicans want to die on in washington proverbially speaking. protecting taxpayer help for corporate jets. the poor corporate jets. do you realize how hard things have been on them? what republicans are prioritizing on the national v level this year, things like that, has been a clear mirror on the state level as well. in florida, scott proposing a $1.5 billion giveaway to businesses to be paid for with
saland, republican state senator in new york state. the reason his remarks are important right now is the same-sex marriage debate is under way in albany is because he is one of the republican state senators who has been undecided, publicly undecided, on this measure. what he s discussing here has been a key issue for republican senators. the issue of whether or not religious institutions essentially have carved-out exemptions in terms of their liability to essentially protect their right to object, to protect their right to object to the extension of marriage rights to same-sex couples. so an agreement was reached on exemptions for religious institutions between the two parties earlier tonight. we were told those still being discussed in detail on the floor of the state senate in new york as the state senate there heads toward eventually a vote on this measure sometime tonight. if new york state does vote for this, it would be the sixth state plus washington, d.c.,