'Average Joe' Candidate says Dems, GOP Manipulate the System (ContributorNetwork)

How can someone who considers himself an "average joe" run for president of the United States? Ask Matthew Gerwitz. With a conservative but non-conforming platform, the unknown "joe" has joined the 2012 race, as yet independent from any party affiliation.

In a previous Yahoo interview, Gerwitz gave his view of the U.S. Supreme Court and what to look for in a president. Today, he answers more questions.

Q: You state on your website that the two major parties manipulate the political election system for their own benefit. Can you give an example?

A: Say I was running Republican...if it even looked like any average joe could come close to winning, the GOP would probably change the rules so that I couldn't become the "establishment" candidate. They have a definite idea of whose "turn" it is. I feel that's how Bob Dole and George W. Bush got the nomination. What goes on in the two-party system has got to change.

Q: Do you think a conservative woman could ever win the presidency?

A: I think Palin or Michelle Bachmann could win, if they won the GOP nomination. Ideas win elections. We've seen that. Even though we think no one besides conservatives might vote for them, if one of them has the right message at the right time like President Obama had the message of change, they could win.

Q: Do you consider yourself a tea partier, or has any Tea Party affiliate approached you offering support?

A: I would consider myself a tea partier. No one has approached me yet, although I've sent some information about myself to Tea Party affiliates.

Q: You have a full plate at home, working three jobs--writer, guitar teacher, pastor--plus having helped your wife homeschool your children. What made you decide to run for president?

A: Even back when I was 18, I made jokes about running for office. But years later, after George W. Bush signed the prescription drug plan [2003, including prescriptions for seniors in Medicare but seen as a huge benefit to drug companies], I realized politicians would never change and began praying about what I could do.

On a sightseeing trip to Gettysburg, I stood at the historic location of a Civil War hospital. I could feel the death. More soldiers died at Gettysburg than in all the years of the Iraq war. Sadness overwhelmed me. I felt the Lord saying, "Are you going to be obedient?" But I ignored him.

The next Sunday, I was teaching a class at church about people needing a vision for their lives. Hosea 4:6 says, "Without vision, my people perish." The Lord asked me again to be obedient.

A week later, it just came tumbling out of my mouth. "I'm going to run for president."

Q: As a Christian pastor running for office, how would you address accusations of "homophobia" and "hate"?

A: Many people use the name "Christian" carelessly when they aren't really one [haven't actively accepted and professed Jesus as Lord, Saviour and leader over their life]. And they mistreat people in the name of what they think is Christianity.

A genuine, true follower of Christ knows what the Bible says about needing to love all people while not necessarily believing that everything people do is okay. Disagreeing is not hate. But many Christians haven't voiced this in the right manner. If we read in the Bible that something is a sin, and that sin hurts people, then we feel we are doing right by kindly telling someone so. If I correct my children for improper behavior, does that mean I hate them?

By the same token -- if the definition of "hate" is defined by those who make generalizations against Christians, then these others are acting just as "hateful" as the Christians they accuse.

See Gerwitz's July 4 You Tube video explaining the national debt ceiling, and stay tuned to the Yahoo Contributor Network for a third interview, discussing the pullout of troops from Afghanistan and other issues.

Sheryl Young has been freelance writing for newspapers, magazines, organizations and websites since 1997. Her specialty is American politics, education and society as they intersect with religion. Credits include Community Columnist for the Tampa Tribune Newspaper, Interview Columnist with Light & Life Magazine, and a National First Place "Roaring Lambs" Writing Award from the Amy Foundation.

(Disclosure of acquaintance: The writer and candidate are previous writing acquaintances, with the candidate inviting this writer to do the interviews. However, the writer is not receiving any form of remuneration from the candidate, nor is she working for, or personally endorsing, his campaign.)

View the original article here

Debt Ceiling Debate Winner Will Win 2012 (ContributorNetwork)

COMMENTARY | The Democrats are playing a dangerous end game on the debt ceiling and the result is a possible win for Barack Obama in the 2012 election. The Republicans have taken a hard line and are willing to let the United States go into default. This is exactly what the Democrats want to happen.

If the United States goes into default, the Republicans will be the scapegoat for the failing economy in the next year and a half before the election. The Democrats will be able to turn the tables and blame the United States devalued credit rating and lower standing in the world economy on the stubborn Democrats.

ABC News posted the anatomy of a debt default and their graphic and story lays the groundwork to make the Republicans look like the bad guys in this battle. The battle over the debt ceiling will become a major talking point in the next three weeks and the focus will be on the Republicans refusal to budge.

Republicans need to learn they have the upper hand. They can send a debt limit approval tied to only cuts, no taxes and send it to the Democrat controlled Senate. If the Senate sends the debt limit approval to the White House with just spending cuts and no taxes, Obama will be responsible for the default and the Republicans will have the edge.

The Republicans have to get a debt limit approval through the House of Representatives and the Senate and on Obama's desk quickly and then his refusal to sign will be the perfect end game for the Republicans in 2012. They will be able to claim victory and Obama go down as the only president to allow the country to go into default.

People struggling to resist claiming bankruptcy will now have an out. The government can default, why can't they? The ramifications have not been thought through. A government default sends a message to the nation and the world. The United States government is in such disarray they cannot honor their obligations.

The House of Representatives has the keys to the car and they can drive the president to the brink with no option but to sign off on the cuts and his ability to expand the government ends in dramatic fashion.

The next three weeks will tell voters if they need to vote out the incumbents or hail them as heroes in the next election. History will happen in the next three weeks. Will it be the end of this country or a new beginning of bipartisan cooperation?

View the original article here

NYC Dems tap state lawmaker to run for Weiner seat (AP)

NEW YORK – Democratic leaders have chosen a state lawmaker from Queens to replace Rep. Anthony Weiner, who resigned his seat in New York's 9th Congressional District last month after a sexting scandal.

Assemblyman David Weprin, 55, was expected to be formally nominated Friday by leaders of the Queens and Brooklyn Democratic parties, an adviser to Weprin said Thursday. The adviser spoke on condition of anonymity because the nomination had not been announced.

Weprin will be heavily favored to win the special election for the seat Sept. 13. While Republicans are expected to announce a nominee soon, no Republican has ever won the seat and the national party was not expected to invest significant resources in the contest.

Weprin was elected to the Assembly in 2010 after serving in the City Council for eight years. He ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic nomination for city comptroller in 2009.

Weiner stepped down in the middle of his seventh term after admitting he had sent sexually suggestive texts and photos to women he met on Twitter and other social networking sites. He remained popular in the district until the end, with polls showing a majority of residents did not believe he needed to resign.

New York is set to lose two House seats next year, based on the results of the 2010 census.

View the original article here

Pelosi flexes muscle as House Democrats prepare for final debt ceiling negotiations (The Ticket)

(Alex Brandon/AP)

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has so far played a minor, background role in the negotiations between President Obama and congressional Republicans over raising the debt ceiling. But she sought to change all that Friday, in a private meeting with Obama to drive home her earlier pledge to oppose any deal that cuts the nation's entitlement programs.

Pelosi emerged from a meeting with House Democrats Friday to announce that they remain "firm" in their commitment to keep Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare free from cuts.

One day earlier, Pelosi made clear that many House Democrats fervidly oppose the White House's bid to place cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security on the table during the debt-ceiling talks. Republican leaders, meanwhile, say they won't proceed with negotiations unless such cuts are included, together with provisions to restrain the future growth of government spending.

"We do not support cuts in benefits for Social Security and Medicare," Pelosi said. "Any discussion of Medicare or Social Security should be on its own table. I have said that before. You want to take a look at Social Security? Then look at it on its own table. But do not consider Social Security a piggy bank for giving tax cuts to the wealthiest people in our country."

It isn't surprising to see the former Speaker flex a little muscle. Through all the big deals negotiated between Republicans and the White House--even the one that extended Bush-era tax rates, which happened while House Democrats still held the  majority and Pelosi was Speaker of the House--she often found herself sitting on the bench, waiting to be called into the game. Now the country is faced with a dilemma that will need her to help fix it--and she's understandably squeezing every bit of leverage she can out of the situation.

The details of the deal are still pending, but both parties are examining ways to reduce federal spending by $4 trillion over the next  10 years. Obama earlier this week said he would consider including the entitlement programs in those cuts, an admission that has received little support from his party.

Members of the House Progressive Caucus have remained the most vocal about their opposition to the deal. Caucus leaders sent a letter to Obama Thursday urging him to strip entitlements from the negotiations, or risk losing Democratic support.

"Not only am I not going to vote for it, I am going to whip my caucus as hard as I can to persuade them not to support it," House Progressive Caucus co-chair Rep. Keith Ellison told the Minnesota Post.

Rank-and-file members are also primed to go to battle over entitlements.

"You want a fight?" said Rep. John Garamendi (D-CA) recently during a press conference. "If anybody in this building wants to take on Social Security—privatize it, change the benefits by altering the Consumer Price Index or by any other method—know this: You've got a fight on your hands."

Still, at least some Democratic lawmakers actually do support at least one of the measures Garemendi cited: reducing benefits by indexing them to the Consumer Price Index. As  Talking Points Memo reporter Brian Beutler points out, congressional Democrats have indicated some backing for an approach to altering Social Security in a way that would reduce benefits without the measure necessarily qualifying as a "cut." By pegging the Cost of Living Adjustments to a lower inflation estimate, Congress could, technically, reduce spending for the program and avoid at least some of the political fallout that would come with deeper outright cuts to the program.

Of course, since the exact details of the deal remain behind closed doors, much of the talk at this point is mere posturing. The true moment of reckoning will come for both sides as more concrete details surface over the next few days.

It's still unclear whether House Speaker John Boehner will even be able to secure votes from a wide majority of Republicans. So for this thing to pass, it will need every Democratic vote it can get. And Pelosi knows it.

View the original article here

Democrats continue fight against voter ID laws (Daily Caller)

Democrats are battling a growing number of states that are preparing to implement tougher voter identification laws.

Stopping voter ID laws is crucial to Democrats who argue college students, the elderly and minorities will be prevented from voting under the new laws.

“It’s no surprise that these voter suppression efforts are being pushed by Republicans in key swing states,” said Democratic Governor Association spokeswoman Lis Smith.

Republicans pushing to pass such legislation counter that tougher laws will prevent voter fraud and keep ineligible voters from the polling booths.

Now, opponents of the laws don’t just have Republicans to worry about.

Rhode Island’s independent Gov. Lincoln Chafee is the latest to join the voter identification law spree—he signed a tougher bill into law Tuesday after it was passed by the state’s Democratic-controlled house and senate. The governor told The Providence Journal the new law would increase “accuracy and integrity” shortly after signing the bill.

Nearly 20 other states are considering more stringent voter photo identification laws, which has many Democrats crying out in retaliation.

More than 15 Democratic senators have signed a letter calling on Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the legality of states’ “highly restrictive photo identification requirements,” which they allege violate the 1965 Voting Rights Act and, ultimately, civil rights.

Holder’s office would not confirm or deny if it is complying with the request from the senators.

“The Justice Department is monitoring, as it routinely does, this type of legislative activity in the states,” Holder’s office told The Daily Caller.

The letter comes weeks after the Democratic Governors Association embarked on a $50,000 fundraising effort to combat voter ID laws.

The Supreme Court has previously upheld voter photo ID laws. The high court ruled in favor of allowing Indiana to enforce photo identification legislation at voting booths in April 2008. High profile Republicans such as current House Speaker John Boehner praised the decision while civil rights groups like the League of Women Voters and many Democrats denounced it.

The fundraising, which ended June 30, surpassed the $50,000 mark, Smith said.

So far, the DGA has specifically targeted Florida and Wisconsin, where Republican governors recently signed voter ID bills into law.

But the DGA isn’t stopping there.

“It’s definitely a big priority of ours,” Smith said. “I think you’ll see we’re going to be involved in additional states in coming weeks and months, Pennsylvania’s one, Ohio’s another.”

Smith said the issue, which the DGA believes is “aimed directly at Democratic voters,” is a priority because it will stop thousands of eligible voters from coming to the polls in 2012.

Before 2011, nine states already required photo IDs at polls. Seven states have inked new voter ID laws this year.

“If this legislation is successful, it will prevent seniors, students, low income folks, women who’ve gotten their names change because they were married, from being able to cast their vote in the 2012 elections,” Smith said.

Not to be outdone, the Democratic National Committee has started its own push back to stop voter ID legislation from becoming law.

The DNC has focused its energy on the exposing the cost of implementing “unnecessary” new voter ID laws. The DNC estimates the cost of the laws could range between $276 million and $828 million for states, attributing the millions to educating voters.

“The concern is the really isn’t a problem,” said DNC spokesperson Alec Gerlach. “It’s more of a solution in search of a problem. Voter impersonation is not a problem”

Gerlach said the stringent voter ID laws make it difficult for minorities and the elderly to vote.

“I think that minority voters and elderly voters are harder to reach as far education is concerned, if you change the law you have to make the effort to educate,” Gerlach said.

No matter how many attack ads Democrats run against the voter ID laws, Republican-controlled legislatures are undeterred. Ohio’s GOP legislature is expected to vote on a series of voter identification reforms during special session in coming weeks.

“The Ohio Republican Party favors an identification provision that is strict and consistent to ensure integrity in our election process,” Ohio GOP Chairman Mike DeWine said to The Daily Caller in a statement. “Identification requirements should comply with the requirements for registration and remain consistent across all 21 days of voting.”

Read more stories from The Daily Caller

Democrats continue fight against voter ID laws

SEC cedes leasing power after putting taxpayers on line for $550 million SNAFU lease

Four governors add names to Cut, Cap and Balance pledge

Senators introduce Sense of the Senate resolution against President acting alone on debt limit

Was Obama almost put up for adoption?

View the original article here

Pelosi: Dems oppose Social Security, Medicare cuts (AP)

WASHINGTON – The top House Democrat says she and fellow Democratic lawmakers will oppose including cuts in Social Security or Medicare benefits in any package aimed at reducing huge federal deficits.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi made the remark to reporters Thursday after returning to the Capitol from President Barack Obama's budget talks with congressional leaders. The leaders are looking for a compromise package that would extend the government's borrowing limit while also slicing trillions off future budget deficits.

Signals have emerged that the White House would consider culling savings from Social Security and Medicare. But Pelosi, a California Democrat, says Democrats believe those two programs should not be used to pay for tax breaks for the rich.

Republicans have opposed ending some tax loopholes for the wealthy.

View the original article here

Does Eric Cantor have a conflict of interest in debt ceiling debate? (Daily Caller)

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) could face a resolution brought by House Democrats accusing him of having a conflict of interest in the debate over the debt ceiling, the Huffington Post reported late Friday.

According to the resolution, Cantor’s investment in ProShares Trust Ultrashort 20+ Year Treasury ETF means he could stand to gain if the debt ceiling is not raised. The fund bets against U.S. government bonds, and if the country were to default on its debts, the value of Cantor’s fund could increase. (Rep. Cuellar: Cantor’s withdrawal from budget talks good for Democrats)

The resolution, the Huffington Post writes, says Cantor “may be sabotaging [debt ceiling] negotiations for his own personal gain.” The resolution goes on to say that Cantor has “compromised the dignity and integrity of the Members of the House.”

Cantor’s spokesman, Brad Dayspring doesn’t just say this is wrong. He says it’s the opposite of the truth. Cantor has only about $3,300 invested in the trust in question, while he has more than a quarter million dollars in a congressional pension plan dependent on government bonds.

Dayspring put it this way: “For the conspiracy theorists — they would have to believe that Eric would want to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars to make a few thousands in return.” He called the insinuations made in the resolution “outrageous.”

Cantor recently removed himself from budget negotiations anyway, saying he wouldn’t consider until Democrats addressed tax issues.

Read more stories from The Daily Caller

Does Eric Cantor have a conflict of interest in debt ceiling debate?

Even Whoopi Goldberg confused why she hosted Dalai Lama talk

Would you give up the internet? [VIDEO]

Congressional staffer resigns after sending inappropriate tweets

Hard times for old time publishers

View the original article here