Your task is to extract the thesis of an opinionated news article by selecting some of its text segments. The thesis is a summarization of what the author wants to persuade the reader of. Your answer should consist of segments of the given text. Note that you are not allowed to combine different sentences.

[EX Q]: New Congress: My fellow Republicans, here's your chance to prove you can lead. This week marks a new era in American government . For the first time in the six years of the Obama administration, Republicans took the reins of power in both houses of Congress, bringing divided government to our nation's capital . With this new power comes not only responsibility, but also real challenges and opportunities . Yes, the newly empowered Republicans in the Senate have the ability to control the floor and try to break through some of the gridlock and dysfunction associated with the failed tenure of now Minority Leader Harry Reid . Instead of bottling up all the legislation that's been passed by the GOP House without ever letting it see the light of day, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell can start moving things forward with up or down votes and a full, fair and thorough amendment process . He has pledged to get back to regular order and help re-establish trust between the American people and Congress . But even more importantly, the Senate can get to work on the issues of real importance to the people who elected them . Instead of pushing petty, politically motivated bills, or not voting just to protect one of the Democratic members from taking a tough vote, the Senate can focus on things that will have a direct impact on the American people . I am encouraged to see that the Keystone XL Pipeline is on the top of the docket . This common-sense, environmentally sound project will not only create good-paying jobs for both unions and non-union members, it will also increase our domestic supply of oil, helping to keep prices low and more money in people's pockets , and it will help to reduce the influence of foreign governments . It's unfortunate that President Obama continues to impede progress on Keystone and is standing with the radical fringe of his party rather than the overwhelming majority of the country . Likewise , now that the elections for leadership are over, House Speaker John Boehner needs to move immediately to unite his caucus and focus on the overwhelming areas of agreement within the GOP . Given that Republicans now boast their largest House majority since the late 1920s, it's not surprising that there have been, and will be, minor areas of difference within the caucus . But the things that unite us are so much more plentiful , and it's now the job of Speaker Boehner to focus on these issues . I was heartened to see the House Republicans roll out a series of bipartisan jobs bills this week, including legislation called the "Hire More Heroes Act." This bill would exempt veterans already enrolled in health care plans from the VA or Department of Defense from counting toward the employer mandate under ObamaCare . This is a win-win for both veterans and small businesses . Many businesses are not hiring because of ObamaCare's many mandates and new regulations , and this measure would be a good first step to help alleviate that problem . Above all ,  Republicans in Congress have to prove to the American people that they are responsible leaders who will put our country's interests first by being able to lead and get real results . They need to show that they have learned from the mistakes of the past and will stop lurching from cliff to cliff and forcing self-imposed government shutdowns that only tarnish the GOP brand and make it harder to win future elections . The new Republican Congress needs to make it impossible for the Democrats to falsely portray the Grand Old Party as a group of fire-breathing extremists focused on divisive social issues . History tells us that when we focus on the issues that really matter-- such as low taxes, getting our debt and deficit under control, limited government, returning power to the states and a strong and muscular national defense-- the American people are with us , and we win elections as a result . The simple reality is that even with a GOP Senate, there is only so much of President Obama's destructive agenda that we can work on repealing these next two years . Getting rid of ObamaCare and rolling back his overreaching executive orders and memos-- that's not going to happen if a Democratic president succeeds the current occupant in January 2017 . We Republicans have a slew of talented candidates who, over the next few months, will throw their hats into the ring and begin the process of running for the White House . The new GOP Congress needs to make sure it provides critical support and issue-oriented ammunition for our nominees -- not become unwelcome distractions that will hurt the brand and increase the Democrats' chances of retaining the White House . Let's make these next two years count, so that in January of 2017 a newly elected Republican president can take power with robust GOP majorities in Congress and really get this country back on the right path .
[EX A]: For the first time in the six years of the Obama administration, Republicans took the reins of power in both houses of Congress, bringing divided government to our nation's capital

[EX Q]: Chances of a TV election debate? Choose between zilch and nada. At the time of the last election, David Cameron pronounced that TV debates were "here to stay" . It was his confident declaration that:"We will have them in every election in the future and that is a really good thing for democracy." Many others thought so too . More than 20 million people watched some or all of them . They engaged voters in ways that we hadn't seen before in Britain . To many, it was unthinkable that they wouldn't become a permanent feature of the fabric of our elections . It gives me no pleasure to say that I have always had great doubts that this was really the case . For it to be true, you had to trust the Tory leader not to change his mind . TV debates happened in 2010 only because of an unusual set of circumstances . Mr Cameron had demanded them because that is what opposition leaders nearly always do . Nick Clegg wanted to gain exposure that no previous third party leader had enjoyed . In the wake of the expenses scandal, all the parties were anxious to be seen trying to connect with alienated voters . The key was Gordon Brown . Unusually for a prime minister, he agreed to debates . His people thought he had little to lose and, in a typically Gordon Brownish way, he reckoned he would come over as the man of substance while his Tory and Lib Dem rivals would be exposed as lightweights . It didn't work out as Mr Brown expected . But what is most relevant to what is happening now is that it didn't work out as Mr Cameron anticipated either . The Lib Dem leader, an unknown to many voters before the debates, shone in the first one , presenting himself as the true candidate of change to the disadvantage of David Cameron and unleashing the "Cleggmania" that now seems so long ago . On election night, I was aboard the boat in the Thames hired by the BBC . Among those also present to comment on the results was Michael Ashcroft, the Tory donor and pollster . As it became clear that his party had failed to secure a majority , he placed the blame on the TV debates . That view has since become orthodoxy in the Conservative party . Whether it is entirely true or not, it has been engraved into the Tory soul . Two people were very badly burnt: Mr Cameron himself and George Osborne , who ran the last Tory election campaign and was widely castigated by his colleagues for agreeing to the debates . The chancellor long ago told friends that he is not going to make the same mistake twice . Lynton Crosby, the prime minister's Australian strategist, is also dead-set against TV debates . Craig Oliver, the Number 10 communications chief who has been leading the Tory side in the debate negotiations, is another key figure who believes it is all downside for them . The first reason that David Cameron and his advisers are against debates is the traditional one . He doesn't want to concede equality of status to his opponents . The experience of the Clegg-Farage debates during the Euro elections hardened the belief in Number 10 that debates are bad for incumbents and a gift to challengers . The view around Mr Cameron is expressed by one close ally:"If you are the incumbent, debates are heavily weighted in favour of the insurgents. It is a rigged game." It is not, as is often assumed, fear of Nigel Farage coming at him from the right that most worries the prime minister . His biggest concern is giving a boost to Ed Miliband . TV debates are the Labour leader's best remaining opportunity to secure mass exposure to voters sceptical that he is up to being prime minister and get them to reconsider their view . So poor are his personal ratings, Mr Miliband might only have to turn up and string together a few half-decent sentences and more people would think better of him . The hope that their man could benefit by exceeding low expectations is why Labour is desperate for debates to happen . Which makes the Tories equally desperate for them not to happen . The Conservatives, as we saw last week with their "dodgy dossier" about Labour's spending plans, want to revert to an old-fashioned model of election in which the campaign is dominated by staged leaders' tours in which the prime minister wafts around the country looking presidential and morning news conferences designed, with a bit of help from their friends in the press, to shape the campaign to a Tory agenda . So, from the off, the Conservatives have done everything in their power to prevent TV debates from happening at this election . The broadcasters and the other parties wanted to begin negotiations about the format last spring . The Tories stalled , saying they wouldn't start talking until October . When the negotiations finally got under way, I am told, and by a variety of different sources, that the Conservatives were determined to block any progress toward agreement . "At every stage, they sought to put obstacles in the way," says one source . Another confirms:"The Tories kept throwing spanners in the works." According to a third:"All the parties, including Ukip, took part in good faith except the Conservatives." Last time around, "a heads of agreement" about the debates had been written by December . This time around, we have got to mid-January and aren't even close to that . The last meeting was just before Christmas . "We didn't get anywhere because of the Tories," says one source, an account that is again corroborated by others . I have learned that a meeting between the parties and the broadcasters was scheduled for the Thursday just gone . It was cancelled at the last minute by the Conservatives . No new date has been set . The prime minister's latest excuse for nobbling debates is that he won't do it unless the Greens are included . I happen to agree that the Greens ought to be represented in one debate . There is not much logic to Ofcom's recent preliminary recommendation that Ukip and the Lib Dems should be treated as "major" parties for the purposes of allocating airtime during the campaign, but not the Greens . They have been nip and tuck with the Lib Dems in the opinion polls and quite often done better . They have had representation in the House of Commons for longer than Ukip . So I agree that it would be fair to include the Greens - and hoot with laughter to hear that argument coming out of the mouth of David Cameron . When did he become obsessed with championing the rights of minority parties? Who knew he had such a passion to debate with Natalie Bennett? In the history of political excuses, this must go down as one of the most terrible . By running away from debates, the Tories are taking some risk with their leader's reputation and sense of himself . Says one senior government figure:"Cameron doesn't like being called chicken." If the Cameron brand is supposed to be the strong and confident leader , why is he frit of debating Ed Miliband, a man the Tories keep telling us is hopelessly weak? Won't it simply look bad to deny TV debates to the voters? Yes, it will , but the Tories are calculating that any fuss will be short- lived, soon forgotten and, in the end, not that many voters will punish them for it, especially if their spinners can successfully sow confusion about who is responsible . The Tories also bargain that the press won't make that big a deal of it . About that, they may be right . There was resentment among newspapers during the last campaign that their capacity to shape the agenda was reduced by the TV debates . There are journalists and editors who will be secretly happy if they don't happen again . As things stand , I think the chances of TV election debates happening are somewhere between zilch and nada . Could anything change that? Some suggest that the broadcasters should call David Cameron's bluff and threaten to stage debates without him - "empty chair" him in the jargon . Labour and the Lib Dems hope this will happen . Number 10 is assuming that the BBC wouldn't have the nerve , the other broadcasters will follow its lead , and holding a debate without Mr Cameron might anyway be a breach of the laws about election coverage . A debate between everyone but the prime minister could even suit the Tories when they want to project him as the statesman floating above the fray . A more realistic way to flush him out would be to strip him of the Green figleaf he is using as his pretext for not debating . The broadcasters could redraft their proposal to include Natalie Bennett in one of the debates . Labour, the Lib Dems and Ukip could say that they'd be content for her to participate . I think they would . Labour and the Lib Dems aren't keen on including the Greens , who have been taking votes off both of them , but when it comes to the crunch, they'd rather have a debate with the Greens than no debates at all . Even then, the Tories are so determined to avoid TV debates that they'd most likely concoct another pretext for sabotaging them . But at least everyone would then be crystal clear who is to blame .
[EX A]: At the time of the last election, David Cameron pronounced that TV debates were "here to stay" It was his confident declaration that:"We will have them in every election in the future and that is a really good thing for democracy."

[EX Q]: President Obama, here's how you build a legacy. Two years from now, the country will be on the verge of inaugurating the 45th president of the United States . The presidency of Barack Obama will be over , and to the joy and relief of many Americans, there will be a new beginning . To quote President Obama's 2008 campaign slogan "Hope and Change" will be the order of the day . Certainly "change" will come with the new occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue . The certainty of who that man or woman will be two years from now is unknown . It will depend on who can survive the already begun long campaign that will easily be the most expensive in history . Immediately after the oath of Office is taken at noon on January 20th, 2017 on the West Portal of the Capitol, the pictures on the walls of the White House and the personal artifacts of Barack Obama and his family will be removed . The legacy left behind and the permanent White House staff will stay on awaiting the new leader of the free world . "Hope" is always in the minds of Americans along with good will for any new president . Much of that good will and almost all of the "hope," that this president could or would be different, is gone . With a little more than half of the president's second term remaining, judgments have been made and speculation is rampant that the White House decisions are now being made is to define that legacy . His expected veto decision on the Keystone pipeline is to appease the environmentalists . His executive orders allowing millions of illegals to stay in the country rather than be deported is also viewed as a pandering to the fastest growing voting group . His alteration by executive order creating changes in his health care law have enraged members of Congress that have the real power to change laws . His attempt to close Guantanamo prison over the objections of Congress is another critical debate . But the biggest and most long lasting mistake maybe his withdrawal of ground troops from both Iraq and Afghanistan . And one he has not yet made may be more severe and dangerous to world peace -- his headlong rush toward an attempt to get a nuclear deal with Iran . A deal that, in spite of all the reassurances from Secretary of State John Kerry, will enable Iran to make nuclear weapons . The mainstream media is feeding into this legacy debate . One of the latest examples, The New York magazine cover story of January 11, called the "Obama History Project." The magazine asked 53 historians to weigh in on Barack Obama's legacy and how they think he will be measured 20 years from now . Historians play a vital role in measuring presidents . Usually their histories are written decades after the fact when they can go back and review documents and gather facts and see the results of presidential actions from afar and in a cold dissected view . Historians have certainly altered the view of many former presidents and have actually restored the reputations of a few . Harry Truman being a perfect example . A man greatly respected today , Truman left office with a tattered reputation, was very unpopular with the public, and could not possibly been reelected when he left office in 1952 . Today, he is ranked among the top 10 presidents by most presidential scholars . A review of Eisenhower is going on now and his marks are high . Lyndon Johnson and George Herbert Walker Bush are getting favorable reviews by the historians after being out of office for decades . I am a partisan Republican who has worked in the administrations of three presidents and served two tours of duty at the highest level of Ronald Reagan's White House . As an American and as the father of a young college-aged daughter, I don't want any president to fail . I want this country to be led by the very best people we can find . It isn't always so . Every president, or people on his staff are looking out for his legacy . But the boss I worked for, President Reagan, operated under a different theory . One day we were returning from a trip out somewhere in the country . We were flying aboard Marine One, the presidential helicopter, across Washington, after leaving Air Force One at Andrews Air Base . The president was very tired and as we landed on the South Lawn, he looked up at pictures of his ranch displayed on the walls of the chopper . He said, pointing to the ranch pictures,"I wish we were landing there!" Not knowing what to say to the leader of the free world who obviously didn't want to go back to work . I said,"Mr  President, it will all be worthwhile. History will be very kind to you someday." He chuckled and said right back."Ed, I don't care about history. I am going to be dead and gone and they will distort it anyways. What I care about is those great young people we saw out there today and making sure they have the same opportunities we all had." He turned to his closest friend, also sitting there, Senator Paul Laxalt (R.-Nev .). He said Paul's father was a Basque immigrant sheepherder and his mother a hotel cook . He turned to me and said:"Your dad was shipyard worker and my own father was a travelling shoe salesman. We are all here because this great country gave us opportunities. We have to make sure that's what we leave behind and those kids out there get those same opportunities. Now let's get back in there and go to work!" Ronald Reagan loved this country and was proud to be the leader of the greatest group of people in the world . President Obama, that's how you build a legacy! President Obama's life story is one of inspiration . To come from a broken home, abandoned by his father as an infant, to be raised by grandparents from the Midwest and to achieve, as a black man, the highest office in the land is inspirational . Unfortunately, he has not been an inspirational president . Mr  Obama, let me speak to you directly . Right now your legacy is that your party suffered historic losses across the country at every level in 2014 . Your health care plan will cost enormous sums above your estimates and even those who didn't have health insurance and now do, can't get health care . The Dodd-Frank bill has cost American business billions of dollars and thousands of lawyers are working around the clock to deal with the implementation of it . You pulled our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan before the job was done . And your lack of strength as a leader has made the strongest nation in the world look weak and vulnerable . You have the greatest political tin ear I've ever seen in a president . Someone should have told you to take your place at the front of the line with other world leaders in Sunday's million person march in Paris, against worldwide terrorism . Or you should have known yourself . Yes , Mr  President, they are terrorists and they hate everything we stand for . You want a legacy? Work with the Congress the American people chose and get something done!
[EX A]:
Two years from now, the country will be on the verge of inaugurating the 45th president of the United States The presidency of Barack Obama will be over