Finally

While Congress slipped out of town Thursday without addressing the sequester issue, they did manage to pass one piece of legislation that has been hanging around since the last Congress:  the Violence Against Women Act.  House Republicans in the 112th Congress didn't quite get the message of November's election back then.  Apparently enough of them have since then.

The editorial board of the Los Angeles Times took note of the bill's passage in what for members of that "center-left" group was pretty strong language.

After more than a year of bitter partisan fighting, Congress on Thursday finally reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act, including new provisions that will extend the law's protections for gay, lesbian, transgender and Native American victims of domestic violence. It's about time.

There is no rational explanation for why lawmakers took so long to reauthorize this legislation, which was first enacted in 1994 and had been renewed twice with broad bipartisan support. Admittedly, the revised law covers a broader group of victims. That was apparently too much for some Republicans in the House, who sought to substitute a weaker bill for the one passed by the Senate, arguing that the new protections either went too far or were prone to fraud.

What the newly reauthorized legislation will actually do is provide help to all victims of domestic violence, regardless of their sexual orientation, immigration status or where the assault took place. ...  [Emphasis added]

What the editorial doesn't mention is that 138 Republicans in the House still voted against the bill.  If you go here, you can check to see just who was still digging in their heels.  There aren't too many surprises.  Among those voting against the bill are Tea Party champions Eric Cantor and Michele Bachmann.  House Speaker Boehner is discovering that herding cats, is even more difficult when at least some of them have painted a target on his back.

Well, at least the 113th Congress got something done.

Lipstick On A Pig

(Graphic snagged from davepear.com.)

So the State of the Union address was delivered last night by President Obama, followed by 2 --count 'em, 2-- responses from the GOP.  I didn't watch/listen to any of it.  I was in a relatively good mood and didn't want to spoil it.  I imagine I'll have a few comments later in the week.

What I do want to comment on is the attempted "re-branding" of the Republican party, hence the graphic.  Leonard Pitts, Jr. had a pretty solid analysis of just what is going on with that alleged change in focus. 

Maybe the party is finally over.

Meaning not simply the Grand Old Party, but more specifically the bacchanal of the bizarre and carnival of crazy to which it has lately devolved. So obvious has this devolution become that even Republican stalwarts have been heard to decry the parody of a party the GOP has become.

Except now we see signs suggesting maybe a corner has been turned. There was, for example, that surprising bipartisan consensus on immigration reform, which one would have thought about as likely as a Ted Nugent concert on the White House lawn. And Politico reports Karl Rove has started a super PAC whose mission is to keep the more .?.?. ahem, colorful candidates from winning Republican primaries. Politico also quotes what it calls a high-profile strategist who said party leaders are now trying to "marginalize the cranks, haters and bigots" they until recently portrayed as courageous truth tellers. ...

So yes, signs are plentiful that something is afoot among the Republicans. But what does it mean? ...

 One might hope.

But one might be well-advised to gird that hope with wariness, given that this is the same party whose leaders, as reported on PBS' "Frontline," held a meeting in 2009 and chose obstructionism as a political strategy. Note that, even while repeating his "stupid party" admonition at a GOP meeting in Charlotte last month, Jindal assured his audience this did not mean rethinking or even moderating the party's hardcore - and frankly, out of touch - stands on issues such as abortion and marriage equality.

No, he explained, he's talking about changing the packaging - not what's in it. Putting lipstick on the proverbial pig, in other words.   [Emphasis added]

 Bingo!

Evidence of that cosmetic change came yesterday when 22 GOP senators voted against the Violence Against Women Act.  We'll see what the House Republicans, many of them from the Tea Party wing, will do to it, probably by the end of the session.

Besides, as we liberals learned the hard way, hope is not a very good strategy.