It happened during the memorial service for Nelson Mandela on Tuesday.

President Obama had a quick chat and shook hands with Cuban President Raul Castro at the memorial service for former South African President Nelson Mandela.

The moment came just before Obama delivered a eulogy for Mandela in a Johannesburg stadium.

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

It appeared to be a friendly exchange.

Obama was cheered into the stadium and made conciliatory gestures toward other world leaders, including Brazil's Dilma Rousseff, who has clashed with the U.S. president over alleged National Security Agency spying.

The United States has not had diplomatic relations with Cuba since the communist revolution led by Castro's brother Fidel more than 50 years ago.

Kai Pfaffenbach / Reuters

“Your dignity and hope found expression in his life, and your freedom, your democracy is his cherished legacy.”

Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

Following is the transcript of his remarks as provided by the White House:

View Video ›

Thank you. To Graça Machel and the Mandela family; to President Zuma and members of the government; to heads of states and government, past and present; distinguished guests — it is a singular honor to be with you today, to celebrate a life like no other. To the people of South Africa — people of every race and walk of life — the world thanks you for sharing Nelson Mandela with us. His struggle was your struggle. His triumph was your triumph. Your dignity and your hope found expression in his life. And your freedom, your democracy is his cherished legacy.

It is hard to eulogize any man — to capture in words not just the facts and the dates that make a life, but the essential truth of a person — their private joys and sorrows; the quiet moments and unique qualities that illuminate someone's soul. How much harder to do so for a giant of history, who moved a nation toward justice, and in the process moved billions around the world.

Born during World War I, far from the corridors of power, a boy raised herding cattle and tutored by the elders of his Thembu tribe, Madiba would emerge as the last great liberator of the 20th century. Like Gandhi, he would lead a resistance movement — a movement that at its start had little prospect for success. Like Dr. King, he would give potent voice to the claims of the oppressed and the moral necessity of racial justice. He would endure a brutal imprisonment that began in the time of Kennedy and Khrushchev, and reached the final days of the Cold War. Emerging from prison, without the force of arms, he would — like Abraham Lincoln — hold his country together when it threatened to break apart. And like America's Founding Fathers, he would erect a constitutional order to preserve freedom for future generations — a commitment to democracy and rule of law ratified not only by his election, but by his willingness to step down from power after only one term.

Given the sweep of his life, the scope of his accomplishments, the adoration that he so rightly earned, it's tempting I think to remember Nelson Mandela as an icon, smiling and serene, detached from the tawdry affairs of lesser men. But Madiba himself strongly resisted such a lifeless portrait. (Applause.) Instead, Madiba insisted on sharing with us his doubts and his fears; his miscalculations along with his victories. "I am not a saint," he said, "unless you think of a saint as a sinner who keeps on trying."

It was precisely because he could admit to imperfection — because he could be so full of good humor, even mischief, despite the heavy burdens he carried — that we loved him so. He was not a bust made of marble; he was a man of flesh and blood — a son and a husband, a father and a friend. And that's why we learned so much from him, and that's why we can learn from him still. For nothing he achieved was inevitable. In the arc of his life, we see a man who earned his place in history through struggle and shrewdness, and persistence and faith. He tells us what is possible not just in the pages of history books, but in our own lives as well.

Mandela showed us the power of action; of taking risks on behalf of our ideals. Perhaps Madiba was right that he inherited, "a proud rebelliousness, a stubborn sense of fairness" from his father. And we know he shared with millions of black and colored South Africans the anger born of, "a thousand slights, a thousand indignities, a thousand unremembered moments…a desire to fight the system that imprisoned my people," he said.

But like other early giants of the ANC — the Sisulus and Tambos — Madiba disciplined his anger and channeled his desire to fight into organization, and platforms, and strategies for action, so men and women could stand up for their God-given dignity. Moreover, he accepted the consequences of his actions, knowing that standing up to powerful interests and injustice carries a price. "I have fought against white domination and I have fought against black domination. I've cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and [with] equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die."

View Entire List ›

A Kentucky doctor took out a newspaper ad saying he was closing his practice “due to the policies of Obamacare.” The reason is a federal requirement that he keep electronic records.

A Kentucky doctor who took out a local newspaper ad saying he was closing his practice "due to the policies of Obamacare" is shutting down his practice because of federal requirements to transfer from paper to electronic records.

Dr. Stephen Kiteck of Somerset, Ky., said the financial burden of electronic records is "too much of a burden to overcome" and that he didn't want to "make a long-term investment" in his small medical practice.

Though Kiteck's ad blames Obamacare, the electronic health care incentive programs were part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009 — the federal stimulus act — and not part of the Affordable Care Act, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Kiteck said he is approaching retirement age, and that he and his office are "computer illiterate," adding that he would need special training to add electronic records. He said it would be a financial burden and take "thousands of man hours or woman hours to get the records on the computer."

Analysis from earlier this year showed that electronic health records have not produced expected savings in health care costs.

The ad, placed in the Commonwealth Journal in Somerset, was passed around Tuesday morning by conservatives on Twitter.

Kiteck said that he petitioned the Department of Health and Human Services to get an exemption for this policy, but was not successful.

He said that he's no fan of Obamacare, but that the ad was mainly to get the word out to his patients, most of whom have been seeing him for a long time. Kiteck said he is required to give 30 days notice to his patients, and that he will provide them with a list of doctors to call.

"It did not make this feel any more comfortable knowing Obamacare has these requirements in it," he said.

View Entire List ›

Not being president.

He took his wife and grandkids on vacation and wore a hat.

Twitter: @AnnDRomney

Posted this old photo of his wedding.

Via Facebook: mittromney

When asked what cartoon character he would be, he said Spiderman.

youtube.com

Hung out with Rick Perry and his hipster glasses.

Via Facebook: mittromney

View Entire List ›

“Media Matters types would like to paint conservatives as boring, old white guys. Twitchy ads more fun and humor to our platform,” Townhall’s general manager says.

Twitchy, the conservative Twitter aggregation site, has been sold for an undisclosed amount to Salem Communications, the Christian radio conglomerate and owners of Hotair.com and Townhall.com.

Jonathan Garthwaite, general manager and editor-in-chief of Townhall.com, confirmed the news to BuzzFeed Tuesday, saying he was "excited" to be folding Twitchy into existing Salem news properties.

"Media Matters types would like to paint conservatives as boring, old white guys," Garthwaite said. "Twitchy adds more fun and humor to our platform, which will appeal to totally different generation and break that stereotype."

Launched in March 2012, Twitchy was the brainchild of conservative author and pundit Michelle Malkin, who until now served as owner and chief executive officer. The site is unique in the conservative media landscape for its native social aim, acting as a "Twitter curator" and timelining social media wars between pundits, politicians and celebrities.

Malkin had formerly sold Hotair.com to Salem Communications in 2010.

Garthwaite says Malkin will relinquish the title of CEO, but will still be active in promoting the Twitchy brand. He said the nine Twitchy staff writers, disparately located around the country, will not be asked to relocate to the Townhall news offices in Arlington, Va. Garthwaite would not disclose terms of the deal.

With the acquisition, Salem Communications will now operate a consolidated block of three major properties in the conservative media landscape in diversified areas. Garthwaite predicts that folding in Twitchy will boost the cumulative traffic of the overall property up to 11 million uniques a month. The company's properties have also had success on television in the last couple years with Townhall's political editor Guy Benson and news editor Katie Pavlich becoming Fox News contributors.

The move should also be big news for the growing number of conservative competitor sites in Washington. Garthwaite named The Daily Caller, Washington Examiner, Breitbart.com and Washington Free Beacon as "ideologically similar and friendly competition," acknowledging as well that this competition extends to page views and ad dollars.

"We are looking to grow organically and through acquisition," Garthwaite said, adding that they intend on hiring more writers for Twitchy soon.

“It tells you a lot about [IOC] President Bach and the IOC’s commitment to human rights that they believe this issue should be easily compartmentalized into a protest zone,” one LGBT advocate says.

A runner carries the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympic torch along a bridge across Yenisei River.

Ilya Naymushin / Reuters / Reuters

WASHINGTON — The International Olympic Committee announced Tuesday concerted efforts to control protests at the Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, both from attendees at the games and from athletes themselves.

The moves reflect continued negative attention the games are receiving due to Russia's anti-LGBT laws and other treatment of dissidents — actions that have led the German president and a European Union official to announce that they will not attend.

The IOC announced that there will be a "protest zone" during the Sochi Olympics and that it will be reminding athletes before the Olympics begin on Feb. 7, 2014, of the Olympics' ban on "propaganda" at the games.

Human Rights Campaign Vice President Fred Sainz criticized the decision sharply in a statement to BuzzFeed.

"Given the Russian government's history of strong-arm authoritarian tactics, the existence of a protest zone is ironically rich," Sainz said. "Olympic athletes should be free to speak their minds about the heinous nature of these laws. You don't stop being human when you become an Olympian."

The announcements Tuesday followed the IOC's first meeting under President Thomas Bach's leadership, held in Lausanne, Switzerland.

According to the IOC:

The Executive Board also received news that, after discussions with the Organising Committee, the authorities plan to set up a protest zone in the city of Sochi.

Speaking after the meeting, President Bach welcomed the development and the fact that people will now have an opportunity to express their views and freely demonstrate their opinions in Sochi.

"It tells you a lot about President Bach and the IOC's commitment to human rights that they believe this issue should be easily compartmentalized into a protest zone," Sainz said. "The fact that these laws exist is an outrage. The fact that the IOC believes they should be the subject of a protest zone is an even bigger outrage."

The IOC also relayed more — although still incomplete — information about how it would be enforcing Rule 50 of the IOC charter, which bans political propaganda at Olympic sites:

In the context of the Sochi Games, the Executive Board also discussed rules 40 and 50 of the Olympic Charter and the information that will be made available to athletes and National Olympic Committees about how those rules will be implemented. As with previous Games where similar guidelines were produced, the EB noted that the rules are put in place to protect athletes and the special atmosphere of the Olympic Village and venues.

Rule 40 relates to eligibility for the Olympics and has not been much discussed in the run-up to the games. Rule 50, however, has been a repeated topic of discussion in light of the questions about responses to Russia's anti-LGBT laws and other human rights questions.

Under Rule 50, "No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas."

IOC spokespeople did not respond to a request for comment about what information was being given to athletes about the rule and how the rule — and potential violations of it — would be implemented. A U.S. Olympic Committee spokesman said he had no further information at this time beyond the information provided by the IOC.

Other LGBT advocates, who have been pushing for the IOC to speak out regarding its own nondiscrimination principles, described in "Principle 6" of the IOC Charter, found the focus on Rule 50 to be misplaced.

"If IOC President Thomas Bach truly cares about principles, he should speak out against the discriminatory Russian laws that clearly violate Principle 6 of the IOC's Charter," said Andre Banks, executive director of the advocacy group All Out.

Of the campaign in favor of action and discussion surrounding Principle 6, Hudson Taylor, the executive director of Athlete Ally, noted, "The 34 Olympians who have joined our campaign feel it is their duty to uphold the Olympic Charter and act in the face of any form of discrimination. Equality is not about politics, it's about principles."

“We don’t want them to become the hostages or pawns of a process,” says the secretary of state.

Kerry testifies on agreements over Iran's nuclear programs before the House Foreign Affairs Committee

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State John Kerry argued against including a provision in the Iranian nuclear deal for the Americans detained or missing in Iran on Tuesday, arguing that this kind of linkage would be a disadvantage to their situation.

Rep. Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican, asked during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Iran negotiations whether it was true that the case of Saeed Abedini, an American pastor imprisoned in Iran, was raised with the Iranians during negotiations, as well as Amir Hekmati and Robert Levinson.

"The answer is that is not true," Kerry said. "I personally raised the issue with Foreign Minister [Javad] Zarif when I first met him, the very first time. And we have not linked it directly to the nuclear issue because we believe that prejudices them, and also prejudices the negotiations — we don't want them to become the hostages or pawns of a process that then gets played against something they want with respect to the nuclear program. Nor do you, I think. We want them returned because they're American citizens, because they have to be accountable to us for them, and they deserve to be returned on a fundamental humanitarian basis."

"I'm not at liberty to go into what is happening on it, and that is the difficulty of some of these situations many times because there are backchannels and other kinds of efforts we are engaged in," Kerry said. "But we have never stopped trying to secure their release or raising that issue with our representative nations that represent us in Tehran, the Swiss, Swedish and others. It is a constant process."

"There is an opportunity that's huge that still exists but we're not going to link them to the nuclear because it prejudices them," Kerry said, telling Smith that he would tell him more about the situation in a classified setting.

Smith said Abedini's imprisonment and alleged torture raise "even more questions" about the Iranians' credibility in nuclear negotiations.

Deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes said on CNN last month that the issue of the Americans in Iran had been raised with the Iranians during the negotiations.

"We raised two issues with the Iranians in our discussions with them," Rhodes said. "One is the nuclear program; the other is Americans detained in Iran."

"President Obama raised it with President Rouhani when they spoke," Rhodes said. "We raised it at a working level on the margins of the P5+1 talks. That includes this pastor. It also includes other Americans. For instance, we've been concerned about, of course, the whereabouts of Bob Levinson, who's been missing for a long time."

On November 26th, the White House made a formal appeal to Iran for the return of Levinson, who went missing in Iran in 2007.

"We respectfully ask the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to assist us in securing Mr. Levinson's health, welfare, and safe return," a White House statement said.

Patty Murray and Paul Ryan have announced a tentative two-year budget deal, pending Congressional approval.

Senate Budget Committee chairman Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) (R) and House Budget Committee chairman Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI) shake hands after a news conference to introduce The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, December 10, 2013.

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

Democratic Sen. Patty Murray and Republican Rep. Paul Ryan announced Tuesday they have reached an agreement on a two-year budget deal.

The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 would reduce the cuts imposed by sequestration by $63 billion over the next two years, though the deal would also provide $23 billion in additional spending cuts during the same period.

The deal would also prevent potential government shutdowns in January and October 2014.

President Obama called the deal "a good first step" in a statement released Tuesday night, calling on lawmakers to "pass a budget based on this agreement so I can sign it into law."

"This agreement doesn't include everything I'd like – and I know many Republicans feel the same way," Obama said in the statement. "That's the nature of compromise. But it's a good sign that Democrats and Republicans in Congress were able to come together and break the cycle of short-sighted, crisis-driven decision-making to get this done."

Speaker John Boehner also praised the deal, calling it a "positive step forward" in a statement released Tuesday evening.

"While modest in scale, this agreement represents a positive step forward by replacing one-time spending cuts with permanent reforms to mandatory spending programs that will produce real, lasting savings," Boehner said.

Whether or not the deal can pass both chambers of Congress remains to be seen. But the fact that the two chief negotiators — polar opposites ideologically — were able to come to an agreement is hugely significant for a Congress that has only been able to pass short term spending measures and has been defined by brinksmanship and last minute can-kicking.

"I see this agreement as a step in the right direction. In divided government you don't always get what you want. That said, we still can make progress toward our goals," Ryan said at a press conference announcing the deal.

"I think this agreement is a clear improvement on the status quo," he said. "This agreement makes sure that we don't have a government shutdown scenario in January, it makes sure we don't have anther government shutdown scenario in October. It makes sure we don't lurch from crisis to crisis."

Both Murray and Ryan insisted that the deal was as Murray put it, "not the one I would have written on my own," but they both stressed it was far better than the alternative of sequester and short-term spending bills. That will be an important selling point to both parties who have been skeptical. Multiple conservative organizations have come out against the budget, before even seeing the proposed legislation.

And after it was released, Sen. Marco Rubio came out strongly against the deal, saying that Americans "deserve better than this," in a statement released Tuesday.

"This budget continues Washington's irresponsible budgeting decisions by spending more money than the government takes in and placing additional financial burdens on everyday Americans," he said in the statement.

Ryan said at the press conference that he "expects great support from our caucus because we are keeping our principles."

"As a conservative I think this is a step in the right direction," he said. "What am I getting out of this? Deficit reduction. The deficit will be reduced more than if we have done nothing. Point number two, there are no tax increases here. Point number three, we are getting out of auto-pilot spending."

Democrats have likewise been nervous about the agreement because it does not include an extension of unemployment insurance — something Democrats have been pushing for. The liberal group Democracy for America said in a statement that House Democrats "should stand strong and reject any budget deal that fails to adequately protect those who continue to look for work."

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, ranking member on the budget committee, however, was cautiously receptive to the deal.

"This agreement isn't perfect, but it is certainly better than no agreement at all. This difficult negotiation has gone through many phases," he said. "The final product replaces part of the job-killing sequester without disproportionally hitting working families, including hundreds of thousands of public servants. It's a small, but good step forward for our country."

Murray said the point of a bipartisan deal was compromise.

"I'm confident we won't have 100% of the Senate or 100% of the House," Murray said. "This is a bipartisan deal. We have both had move to get to where we are today. But I think the American people ought to know, that this Congress can work."

Dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s.

Mark Wilson / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — Sens. Mark Kirk and Bob Menendez are all but finished with the text of Iran sanctions legislation meant to be an amendment to the defense authorization bill, though procedural issues could mean a vote on the amendment is dead in the water already.

A Senate aide familiar with the situation told BuzzFeed that the two were basically finished drawing up their legislation: "dotting I's and crossing T's, as they say."

"It's basically agreed to and is now just a procedural issue," said another Senate aide, who said most Republicans are on board. But "the Democrats are folding like a deck of cards under White House pressure."

The fate of the amendment rests in the hands of Majority Leader Harry Reid, who will decide whether a vote on the National Defense Authorization Act goes forward without amendments or whether it will include amendments, including Kirk-Menendez.

Leaders of the Armed Services Committees plan to push the NDAA bill through quickly without amendments, and Reid has decided to put nominations on the Senate floor this week instead of having the NDAA be debated.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell criticized the move as a "rather transparent attempt to prevent a vote on an enhanced Iran sanctions."

Reid and other influential members of Congress have been under enormous pressure from the administration to prevent new Iran sanctions from being passed while negotiations with Iran are ongoing, culminating in a full-throated appeal from Secretary of State John Kerry before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday. Kerry defended the interim deal reached with Iran last month and urged Congress not to go forward with new sanctions: "I'm not saying never," he said. "I'm just saying not right now."

The push for new sanctions took another blow Tuesday when Sen. Tim Johnson, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, said his committee would hold off on a new sanctions bill that had been proposed.

Despite the numbers, officials are still bullish on the law. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius will appear on Capitol Hill Wednesday.

Mike Segar / Reuters / Reuters

Fewer than 365,000 Americans have successfully selected private health insurance plans on the federal health care exchange in the first two months of the program, according to a new report released Wednesday by the Department of Health and Human Services.

The administration originally projected that 500,000 people would enroll in just the month of October on the individual market.

Despite the early technical failures of President Barack Obama's flagship health care law, Director of the Office of Health Reform Michael Hash said in a call with reporters that he still thinks it can meet the Congressional Budget Office's original projection of 7 million enrollees by March 31.

"As many more Americans learn about the options available to them at the marketplace, we have every reason to believe interest will continue to grow and enrollment will continue to rise," Hash said.

Of the 3.7 million people that applied for Obamacare during the period covered by the report — Oct. 1 to Nov. 30 — 2.3 million people have been found eligible to enroll. There are at least 1.9 million people that have been approved but have not yet chosen a plan.

Overall, about 1.2 million people have gained coverage, when Medicaid enrollment numbers are included.

As website glitches continue to be resolved — Hash said the website is like "night and day" from Oct. 1 — enrollment numbers have trended upward. According to the report, enrollment in the federal exchange quadrupled from October to November.

State-run exchanges continue to outperform the federal one. The latest report shows that 227,478 Americans enrolled in state exchanges while 137,204 have enrolled in the federal one.

With 250,838 completed applications, California has the most enrollees of any state. Florida, with 150,142, has the highest number of enrollees for any federally run or assisted exchange.

Administration officials would not provide month-by-month enrollment numbers. Cumulative numbers, HHS said in a statement, provide "the best snapshot of Marketplace enrollment activity," as some people can apply in one month but finally select a plan in another.

Julie Bataille, spokeswoman Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, said on the call with reporters that particular focus will go toward those who started the application process but were unable to finish because of website issues.

That includes resolving issues with 834 errors, which are backend system errors that can lead to missing, duplicate, or erroneous information sent to insurers after a customer believes they successfully applied for Obamacare.

Bataille said the administration is communicating daily with insurers to correct these errors and to ensure future ones don't happen. She would not say directly if she could guarantee everyone who wants to enroll by Dec. 23, the deadline to be covered starting Jan. 1, would be able to.

"There's a tremendous demand for this product and millions of Americans are seeking plans," Bataille said.

In separate news on the exchange, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius also announced Wednesday morning that she has requested an inspector general investigation into the management and contracting decisions behind the website issues. She will appear before lawmakers on Capitol Hill Wednesday.

“Paul Ryan is the Jesus of our conference. If Paul gives something his blessing, it brings the votes,” a Republican leadership aide said Tuesday of Ryan’s budget deal with Democratic Sen. Patty Murray.

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

WASHINGTON — Rep. Paul Ryan appears to have done what only a week ago was unthinkable: not only has the baby faced conservative negotiated a two-year budget deal with a progressive Democrat like Sen. Patty Murray, he's convinced his fractured conference to go along with it.

Under normal circumstances the deal — which appears to have enough Democratic and Republicans support to pass — would at best be considered a minor success: it does little to address either long-term spending needs or drastically reduce the deficit, and doesn't include significant reforms to entitlement programs.

But in a Congress that measures success in how few days its incompetence results in a government shutdown, the Ryan-Murray deal marks a legislative high-water mark.

Indeed, Ryan has succeeded where his party's official leadership has failed since taking control of the House three years ago: Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, all of whom are master politicians, have tried, and failed, to cut agreements large and small to avoid another round of legislating by crisis.

"Paul Ryan is the Jesus of our conference. If Paul gives something his blessing, it brings the votes," a senior Republican leadership aide said of the Wisconsin lawmaker.

"There's nobody better than Paul Ryan. There's nobody more knowledgeable and nobody more principled that Paul Ryan. So that gives me a lot of confidence just knowing that it's him. The trust is high. I think everybody knows him and he's one of the most respected individuals in Congress period. By both sides," Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart said Tuesday, just hours before Ryan and Murray announced their deal.

It wasn't just mainstream Republicans like Diaz-Balart who were praising Ryan, even before the deal was cut. Conservatives — who have consistently been a thorn in the side of leadership and scuttled numerous bipartisan agreements — were also effusive in their praise.

"I'm very supportive of Chairman Ryan and I've been very concerned about sequester and how it effects the military … It is a real achievement. I'm as surprised as anyone. We've seen the 'Super Committee' and how they didn't come through," said Rep. Joe Wilson.

A key test for Ryan came Wednesday morning when he was charged with selling the deal to the Republican conference. There was loud applause heard coming from inside the room when Ryan concluded speaking, and even conservatives like Wilson and Florida Rep. Dennis Ross said they felt inclined to support the deal.

"I feel good about it, the more I find out about it," Wilson said. "He had credibility to begin with, but to be able to reach a balanced agreement that's beneficial to the American people, it reflects well on Paul Ryan."

That's not to say everyone will vote for it, but unlike with deals past, Republican members said that a healthy amount of conservative "no" votes wouldn't mean the death of the deal. Republicans readily acknowledge the vote will rely on a good chunk of Democratic votes, but Rep. Darrell Issa predicted the "majority" of the conference would end up supporting it despite staunch opposition from outside conservative groups.

"Conservative groups would like to get more, I'd like to get more. But if what we want to do is keep the government open and get a trajectory of savings for now, and then argue in the 2014 elections that we should be more willing to do more than this combination then that's the right thing to do. What Chairman Ryan has done artfully has gotten what there was to get," Issa said.

Following conference Ryan said that they felt very good at where we are with our members."

"We know that this budget agreement doesn't come close to achieving what we want to achieve on our ultimate fiscal goals, but again, if we can get a step in the right direction, we're going to take that step and that's why we're doing this," he told reporters.

House Speaker John Boehner was adament in his support for the deal, and in an a flash of anger, blasted outside groups for opposing the deal before they had seen it.

"You mean the groups that came out and opposed it before they ever saw it? They're using our members and they're using the American people for their own goals," he said. "This is ridiculous. Listen, if you're for more deficit reduction, you're for this agreement."

Ryan's recent success stems in large part from his deep roots within the GOP's conservative wing. Long before becoming a member of the conservative "Jedi Council" that has helped foment conservative outrage against previous spending plans, Ryan was a key figure within fiscal conservative circles in Washington. Over the years Ryan has developed a reputation amongst conservative and moderate Republicans in the House as a trusted voice on not only budget issues, but broader economic policy.

"The thing about him is that everyone knows he's a straight shooter, he's not going to play games. And that's what it takes," Diaz-Balart said. "Everyone understands what he says is real, whether you agree with Paul Ryan or not everybody understands that his word is truthful. In this process, he's among the most trusted."

Republican Policy Committee Chairman Rep. James Lankford, one of the most conservative members of the GOP leadership, agreed. "The level of trust is there because people know what his core is. We've all gone through budget negotiations with him, we've all seen the budgets he's put together and the coalitions he's put together to get that done. So we know he's going after as much as he can possibly get," Lankford said.

Of course, that's not to say Ryan's apparent success has occurred in a vacuum. Conservatives ideological intransigence over Obamacare and spending brought on the government shutdown and nearly sent the government into default. Republicans emerged from those crises badly bruised and facing what suddenly appeared to be a difficult 2014 election cycle.

And then came the debacle of the Obamacare website, and within weeks, Republicans were once again riding high — a feeling many aren't particularly eager to lose anytime soon.

Faced with a relatively small deal that, while increasing spending, reduces the national debt, it's a bit of a no brainer for many Republicans.

"The magnitude of the deal is part of it. The body is kind of smarting from the shutdown and that could be helping this process," Rep. Tom Rooney said.

A red state Democrat agreed, arguing, "After the shutdown, those guys don't want to lose the momentum" they've gained from the Obamacare episode.

Still, Republicans Tuesday praised Ryan's efforts, and predicted it could help him in a potential 2016 presidential run.

"He's showing leadership. If you want to become president, maybe instead of trying to please every faction of your party, maybe you should show the country as a whole 'I can work with the other side on something important. It's a unique way to become president but I think it might actually work," Sen. Lindsey Graham said.

James Arkin contributed to this report.

We will overcome.

The federal government went into full apocalyptic lockdown on Tuesday after "AT LEAST AN INCH" of snow was forecast to decimate the nation's capital.

Hill offices, museums, and all non-emergency federal employees were told to STAY HOME...

blogs.amctv.com

View Entire List ›

More than three-quarters of likely voters polled favor negotiating with Iran plus adding sanctions.

Gary Cameron / Reuters / Reuters

WASHINGTON — A new poll conducted by Republican pollster Frank Luntz that will be released on Wednesday finds that a majority of likely voters support levying new sanctions on Iran.

The poll, commissioned by Al-Masdar.net and the Israel Project's The Tower website and shared with BuzzFeed ahead of its publication, found that 77% of those polled favor negotiating with Iran plus adding sanctions.

Seventy-seven percent of Democrats polled said they would rather vote for a senator who supported new sanctions, compared with 96% of Republicans.

The poll was conducted on Dec. 7–9 with 900 likely voters.

The results dovetail with a recent Pew poll that found only 32% of Americans approve of an interim deal reached with Iran last month in Geneva, while 43% disapprove. The results show a shift in opinion over the last few weeks, as Americans supported a deal 2-1 in late November, including lifting some sanctions.

Democrats in both chambers of Congress have seen the poll, including "key Senate offices" and "key members of the House" and have been briefed on its contents, a source said.

"This poll shows that the White House has an clear uphill battle with rank and file Democrats, not to mention Democrats in Congress," said one Democratic aide on the Hill. "If you look at Secretary Kerry's hearing in front of the House Foreign Affairs Committee yesterday, you can see that it's not just Republicans and neoconservatives who have serious questions about this deal. You don't have to be a warmonger to support increasing sanctions against Iran during these talks."

"The White House pushback on the Senate effort doesn't seem to be resonating with voters," the aide said.

But the push for new sanctions in Congress looks stalled for now as the Senate Banking Committee has decided not to go forward with a proposed bill and with the amendment written by Senators Kirk and Menendez for the defense bill resting in the hands of Majority Leader Harry Reid, who will decide if the bill gets voted on with or without amendments.

“I am stunned, surprised and disappointed by what I have learned,” Sen. Lamar Alexander said of the staffer, whom he has placed on leave without pay.

Via politico.com

Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee has put his chief of staff Ryan Loskarn on leave without pay after learning that law enforcement agents searched Loskarn's home in connection to allegations involving child pornography.

Loskarn has been his chief of staff since 2011 and has worked for Alexander for a decade.

Here is the Wednesday statement from Alexander:

"I was just informed by the United States Senate legal counsel's office that law enforcement agents are conducting a search of the personal residence of Ryan Loskarn, the chief of staff of my Washington, D.C., office regarding allegations involving child pornography. I am stunned, surprised and disappointed by what I have learned. Based on this information, I immediately placed Mr. Loskarn on administrative leave without pay. The office is fully cooperating with the investigation."

Loskarn was listed in 2011 on Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call's "fabulous 50" list of leading Republican and Democratic staffers.

With activists calling for demonstrations of opposition to Russia’s anti-LGBT propaganda law in Sochi, the International Olympic Committee won’t specify how it will respond to violations of its own propaganda ban. “[T]he lack of clear guidelines as to authorized and unauthorized behaviors encourages self censorship,” an advocate says.

Nikolay Petshak carries the Olympic torch as he leads a group of members of local winter swimming clubs during the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympic torch relay in the waters of the Yenisei River in Russia's Siberian city of Krasnoyarsk, November 26, 2013.

Ilya Naymushin / Reuters

WASHINGTON — The International Olympic Committee still is not saying how it plans to implement a rule banning demonstrations and "political propaganda" at Olympic sites during the Sochi Winter Olympics — despite an announcement Tuesday that its executive board had discussed that very topic.

"Specifically on the implementation of the rules, the IOC would always take a sensible approach when dealing with potential actions and always act on a case by case basis," IOC spokeswoman Emmanelle Moreau told BuzzFeed — the same statement she provided to BuzzFeed about the rule in August.

[Update: "The principles were discussed in broad terms but the EB did not enter into specific scenarios," Moreau explained when asked how Rule 50 would be implemented in Sochi.]

One group advancing LGBT athletes' participation in sports said the lack of clarity from the IOC — less than two months from the start of the games — would silence some athletes.

"[T]he lack of clear guidelines as to authorized and unauthorized behaviors encourages self censorship, with athletes erring on the side of silence, even in cases that the IOC would likely find unobjectionable," Marc Naimark, a spokesman for the Federation of Gay Games, said in a statement provided to BuzzFeed.

In its own news release Tuesday following the IOC's executive board meeting, the IOC noted its board "discussed rules 40 and 50 of the Olympic Charter and the information that will be made available to athletes and National Olympic Committees about how those rules will be implemented."

While Rule 40 relates to athlete eligibility, Rule 50 has garnered attention for its ban of any "demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda" at "any Olympic sites, venues or other areas."

The potential for demonstrations and similar efforts have been advocated for by LGBT activists, dissatisfied with Russia's anti-LGBT laws — primarily the country's own propaganda ban, which makes virtually all public discussion of LGBT issues illegal — and the IOC's lack of response to the law.

Many LGBT activists have called on people attending the Winter Olympics to take a variety of actions, from speaking out against the laws to showing solidarity with LGBT people through display of rainbows or other LGBT rights symbols. If done at Olympic sites, those actions could violate Rule 50 — whose ultimate penalty is "disqualification or withdrawal of the accreditation of the person concerned."

Of the IOC dissemination of information regarding the rules' implementation, Moreau told BuzzFeed that "National Olympic Committees (NOCs) are briefed on a number of topics including rules 40 and 50 and social media guidelines. This is no different from what was done prior to the Games in London (in 2012) or Vancouver (in 2010)."

"The IOC Executive Board yesterday simply approved the information that will now be made available to athletes so that they are aware of the rules and understand why they exist," she stated. "You will understand that we are not in a position to share this information as the letters have not yet been sent to the NOCs."

Naimark, the Federation of Gay Games spokesman, was disappointed with the situation, saying, "We expressed our hope that these would provide clear indications on what actions would be accepted and what actions would expose athletes to sanctions. From the description of the guidelines, it appears that such clarity is not on offer."

The specifics of the executive board's discussion of implementation of Rule 50 matter because, according to the IOC charter's discussion of Rule 50, "The decisions of the IOC Executive Board regarding this matter shall be final."

John Gara / BuzzFeed

But some Democrats here still hate them: The group is seen as an irritant and a drain, a parasite on liberal successes and a direct-marketing machine better at raising money than at changing policy or winning party-purifying primaries. Democratic political operatives regularly forward PCCC emails to reporters with asides like "LOL" and "ugh."

Now, though, Washington is a town where purity rules and a sense of shame has little use. On the right, Heritage Action — once a digital mirror image of PCCC — just accomplished a transformation from ridiculed gadfly to a central cause of the shutdown of the American government. And PCCC's Democratic critics are increasingly loathe to discount the group's high-profile successes, even as they attack its methods.

They say it's shameless. PCCC's co-founder and public face, Adam Green, is happy to take that on.

Launched five years ago by Green and Stephanie Taylor, both former MoveOn staffers, the group has lofty ambitions. In 20 years, Green wants to put so-called "movement progressives" at the top of every major party and congressional committee — and, "yes, eventually," he says, he wants one in the White House too. The 37-year-old Green, bespectacled and intense, leaves himself a decade to accomplish that last one.

The group's focus is largely on economic populism. PCCC hails Sen. Elizabeth Warren as its "North Star" and wants to remake the Democratic Party in her ideological image. The first-term Democratic senator from Massachusetts has become the mascot of PCCC — whether she likes it or not. There are many signs that she does.

In the here and now, many operatives and lawmakers aren't exactly sure what to do with PCCC, or with Green. They scratch their heads at the group's political targets, question its aggressive fundraising tactics, laugh at what they see as a lousy win-loss record in Democratic primaries, and wonder whether PCCC's accomplishments on the ground will ever compare to the noise it makes in headlines.

Take PCCC's headline-grabbing battle against the think tank Third Way last week — an operation with all the group's signature trimmings.

PCCC co-founders, Green and Taylor, pose for a photograph with Sen. Elizabeth Warren, their group's "North Star," at the Netroots Nation conference last year.

Courtesy of Adam Green

When Green saw PCCC's patron saint, Warren, assailed as "disastrous" by a moderate think tank in the pages of The Wall Street Journal last Monday night, he knew what had fallen into his lap. Within hours, he seized the opportunity — the kind he calls "a moment of accidental leverage."

PCCC sent an email Tuesday to its nearly 1 million members demanding that Third Way, the veteran New Democrat organization with ties to Wall Street, disclose its corporate donors. The next step? The group turned its crosshairs on Rep. Allyson Schwartz, the Democratic Party's pick to become the next governor of Pennsylvania and, it so happens, an honorary co-chair of Third Way.

"Allyson Schwartz group attacking Elizabeth Warren?" read the subject line of an email blast, fired off by Green on Wednesday. The message: "Can you call Allyson Schwartz today and tell her to drop her affiliation with Third Way immediately?" By Thursday, Schwartz had called the op-ed "outrageous" and distanced herself from the think tank. In an email to reporters, PCCC called the development "HUGE."

The Schwartz fight proved the point that "punching hard and moving quick" can work as a strategy, Green said in an interview with BuzzFeed. Why Schwartz? She's "running in a progressive primary," providing PCCC with plenty of leverage.

"There's a reason that she was chosen, and there's a reason she reacted so quickly," Green said. "She was the first domino to fall."

The episode also captured why some Democrats view the progressive group with concern. Why go after Schwartz — a fairly progressive candidate, whose establishment support makes her Democrats' best shot at the Pennsylvania governor's mansion?

Even PCCC's biggest ally wasn't thrilled.

Team Warren expressed unease about the group's Schwartz attack to insiders who asked. The unease was mentioned in communications with PCCC too.

Green wasn't surprised.

"It would probably not be appropriate for any congressional office on the Democratic side to say they were happy about us pressuring Allyson Schwartz," Green told BuzzFeed. "With something like that, we don't ask permission.

The Schwartz effort was the latest in a series of sharp-elbowed, unconventional tactics — owing as much to online direct sales practices as to politics — the group has tried out over the last few years.

In 2011, if you didn't know how to spell "Stephen Colbert," the name of the Comedy Central television star, you ended up caught in Green's web.

After Colbert launched a parody super PAC two years ago, Green bought four similar domain names that misspelled the comedian's name. (ColberSuperPAC.com, for example.) The four domains, whose registration was renewed this year, redirect to PCCC's site. The goal, Green said, was to give Colbert's progressive viewers a chance to donate to a real activist group.

Green, in one of his frequent cable news hits, talks with host Ed Schultz of MSNBC about the public option debate in December of 2009. For PCCC, media promotion is a "key part" of its strategy, Green says.

MSNBC / YouTube

He conceived the idea during an "awesome late-night brainstorm," he said, explaining it was mostly supposed to be "kind of funny" and not a serious strategy. "It generated very few people."

The fake Colbert sites caused some ire on the activist left. (Blogger Angry Black Lady called them "dishonest," for one.) Green dismissed the critics as "Obama-bots" angry over PCCC's campaigns against the current White House. He bought the URLs with his own money, not PCCC's, but acknowledged they linked back to his group's homepage.

Butterfingered surfers are not the only unwitting internet users who could find themselves confronted with an offer to donate money to PCCC.

Visitors to the group's "Draft Schweitzer" page, set up earlier this year to woo former Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer into next year's Senate race, can still donate, despite Schweitzer's decision not to run more than five months ago. ("We were very much lining up Schweitzer to be the next Warren," Green said of the effort.) Fundraising sites for other former candidates on the progressive fundraising site, ActBlue, are also still active.

Green said it's all part of how the internet works. "ActBlue pages don't go away. There are petitions from four years ago that are still on our homepage," he said.

Since Schweitzer dropped out of the race in July, only 13 people have found the page and signed up to "volunteer," said Green. No one has donated. But next spring, after the filing deadline in the Montana Senate race passes, the money PCCC raised will be available for general use. "Right now it's just sitting in an escrow account waiting," said Green. "After [the deadline], then the money goes to us."

This kind of stuff rankles many Democrats and progressives. But in the immediate aftermath of the Third Way battle, few were willing to speak ill of the group for attribution.

"It's easy for Democrats to dismiss them, but look at what happened this week. It's now harder for anybody else to work with Third Way," said one Democratic strategist who has worked with PCCC before. "People said similar things about MoveOn.org for years, but you look at the longer game and they really did change the heart of the party."

PCCC has expanded rapidly over the last two election cycles but is still a lean operation with about 20 staffers. Five are based in Washington, and the rest are scattered across the states, working remotely from places like New York, Minnesota, and Tennessee. The group keeps operating costs low while bundling relatively large sums of money online. Last year, PCCC raised $1 million for Warren's Senate bid, after helping draft her into the race in 2011. Though it often races to take credit for pushing primary candidates to the left, it's difficult to find an actual election in which its role has been decisive.

"I don't know the real-world impact," said Michael Whitney, the U.S. email director at Change.org, a nonpartisan petition-based group and platform, "but they play this game well."

Green says the strategy is working, and he shrugs off his critics.

"Our goal is to build progressive power," he said, "and we think about things much more in terms of a 20-year plan than a two-year election cycle or a one-year legislative calendar."

Green points to the 45 members of Congress, including Warren, he says he personally contacts by phone or email, as a measure of PCCC's growing influence.

He described his organization's relationship with Warren as "seamless" and "extremely close" — a characterization the senator's staff did not dispute. When asked if he can pick up the phone and call Warren, Green said, "Yes. We interact with her quite often."

PCCC distributes its new "Elizabeth Warren wing" stickers at a Democratic Party dinner in New Hampshire last month. Warren works regularly with the group.

Ruby Cramer / BuzzFeed

"We started out with zero, then probably had three our first year, and now we're up to 45," Green said of the members he can contact directly. "For us that's really power."

The thought of Green commanding the attention of 45 members of Congress likely causes some Democratic strategists to break out in hives. Conversations with more than a dozen strategists over the past few weeks raised three core complaints about the group, each of which Green was happy — almost proud — to respond to. He takes negativity in stride, leaning into the critics and admitting a shameless, unapologetic campaign to shake up the Democratic Party.

First off, observers say PCCC is unpredictable, jumping quickly at high-octane fights and launching unorthodox fundraising campaigns.

"I'm not really clear on what they're trying to do," said one Democratic strategist who has faced them several times.

More than one reporter's inbox lit up with snide quips when PCCC launched its "Edward Snowden Defense Fund." The campaign raised about $38,000, according to Green. He said the money went to a Washington-based law firm, Trout Cacheris, which represented the high-profile case of whistleblower John Kiriakou.

Green has rebuffed critiques of the group's fundraising before. In an interview, he said he had successfully called off reporters from the Washington Post and Politico sniffing around PCCC's contributions to the Wisconsin recall fights of 2011. Skeptics alleged the organization raised a lot but spent a relatively small amount.

Green said his critics are misreading the financial records and pointed to the two spiked stories as evidence he's on the right side of things. He bristled at questions about his group's legitimacy when it comes to fundraising.

"We take integrity very seriously," said Green.

Then there's the issue of self-promotion.

Critics say PCCC's media strategy has made Green a sort of self-appointed spokesman for what the group calls the "Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party" — a slogan it recently printed on T-shirts and bumper stickers, now for sale online.

When speculation over a possible Warren presidential bid dominated headlines, it was Green who appeared quoted in the much-discussed New Republic cover story, headlined "Hillary's Worst Nightmare," discussing how progressives view Hillary Clinton. And earlier this year, when PCCC led its Schweitzer draft campaign, it was Green who repeatedly pitched himself to MSNBC, saying that Schweitzer would soon announce his campaign, according to a producer at the network.

Promotion? Of course, says Green. He is unabashed about courting press.

"For us, the media is a key part of our model," he said. He is quick to stress, though, that he and his co-founder Taylor are equal partners in the organization at every level. "I tend to be more of the public face," he added. (The late tech visionary Aaron Swartz was also involved with the group.)

Green said he was gratified when PCCC was recently described to him in conversation as "the most progressive group out there that's taken seriously in the media," which depends a bit on which reporter you talk to.

Operatives who have worked with PCCC say Green excels more at "proxy wars" than electoral politics — in recognizing opportunities and seizing them — with several Democrats pointing to the Third Way dust-up as a prime example.

"This is where PCCC excels: seizing moments that can get them placed highly in stories in TPM, Roll Call, Politico, and others to demonstrate their reach, the voice of their members, and show up in Beltway publications," said Whitney.

And that leads to the core criticism of the group: that PCCC cares less about winning races than advancing the progressive mantle and its own identity, in whatever way possible.

Whitney praised PCCC's ability to "hold the left flank" but hasn't been impressed with its record on the ground. "Their success with political campaigns has been elusive. If they really want to put themselves alongside the DCCC and DSCC in terms of candidate impact, they have a long way to go."

Green and Taylor talk with Rep. Keith Ellison, an ally of the progressive group, at Netroots Nation earlier this summer in San Jose, Calif.

Courtesy of Adam Green

Its primary record isn't great — a fact Green readily acknowledges. He said that a "key part" of his group's model is getting "involved very early." But last year, PCCC endorsed just five candidates in congressional primaries. Four lost. Only one, Ann McLane Kuster of New Hampshire's 2nd District, became the Democratic nominee. (Warren was the only candidate PCCC backed in a Senate primary. In the general election, the group endorsed many more candidates: 30 federal, state, and local-level Democrats it backed ended up winning last November.)

"Look, we've won some primaries and we've lost some primaries," Green said of his group's electoral record. He argued that PCCC has pushed the conversation to the left in every race it's played in: winning by not winning. "When we enter a primary, every candidate competes to be the most progressive in the race," Green said. "Our opponents are putting the word 'progressive' on all their literature."

"For us, we care about the issues first," said Green. "Elections are just a means to that end — but they're a really important means."

Progressives on Capitol Hill generally praise PCCC, even as they keep their distance from some of the group's methods.

"Substantively we tend to agree, and even on tactics we tend to agree a lot, but there are times when I wouldn't have done something one way," said Rep. Keith Ellison, a Democrat from Minnesota and co-chair of the House Progressive Caucus. "I still support them, because we are better off with them than not."

But there are also signs that PCCC doesn't always have the reach into progressive politics it advertises. Rep. Peter Welch, a progressive from Vermont, said he wasn't very familiar with PCCC but what he has seen gives him pause.

"Ideological rigidness is generally counterproductive," Welch said. "Progressives have clear goals about how to create broader opportunity and equal rights, but the methods by which we get from here to there have to be determined under certain circumstances. What can we achieve today?"

Last week's battle with Third Way splashed PCCC into the headlines and earned the group some respect from even critical observers. Still, the overall plan, so clear in Green's head, eludes many of the people who watch him work.

But that doesn't mean they're not impressed.

Josh Orton, the political and communications director for Progressives United, a group that has worked with PCCC, described Green's approach as "very aggressive" for good reason.
"Sometimes PCCC can act like a bull in a china shop," Orton said. "And in the end, that's often what the Democratic Party needs."

Additional reporting by Kate Nocera.

UPDATE (Dec. 12, 2:56 p.m.): Green said PCCC operates "much more in terms of a 20-year plan than a two-year election cycle or a one-year legislative calendar." An earlier version of this article condensed that statement. Additionally, when asked if Green can pick up the phone and call Warren, Green said, "Yes. We interact with her quite often." An earlier version of this article described the communications between Green and Warren in different terms.

CNN had such a weird year.

MSNBC's timing with this chyron.

Bill O'Reilly's job requirements for weed editors.

instagram.com

Almost every minute of HLN's After Dark.

View Entire List ›

Nearly 40 news outlets sent a letter to the White House in November complaining about what they see as an unprecedented lack of access for photographers. At the White House press briefing Thursday journalists angrily confronted press secretary Jay Carney over the issue.

youtube.com

The internet at its finest.

And then, the internet happened.

View Entire List ›

“This is an incredibly personal issue for me, one that couldn’t possibly hit closer to home,” Mary Cheney, the daughter of the former vice president, says in opposing a proposed amendment to ban same-sex couples in Indiana from marrying. Her sister, Liz Cheney, is running for Senate in Wyoming and opposes marriage equality.

View Video ›

WASHINGTON — Mary Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, went to Indiana this week to make the conservative case for marriage equality as the state debates a proposed amendment to ban same-sex couples from marrying.

Many political, business and education leaders in the state oppose the proposal, HJR-6, and Cheney's visit was a part of the effort against the measure.

"I believe that all families — regardless of how they look or how they're made or where they live — that all families deserve to be treated with the same respect, dignity, legal rights and recognitions as every other," she said in video from the event provided by Freedom Indiana. "I firmly believe that, and I certainly hope that our country will continue to move towards that goal."

The Cheney family has recently been in the news for their own internal differences on the subject. Liz Cheney, the former vice president's elder daughter, is challenging Wyoming Sen. Mike Enzi in the state's 2014 Republican primary, and in so doing has stated her opposition to marriage equality — a move that prompted Mary Cheney's wife, Heather Poe, to criticize Liz Cheney on Facebook.

Freedom Indiana

Mary Cheney's involvement in the Freedom Indiana campaign, in the midst of this family fight over the issue, is one of the first times she has become involved in a political campaign surrounding marriage equality.

She noted that — unlike many states where the movement is toward marriage equality — the proposed Indiana amendment would be a move in the other direction.

Of Freedom Indiana's campaign against the proposal, which must be passed by the legislature for a second time before being put to the people for a vote, Mary Cheney said, "While certainly a step in the right direction, defeating HJR-6 won't get us there. Not even close."

Freedom Indiana campaign manager Megan Robertson said in a statement, "We were honored to have Ms. Cheney visit Indiana and voice her opposition to HJR-6, the proposed amendment that would permanently destroy legal protections for so many Hoosier families."

View Entire List ›