Bergdahl in Email to Parents: ‘I Am Ashamed to be an American’

Bowe Bergdahl
(Reuters)

A headline on today’s EIN News website says “GOP turns on American POW.”

The video accompanying the story features the Rev. Al Sharpton pointing out that several congressional Republicans previously expressed support for a deal that would bring Pvt. Bowe Bergdahl home from Afghanistan.

Sharpton claims they only changed their minds for political reasons.

But maybe there’s more to it than that. Maybe the Republicans figured out what the White House should have known before approving the trade – that Bergdahl has not been a very loyal soldier, his captivity was the result of his own foolish (and possibly treasonous) actions, and his release hardly justifies the liberation of five very dangerous terrorists.

The difference in the deal is this – the Taliban is getting back five loyal soldiers who will rejoin the fight, while the U.S. got a possible deserter with a bad attitude who will probably never serve his nation again.
[Read more…]

OOPS! House Democrat Admits Obama Had Enough Funding to Treat Veterans – But Didn’t

Brown
(mediaite.com)

The Democrats’ only hope to pin the outrageous VA scandal on Republicans is to somehow portray them as obstructionists who cut the VA budget to save money.

Florida Congresswoman Corrine Brown apparently didn’t get that memo.

As Mediaite puts it:

Rep. Corinne Brown (D-FL) probably did not set out to substantiate virtually every Republican talking point regarding how Democrats and the Obama administration have handled, or mishandled, the scandal surrounding the Department of Veterans Affairs. Nevertheless, that was the result of her spirited attempt to defend President Barack Obama Wednesday at a House Veterans Affairs Committee Hearing.

Invoking images of the central Florida congresswoman hovering high above her district in an SR-71 Blackbird, Rep. Brown assured the hearing’s attendees that she has performed her “reconnaissance” on the VA. Following the successful completion of that mission, Brown reported to her colleagues that the Veterans Affairs facilities in Florida were “doing fine.”…

In less than two minutes, Brown confirmed two key Republican themes. First, that this administration has failed to deliver on its campaign promises; that the president and his party are detached, aloof, and deluded; that they cannot address this abominable scandal because they largely refuse to acknowledge it exists. And second, that a lack of funding for the federal government’s Leviathan social bureaucracies is not the reason why they disappoint so often and so completely. Those bureaucratic monsters fail because their unwieldy design and the scope of their mission preclude the possibility of success.

Brown’s tut-tutting proves a lack of resources was not the VA’s problem. In fact, it was reported last week that the VA expects to have more money than it can spend this year for the fifth year in a row.

Women’s Advocate Says a Higher Minimum Wage Won’t Pull People out of Poverty

myth debunked
(hsaforamerica.com)

Sabrina Schaeffer, executive director of the Independent Women’s Forum, debunks the idea that an increased minimum wage will help millions escape poverty.

From Newsmax.com:

President Barack Obama’s proposal to boost the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour would increase earnings for 16.5 million Americans but eliminate about 500,000 jobs, budget analysts say.

Schaeffer called the claim that minimum-wage earners live in poverty a myth.

“The reason people live in poverty is not because of low-wage jobs,” said Shaeffer during an appearance on The Steve Malzberg Show on Newsmax TV. “It’s because they don’t have paid, consistent work.

“The fact is that only 9 percent of people living in poverty had full-time work last year. Similarly, 67 percent didn’t have work at all, so the big issue is job creation. That’s what would really help.”

Schaeffer said some Republicans are getting behind a minimum-wage hike for the wrong reasons.

“It sounds compassionate, it sounds nice, but the bottom line is … what this would do to younger workers,” she said. “The fact is that the people who would be hurt the most are those with the least amount of experience, the least amount to lose, so to speak.

“Entry-level jobs, which are often minimum-wage-earning jobs, give people much more than just the salary. These are critical skill-learning opportunities.”

The loss of jobs that would occur with the minimum wage hike would adversely affect the female workforce, she added.

“The reason it would hurt women in particular is that women account for nearly two-thirds of part-time workers and these workers are a lot more likely to be making minimum wage. They’re also a lot more likely to have their jobs cut, if need be, so women are definitely much more vulnerable to job losses.”

Detroit-area Democrat one step closer to seeing his 50-year political career end due to incompetence

John Conyers
(dailykos.com)

DETROIT – Unqualified signature gatherers may have done something Republicans never could, namely end the 50-year political career of U.S. Rep. John Conyers, a Detroit-area Democrat.

On Friday, Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson upheld Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett’s decision to invalidate more than 1,400 of the 2,000 signatures submitted by the Conyers’ campaign because they were collected by petitioners who were not properly registered to vote.

“That action left Conyers with 592 valid signatures,” well short of the 1,000 signatures a candidate needs to be placed on the ballot, Detroit Free Press reports.

As things stand now, Conyers’ name won’t appear on the August primary ballot.

All is not lost for the 85-year-old lawmaker, however. The Associated Press reports a federal judge will rule later today on whether or not the Michigan election law that requires petitioners to be registered voters is constitutional or not.

And if Conyers doesn’t prevail in court, he could still run as a write-in candidate, the AP reports.

Conyers’ political opponents aren’t too sympathetic with his plight, pointing out the congressman has met the rules numerous times since first being elected in 1964.

If the signature snafu winds up ending Conyers’ career, it’ll have a certain poetic quality. The Democratic incompetence that’s destroyed the Motor City could now bring Conyers’ career to an inglorious end.

Care to guess how many journalists self-identify as ‘liberal’ in the latest poll?

media bias
(Before It’s News)

It’s a wonder Republicans ever win any election in America.

They run for office on a hopelessly uneven playing field, created by referees (the media) who are openly rooting for the other team.

The good news is that voters seem to recognize and disapprove of the bias, and many do not allow it to sway their decisions when they step into the ballot booth.

Of course the media wields a great deal of power and influence over American public opinion.

It chooses the issues that get news coverage, and frequently presents information in a manner designed to manipulate public reaction.

That’s just the way it is in a free society with a necessarily vigorous and unobstructed media.

And of course reporters are overwhelmingly liberal and tend to work overtime to give Democratic candidates and their issues a boost.

Media types have always denied it, but there’s a mountain of conclusive evidence.

The newly-released results of a 2013 survey of 1,080 television, print and online journalists showed that 28 percent consider themselves Democrats and only seven percent say they are Republicans.

About 50 percent identified themselves as politically “independent,” which is far more appropriate for a journalist, and would be a good sign if it were indeed the truth.

But the percentage of self-identified “independent” journalists increased by a suspiciously high 18 percent since 2002, according to Newsbusters.org.

Perhaps their embarrassingly overt worship of Barack Obama during the 2008 campaign shamed some of them back into the ideological closet, but their preference is still obvious and their bias remains detectable in their work.

A 2010 report from the Media Research Center revealed the following:

A poll of journalists by the American Society of Newspaper editors found that self-identified liberals outnumbered conservatives in newsrooms 61 percent to 15 percent.

More than four-fifths of surveyed journalists said they voted for the Democratic presidential nominee in every election between 1964 and 1976.

In 1992, 88 percent of surveyed D.C. reporters said they voted for Bill Clinton for president. In 2004, the same group said it supported Democrat John Kerry over President George W. Bush by a 12-to-1 margin.

In 2009, a whopping 96 percent of the staff working for the online Slate magazine said they supported Barack Obama for president.

And get this – in the American Society of Newspaper Editors poll, 71 percent of editors admitted that reporters’ opinions “sometimes” or “often” influence their coverage.

“Are reporters biased? There is no doubt that — I’ve worked at the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and worked here at Politico. If I had to guess, if you put all of the reporters that I’ve ever worked with on truth serum, most of them vote Democratic,” said Politico’s Jim VandeHei in 2012.

Given all of this, one might expect the U.S. to be a largely single-party state, with Democrats in control of pretty much everything.

That’s obviously not the case, which is a tribute to the intelligence of the American voter.

According to the Media Research Center report, most voters understand they’re being fed an incomplete picture by liberal journalists.

In every presidential election since 1992, most Americans said the media clearly backed the Democratic candidate.

In 2008, 70 percent of poll respondents perceived the media as being supportive of Obama, compared to 9 percent who said it favored Republican nominee John McCain.

“Nearly nine out of 10 Americans (87 percent) strongly or somewhat agreed that the news media have their own political and public policy positions and attempt to influence public opinion,” the report said.

But here’s a key stat – Only 29 percent of poll respondents think reporters consistently get the facts correct, and only 18 percent said the media is fair.

The message is that most voters take news reports of political campaigns with a grain of salt and still vote the way they believe.

If that weren’t the case, there’s no way the GOP would control the U.S. House. There’s no way 29 out of 50 governors would be Republicans.

And the idea of Republicans regaining the U.S. Senate this year or the White House in 2016 would be laughable.

But those things might very well happen, despite the best efforts of the media.

So here’s to the average American voter, who is obviously smarter than most people think.

That’s probably why we have such a great nation, and the future still holds a great deal of promise.

Authored by Steve Gunn

GOP victory party is threatened by a lack of voter enthusiasm

republican
(redalertpolitics.com)

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A lot of political pundits believe Republicans have a golden opportunity to make big gains in Congress in the 2014 mid-term elections. That would make sense, considering the slow economic recovery, growing national debt and the scandals plaguing the Obama administration.

But a report from Western Journalism suggests that voter enthusiasm among Republicans is not nearly as high as it was in 2010, when the GOP swept to victory in the mid-terms. Sixty-two percent of GOP voters said they were excited to vote that year, compared to only about half of Democratic voters. This year, both parties have a majority of voters saying they are less excited about participating in the election:

Historically, as evidenced by 2010, the party with the most voter enthusiasm is likely to win elections. Separated by party, Republicans are better off in this regard (this year). The Republicans have an eight-point enthusiasm deficit compared to 23 points among those on the other side of the aisle.

Nevertheless, it appears the overwhelming excitement among Republicans during the conservative uprising in 2010 has effectively disappeared.

The article went on to suggest that the GOP will probably pick up seats in Congress, but not as many as 2010.

That suggests that Republicans are almost as upset with each other as they are with Obama and the Democrats. The growing civil war between tea party and establishment Republicans is surely to blame for this. Throughout the nation, nasty battles in Republican primaries are tearing the party in two.

Republicans would be wise to remember that we have a unique political system requiring compromise. Unlike in European democracies, where there are dozens of little parties constantly fighting for power and cutting deals to form short-lived coalitions, American political parties are big tents. Members traditionally tolerate a degree of diversity within their ranks, because they want to win elections.

Obviously many conservative Republicans are disgusted with more moderate members of their party, and see little difference between RHINOS and Democrats. They should remember that they have a better chance of working with moderates in their own party to achieve their goals than working with hard-core leftist Democrats.

If they forget that at election time, a golden opportunity for the GOP could easily slip away.

Authored by Steve Gunn

Republicans foolish to turn their backs on free thinkers like Michigan’s Amash

Amash
Justin Amash (conservativeintel.com)

WASHINGTON, D.C. – If Republicans want to continue to be viewed as stuck-in-the-mud defenders of big business who have no tolerance for various viewpoints, they should keep doing what they’re doing – like ostracizing second term Congressman Justin Amash of Michigan.

According to a recent article in the Detroit News, Amash is drawing very little personal or financial support from establishment Republicans around the nation. That could be a problem for the congressman, since he’s facing a strong primary challenge from conservative, mainstream candidate Brian Ellis.

What the Republicans don’t realize is that Amash represents the type of free thinking that appeals to younger voters – the type who put Barack Obama over the top in two presidential elections.

It’s not that Amash is liberal. He’s far from it. There is no stronger proponent of limited government, and his commitment to the pro-life movement is absolute. But he’s also very independent, and refuses to support any type of legislation that he is not convinced passes Constitutional scrutiny.
[Read more…]