House Republicans Vow To Stay In Washington Until They Vote On Border Funding

WASHINGTON — After canceling a vote on funding to address the border crisis because not enough House Republicans supported it, GOP members were scrambling for a new solution so they don’t go home to face constituents with nothing.

Members met Thursday afternoon to figure out a game plan. Afterward, they said there was near-consensus on one thing: They’ll stay in Washington, postponing the start of their August recess, until they pass something.

“I think we’ll be here until we vote. We might be here tonight, we might be here tomorrow, we might be here at the end of the so-called break,” Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) told reporters.

“We could be here until Christmas,” quipped Rep. Ralph Hall (R-Texas).

The House and Senate are working to pass measures to address the influx of more than 57,500 unaccompanied minors apprehended since October crossing the U.S.-Mexico border illegally. The initial House bill would have provided $659 million in funding — compared with President Barack Obama’s request for $3.7 billion — and added measures that would send the National Guard to the border and change a 2008 law to speed deportation of minors.

When it appeared the bill lacked enough votes to pass, Republican House leaders added a plan to vote on legislation that would end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, that allows undocumented young people who came to the U.S. as children at least seven years ago to stay temporarily.

That plan also failed to attract 218 supporters, a majority of the House, amid heavy opposition from Democrats. It appeared for a time that House members would leave for recess without even holding a vote on the border crisis, exposing themselves to criticism from Obama, Democrats, and their own constituents. But members told leadership they wanted to stay until they passed something.

House Republican leaders — Speaker John Boehner (Ohio), Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), Majority Whip Steve Scalise (La.), and Conference Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.) — issued a statement after the vote was canceled, saying they “will continue to work on solutions to the border crisis and other challenges facing our country.”

“This situation shows the intense concern within our conference — and among the American people — about the need to ensure the security of our borders and the president’s refusal to faithfully execute our laws,” the Republican leaders said. “There are numerous steps the president can and should be taking right now, without the need for congressional action, to secure our borders and ensure these children are returned swiftly and safely to their countries.”

Now, House leaders are reworking the package to woo more GOP votes, with a strong possibility of alienating the initial bill’s few Democratic supporters and ensuring its failure in the Senate. The Senate will hold votes on its own proposal later Thursday, but it is expected to fall short of the 60-vote threshold for approval.

House Republican members said changes to their package may include adding the bill to end DACA to the funding legislation directly, rather than making it a separate vote, and changing the 2008 law further to limit exceptions that would allow some minors to remain in the country longer. Rep. Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.), a member of a working group that helped shape the policy of the initial bill, said “the ideas that were originally proposed are just going to be made stronger.”

While members seemed unified on their desire to vote, some immigration hardliners said they still had concerns that may go unmet. Rep. John Fleming (R-La.) said he was “still a no” and was unsure Republicans could reach consensus, although he didn’t rule out supporting a bill.

“I think there are some members who don’t want DACA voted out at all, and that’s a problem,” Fleming said. “So you have Republicans who are on one end of the scale and others that are on the other end. To get 218 somewhere in the middle is very difficult.”

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) said he wants the bill to give new powers to the National Guard, in addition to adding a provision to end DACA and changing the 2008 trafficking law.

“I want our National Guard troops to actually be patrolling the border,” Brooks said. “I don’t want them babysitting our kids. I don’t think that’s their job.”

Brooks was among the House members reportedly urged personally by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) to oppose the initial bill. Brooks said the senator “doesn’t control anyone’s vote in the Alabama House,” but his opinion “carried a lot of weight.”

Bachus shot down the idea that Sessions had convinced the Alabama delegation to oppose the bill.

“The Senate doesn’t tell me how to vote,” Bachus said.

Despite the discord, House Republicans insisted they were optimistic about reaching a deal. Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), one of the more moderate GOP members, demurred when asked whether the issue was between tea party-aligned Republicans and others.

“I have some feelings, but I don’t want to say anything that’s gonna upset this right now,” King said. “So right now, we’re one big happy family working together to do the job by tomorrow. … It’s our job to get it done. You can’t run and hide.”

Marina Fang, Sam Levine and David McCabe contributed reporting.

On Centennial, Seven Harvard Scholars List Lessons of WWI — And How They Might Apply Today

This week marks the centennial of the outbreak of World War I. WorldPost contributors such as Walter Russell Mead and Artyom Lukin have asked whether events in 2014 parallel those of 1914.

Here, seven scholars from the Belfer Center at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government offer the historical lessons they see.

“Just because war would be folly and self-defeating does not mean that it cannot happen. None of the leaders of Europe in 1914 would have chosen the war they caused — and in the end all lost. By 1918, the Kaiser had been dismissed, the Austro-Hungarian Empire dissolved, the czar overthrown by the Bolsheviks, France bled for a generation, and England shorn of the flower of its youth and treasure. Given a chance for a do-over, none of the leaders would have made the choices he did. Combinations of assertiveness and ignorance, risk-taking, overconfidence, and conceit produced an outcome so devastating that it required historians to create a new category: world war.” –Graham Allison

“History is typically assumed to be the result of great forces, strategic trends, well-thought-out plans, but is often a function of unimportant and unintended events, a ‘shot heard around the world’. This is certainly the case in the Mideast where a car accident ignited the first Intifada, the humiliation of a Tunisian fruit seller began the upheaval which is changing the face of the region, and Israel today fears a small border incident becoming a major conflagration.” –Chuck Freilich

– “A salient lesson of World War I for decision-makers should be humility about predicting consequences in a transitional epoch. The leaders of the era were wrong about almost everything – the effectiveness of ultimatums, the value of the alliance system, the duration of the conflict, the tactics and strategy required in a new industrialized war, the social and cultural impact of mass death and the stability of empire. These mistakes, driven by hubris, had catastrophic impacts during the Great War itself, led to the horrific 30 years war in Europe and have echoed down the century across the globe (USSR…Middle East…).” –Ben Heineman

– “Historical analogies, though sometimes useful for precautionary purposes, become dangerous when they convey a sense of historical inevitability. WWI was not inevitable. It was made more probable by Germany’s rising power and the fear that this created in Great Britain. But it was also made more probable by Germany’s fearful response to Russia’s power, as well as myriad other factors, including human errors. But the gap in overall power between the US and China today is greater than that between Germany and Britain in 1914. Among the lessons to be learned from the events of 1914 is to be wary of analysts wielding historical analogies, particularly if they have a whiff of inevitability. War is never inevitable, though the belief that it is can become one of its causes.” –Joseph S. Nye

– “The single most important conclusion that one can draw from the WWI experience (as it might apply to us today) is the ambiguity that allies present. Confronting China in the future, the United States will need all the strong allies it can get, yet supporting those allies (like Japan for instance, which has major territorial disputes with China) can get us involved in conflict just as Russia’s support of Serbia or Germany’s of Austria did in 1914. We have to find new ways of supporting a key ally without at the same time undertaking to defend it come what may.” –Richard Rosecrance

“The main lesson to draw from the onset of the Great War is that serious miscalculation leading to war is possible even in a modern world that is well connected and deeply integrated. The suggestion made often today that commercial interdependencies will preclude war was proven wrong exactly a hundred years ago. Europe in 1914 was in many ways like the world today — integrated in commerce and politics; with many shared goals and interests that should have made war unthinkable. Yet, somehow the leaders of 1914, with all the pertinent information at their fingertips, and with a capability to talk to one another instantly, miscalculated; setting Europe ablaze and putting the world on a path to even greater conflict two decades later.” –Kevin Ryan

“‘You will be home before the leaves have fallen from the trees,’ Kaiser Wilhelm told his troops in August 1914. Yet, before autumn had ended, a million combatants lay dead. Fifteen million more — soldiers and civilians — would perish before the armistice. Empires shattered. Borders dissolved. Europe’s statesmen failed to imagine the immensity of the tragedy they were to cause. In Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and elsewhere, such unquenchable fires may again be aflame.” –William Tobey

Richard McTear Guilty Of Throwing Baby From Car Window

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) — A Florida man was convicted of murder Thursday for tossing a 3-month-old boy out a moving car window along an interstate, killing the infant instantly.

According to prosecutors, 26-year-old Richard McTear attacked ex-girlfriend Jasmine Bedwell, 22, after she returned home with her son from a friend’s house in 2009. McTear blocked the door when Bedwell tried to flee and grabbed her son, Emanuel Wesley Murray, during the struggle. He then took off down Interstate 275 in Tampa, throwing the baby out of the window, prosecutors said. The baby’s blood stains were found on McTear’s shorts and in a car he was known to drive.

Defense attorneys argued that McTear was innocent and questioned the mother’s credibility.

The jury deliberated for more than seven hours before finding McTear guilty of first-degree murder, kidnapping, battery and aggravated child abuse charges. They will return to court on Monday to begin the sentencing phase.

McTear faces a mandatory sentence of life in prison without parole, though jurors could recommend the death penalty.

A previous court proceeding against McTear ended in a mistrial after Bedwell made statements on the witness stand that Circuit Judge William Fuente had barred from the jury. Bedwell testified that McTear had threatened previously to harm her and the baby.

Bedwell and the baby’s father are expected to submit victim impact statements in writing that will be read during the sentencing hearing.

Ruffhides®: Rawhide Covers Keep Your Dog Busy For A Long Time

Ruffhide

If your dog is woofing up his rawhide long before you’ve finished
your daily meditation, you might want to look into getting a Ruffhide®. 
It will be his next-best friend and it will give his very best friend some sorely needed personal time.

PlayStation Now Is Still Way Too Expensive

PlayStation Now Is Still Way Too Expensive

Right now, on your PlayStation 4, you can enjoy 90 days of the PS3 racing game F1 2013 for the low, low price of $49.99.

Read more…


What's the Generic Word For Skype? Videophone? Video Chat?

What's the Generic Word For Skype? Videophone? Video Chat?

As technologies evolve, so does the language we use to describe them. Radio used to be called wireless telephone . Some people used to call the internet the catenet . But what do we call it when you’re talking with a person via video link? Is it videophone? Video chat? Skype?

Read more…



We Just Found a Galaxy So Big It Acts Like a Magnifying Glass

We Just Found a Galaxy So Big It Acts Like a Magnifying Glass

Some galaxies are so positively massive that their gravity actually distorts the light from objects behind it, turning the entire galaxy into our very own intergalactic magnifying glass. And now, NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope just found the most distant one ever.

Read more…



To-do app Wunderlist gets a fresh coat of paint and real-time sync

The folks at 6Wunderkinder have been quite busy as of late, releasing version 2 of the Wunderlist productivity app on top of Pro and Business options for power users. Keeping up the pace, the third installment of the to-do list manager is rolling out…

Sony's new Action Cam arrives stateside with SteadyShot and more for $200

Sony’s stable of action cams just got a new option for thrill seekers in the US. The HDR-AS20 joins the outfit’s HDR-AS100V and HDR-AS30V in capturing daring feats of whatever you fancy. This new model packs the company’s SteadyShot image…

Slingshot updated, still has “send to receive” requirement

facebook-slingshot-600x378On launch, Slingshot was a bit of a let-down. The Facebook photo messaging service mis-fired on a lot of levels, with the “send to receive” qualifier a big issue. An update has arrived for the service, fixing a few issues people had, but is it usable yet? This latest version will now let you reply to a pic with your … Continue reading