Mediaboss Marketing

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., on Saturday criticized President Trump's decision to launch a missile strike on a Syrian airfield, saying the Trump administration should have sought input from Congress first.

"You know, I guess what I've been more concerned is not the military aspects of the mission or even whether or not it will have any significance," Paul said on CNN. "My concern has been mostly that this is an inappropriate way to begin a war, that the Constitution says war begins with a vote in Congress."

Paul, whose libertarian leanings have led him to advocate for far less foreign intervention than most other members of his party, pointed to the example George W. Bush set with his decision to seek an official Authorization for Use of Military Force from lawmakers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

"Even George Bush, who was often treated mercilessly by the media as being so far out there, he came to Congress and asked to go to war against the Taliban and those who attacked us on 9/11," Paul said. "He also did the same in Iraq."

Congressional leaders have signaled a willingness to consider the Trump administration's request to pursue additional military actions in Syria if the president decides to put one forward, although few lawmakers have indicated that they are open to returning from their two-week recess to debate an AUMF.

"I think this is a wrongheaded notion, that we just skip the most important step, and that is whether or not we should go to war," Paul said.

Follow this link:
Rand Paul: Syria strike an 'inappropriate way to begin a war' - Washington Examiner

Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) shot back at his fellow Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) for demanding that President Trump ask for Congressional approval for the airstrikes he ordered on a Syrian airfield Thursday. He made the comments on CNN Friday to Wolf Blitzer.

Blitzer read Pauls statement about the airstrike to McCain and asked for his reaction: While we all condemn the atrocities in Syria, the United States was not attacked. The President needs congressional authorization for military action as required by the Constitution, and I call on him to come to Congress for a proper debate. Our prior interventions in this region have done nothing to make us safer, and Syria will be no different.

I dont really react to Senator Paul, McCain said disdainfully, were just too different, and he doesnt really have any real influence in the United States Senate.

Blitzer reminded him that many other Senators agreed with Paul, and McCain said he would talk to them but not address Pauls statement.

So you dont even want to respond to that, Blitzer tried to ask again.

Pardon me, I dont pay any attention frankly, to whatSenator Paul says, McCain reiterated his disdain.

Buttell me why you disagree with him so much, Blitzer asked.

Because hes wrong, McCain replied.

Just on this issue or a whole bunch of other issues? Blitzer responded.

Every other issue that I know of, that has to do with national security, McCain answered.

McCain said that he wasnt surprised by the attack for several reasons. I got a call before the launch from Mattis and also from Kelly, he said, but when I talked to [President Trump] the morning before, I could tell that he was deeply concerned. Now, to the point where I thought it was entirely possible that he would decide to act on the advice of his national security team.

McCain also said that if Trump followed his advice to press on against President Bashar al-Assad, that he wouldnt need Congressional approval for that either.

He does not, he said about needing approval from Congress. President Reagan didnt need it when after the bombing at a disco in Berlin that killed Americans, striking Libya. But if this is a long term campaign, then I think we oughta examine it.

But Ill tell you the practical problems, he explained. The practical problems is, and Ive dealt with this issue for a long time, and that is, its called the War Powers Act, is the president is the commander in chief. And he proposes, Congress disposes, as far as money is concerned. But as far as the actual mechanics of the war are concerned, theres never been agreement. The War Powers Act has never been challenged in the courts because every president, Republican and Democrat, has been afraid that it was going to be ruled unconstitutional.

Rand Paul has been an outspoken critic of any military action made without Constitutional approval, a position that not many members of Congress have agreed with publicly.

Trump ordered the strike on a Syrian airfield in retaliation for a chemical attack on civilians many blame on President Bashar al-Assad. Secretary of State Tillerson said there was no doubt that Assad was guilty of the chemical attacks.

Read more here:
John McCain tramples on Rand Paul's foreign policy cred TheBlaze - TheBlaze.com

Republican Ron Estes won a competitive congressional race in Kansas, marking the first special election of the year for a House seat vacated by a Republican lawmaker. (The Washington Post)

On Tuesday night, Democrat James Thompson did not win the first congressional election in the country since President Trump was elected. But he came within seven points in one of the most Republican districts in the nation. And Democrats are absolutely thrilled about what that says about their party in the era of Trump with good reason.

If we can make Republicans go into full-on freakout mode in a ruby red Kansas congressional district now, said Jim Dean, director of the progressive group Chair of Democracy for America in a statement, we have the power to rip the gavel out of Paul Ryans hands in November 2018.

Maybe. What happens in April 2017 does not mean the same thing will happen in November 2018, when the entire House of Representatives is up for reelection. But it's the best evidence we've got that right now, votersin traditionally Republican districts aren't thrilled with Trump.

As my colleague Aaron Blake wrote yesterday, it's hard to overstate just how Republican this Wichita-area congressional district has been:

On Tuesday, this district swung more than 20 points in favor of the Democrat. There were some, but not alot of race-specific factors that should have made this much of a difference.

Thompson, an Army veteran and civil rights attorney with no legislative experience and very little help from the national Democratic Party, wasn't an uber-gifted candidate who could overcome these fundamental barriers. Nor was Rep.-elect Ron Estes, the state treasurer, a particularly flawed GOP candidate. Though we'll add that the governor, Sam Brownback (R), is incredibly unpopular in the state, and Estes is a part of his administration.

Brownback's unpopularity aside, that leads us to conclude per our guide on how to pundit like a pro that there are national factors that spurred Thompson's surprisingly close loss. Specifically, this election could be a window into how voters in this deep-red congressional district feel about Trump and Republicans' leadership right now.

Especially in aspecial election, most voters aren't paying much attention to the candidates, said Stuart Rothenberg, a nonpartisan elections analyst and columnist at The Washington Post. Which means many are voting to send a message to Washington rather than for or against a specific congressional candidate.

When they think about choices, they tend to think big choices: change versus status quo, Rothenberg said. Keep the president, or send a message of dissatisfaction to the president.

Seen through that lens, Thompson's seven-point loss should have Republicans across the country very worried. Estes performed 20 points worse than Trump did in this district just five months ago. In 2018, Republicans will be defending23 seats that Clinton won. If Democrats can net 24 seats, they would recapture the majority.

More immediately, Kansas's results willlikely rev up progressive momentum in a more high-profile special election coming up in a week outside Atlanta, where 30-year-old Democrat Jon Ossoff is trying to win a majority of the vote against some 16 mostly Republican candidates to replace former congressman Tom Price, who is now Trump's health and human services secretary. Again, this is a traditionally Republican district, and the fact we're even talking about its competitiveness is extraordinary.

This race is as much about the next year and a half nationally as it is about district, Rothenberg said. Ossoff wins and suddenly every Republican in a swing district is going to be nervous, and they will demonstrate their independence.

If Ossoff wins, or even if he forces the race into a runoff, that could manifest an even bigger drag on Trump's historically low popularity: House Republicans become more resistant to working with their president, whichin turn makes Trump's job trying to pass big legislation with his party that much more difficult. And that in turn leaves him and a Republican Congress without many victories to call home about next November.

In the past, special election upsets were trembles of a big wave coming against the party in power.

It's still a year and a half away, but what we know right now is that Republicans can barely hang onto a districtthat Trump won by nearly 27 points.

Read this article:
A Republican won in Kansas. But here's why the GOP is not celebrating. - Washington Post

AnyaBerkut/Getty

Policymakers reacted swiftly this week to the outrageous viral video of police officers forcibly removing an innocent passenger from an overbooked United Airlines flight. A new passenger bill of rights, including regulations on bumping people from flights, was announced on Tuesdayby Canada's transportation ministry.

"Their constituents are being mistreated, just like Democratic constituents."

Here in the United States, at least one party has a long history of siding with the airlines at the expense of their passengers. "It's an ongoing frustration that we haven't had good cooperation on the Republican side," says Sally Greenberg, executive director of the National Consumers League. "Their constituents are being mistreated, just like Democratic constituents. I'm disappointed and frustrated."

In 2016 alone, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) introduced 22 different consumer-protection riders to a funding bill for the Federal Aviation Administration. Among other things, the proposals would have placed a moratorium on seat-size shrinkage, required more transparency about ticket fees and passenger complaints, promoted competition between airlines, and ensured that passengers had the right to sue airlines instead of being forced into arbitration. (See the complete list below.) None of the proposals made it through the GOP-controlled Senate.

"The degrading treatment of this [United passenger] is the latest example of a major US airline disrespecting passengers and denying them their basic rights," Blumenthal wrote to Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao on Tuesday. "Your agency must conduct a swift, sweeping investigation into United Airlines and the industry practices that led to this incident."

Congressional Republicans delayed for years the passage of the handful of consumer protections that exist for airline passengers. During the George W. Bush administration, GOP senators killed a passengers bill of rights that, among other things, would have restricted how long people could be confined to a grounded airplane without food and drinks. In 2011, the Obama administration enacted a stricter version of the rule administratively, adding requirements that airlines reimburse passengers for lost bags, disclose extra ticket fees on their websites, and compensate bumped passengers financially.

During the last election cycle, the top airline lobbying group gave almost six times as much cash to Republicans as to Democrats.

"The Republicans can be viewed as the party of big business, whereas Democrats are more for personal rights and equality," says Ranier Jenss, director of the Family Travel Association. One provision his group backed that requires airlines to let families with children sit together on flights free of charge became law last yearbut only after it attracted support from a Republican congressman who'd had a family member get separated from his kids during a flight, Jenss says.

Not all Republicans, after all, are airline industry lapdogs. On Tuesday, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie asked the TSA's Chao to suspend the federal regulation permitting airlines to overbook flights and remove passengers as a result. "This conduct is abusive and outrageous," Christie said in a press release. "The ridiculous statements, now in their third version, of the CEO of United Airlines displays their callousness toward the traveling public with the permission of the federal government."

The airline industry, however, favors Republicans. In the most recent election cycle, United Continental Holdings gave them $547,000, versus $497,000 for Democratsa split that roughly mirrors the industry's spending patterns. The main airline lobbying group, Airlines for America, leans far more toward Republicans: It donated about $85,000 to Democrats in the latest cycle. It gave nearly six times that much (about $478,500) to Republicans and conservative groups, according to OpenSecrets.org. In 2015, Politico reported that House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman Bill Shuster (R-Penn.) was actually dating Shelly Rubino, an Airlines for America executive. Republicans "are literally in bed with the industry!" says the National Consumers League's Greenberg.

She hopes the United scandal will convince Republicans to end their love affair with Big Air: "I think Congress is going to be under a lot of pressure to take some decisive action because of what people saw in that video." ______

Here's what Sen. Richard Blumenthal proposed last year to keep airlines in check. But not one of his amendments made it past Mitch McConnell et al.

Read more:
Airlines Treat People Like Dirt Because the Republicans in Congress Let Them - Mother Jones

And it was scary as hell.

With six weeks left on the clock, the Republican majorities elected last November to the Minnesota Legislature are rapidly passing the budget bills that will dictate the states spending for the next two years. Or its lack of spending.

Despite a $1.6 billion surplus, Republicans are still slashing budgets all over the place to pay for tax cuts: $900 million, if Senate Republicans get their way, or the titanic $1.35 billion pushed by House Republicans.

The Minnesota they envision has little in common with the one we live in now. In this time of Passover, their proposals are beginning to sound a bit like the biblical chapter Exodus. If you recall, before the Israelites made it to freedom, things got a little hairy.

1. Water into blood: Ostensibly a spending bill, the House environment bill is littered with policies that will make it easier for businesses to pollute water. Most egregious is a change in how we handle Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), worst-case scenario assessments for air, water, and soil, which are currently overseen by state agencies. The GOP wants to allow businesses to submit their own environmental paperwork. If people living by a slaughterhouse notice a rust color and an iron aftertaste to their tap water, they should stop drinking it and consider using it as the base for a soup.

2. Lice: House Republicans public safety budget would push the state to reopen a 1,600-bed prison in Appleton. Minnesota would enter into a contract with CoreCivic, a publicly traded corporation notorious for valuing its stock price more than inmate healthcare. Watch for a horde of lice, already a common problem in the joint, to descend upon its inmates. To be fair to CoreCivic, its customers complain less after theyre killed in a riot sparked by shoddy conditions.

3. Mixture of wild animals: Most of the savings Senate Republicans found on health care come from bumping debt payments from May to June. (New fiscal year, new you, Minnesota!) But the bill does include a 7 percent reduction to the Minnesota Department of Health, the agency that handles restaurant inspections in St. Paul. Evidently, Senate Republicans want their lunch breaks to have an element of mystery. Senator Benson, what kind of tacos did you get? Answer: I dont know! But I just spit out what appears to be a dog collar.

4. Boils: The House health budget is even stingier. Though costs rise each year, Rep. Matt Dean (R-Dellwood) is positively convinced the Department of Human Services (DHS) can find more than $370 million worth of savings through competitive bidding and by throwing ineligible people off programs. (Perversely, DHS is supposed to play cops-and-robbers while being underfunded to the tune of 300 employees.) If Deans cost-cutting dreams dont come true? Its up to DHS to figure out which vulnerable Minnesotans dont get medical attention. When visiting a relative in the states care, remember to bring rubbing alcohol, a lighter, and a safety pin so you can lance any bedsore infections.

5. Thunderstorms of hail: At the last minute, Republicans remembered theyd meant to give another handout to the fossil fuel industry. Language tacked to an energy bill would allow Enbridge to build an oil pipeline at its sole discretion and along its preferred route. That hands-off treatment removes state regulators in nearly identical fashion to a bill that lets Xcel Energy do what it wants with a new natural gas plant. Our policy-makers are in a state of climate science denial. Perhaps theyll be convinced when they look out their office windows to see a mile-wide microburst approaching the Capitol parking lot.

6. Darkness: The House tax plan cuts the so-called estate tax, assessed solely to the fortunes of deceased million- and billionaires. It also slashes the corporate industrial property tax, which costs businesses based on the value of land they own. Combined, just those two elements would subtract nearly $1 billion in tax revenue over the next four years. How do they account for the losses? They dont. The losses compound, and Minnesotas ability to carry out the basic functions of governing five million people gets less and less each year. Imagine how much well save when we dont even have to turn on the lights at the Capitol.

7. The loss of first-born children: Those tax cuts are just one example of how legislative Republicans absorbed corporate CEOs priorities as their own. Whos losing out? The sick and the poor, sure. But the GOP agenda is also a huge fuck you to the educated young people they and economists say are making our state great. Theyre cutting money for colleges and for preschool programs that help working people with kids. Theyre penalizing cities (read: Minneapolis and St. Paul) for trying to ban plastic bags and not rounding up immigrants. Theyre defunding city buses and declaring war on light rail. Theyre siding with oil, insurance companies, and Big Ag.

If Gov. Mark Dayton cant get Republicans to reconsider, the final plague visited upon Minnesota will be the sudden loss of all those young professionals with degrees, ideas, and expendable money, who will instead set off for the promised progressive lands of Oregon, Washington, and Colorado.

They that sow the wind shall reap the whirlwind... and they dont even know you can convert whirlwind into electricity.

More from Mike Mullen:

Read more:
The 7 plagues of the Republican budget - City Pages