PERSUASION IN INK

The IRS audited a conservative women’s group in 2011, and ultimately found no wrongdoing, in what appears to be another example of the scandal plaguing the tax agency.

In January 2011, Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute founder and president Michelle Easton told Breitbart News, an IRS agent called “to say our Form 990 from the year 2008 had been selected for examination.” Easton said that means, in “government lingo,” her group was getting an IRS audit.

“The IRS agent who called would not tell me how or why we were selected,” Easton said in an email. “She said the IRS just wanted to insure we were doing proper activities under our tax exempt 501(c)(3) status.” The year for the institute the IRS wanted to audit was 2008.

Easton founded the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute in 1993, and it had never received an audit before this. But 2008 was a different year for the institute and for Easton. Because Sarah Palin was selected as the vice presidential candidate, Easton stepped down as the president of institute temporarily to help volunteer for Palin’s campaign. “I was so excited a conservative woman was running,” Easton said. “As president of [a tax exempt organization] I couldn’t do a thing. And I never have. I’m an attorney and I follow all the rules but I just wanted to do something.”

“My work for the Palin campaign was done with our attorney’s advice, everything done by the book every step of the way,” she added.

It was not long after that first phone call from an IRS agent that two more agents appeared at Easton’s organization’s headquarters in Herndon, Virginia, to conduct an in-person interview and demand a tour of the building. “Soon two IRS agents marched into our office and conducted an interview of me here in our Herndon Headquarters with our attorney present, and the IRS agents asked a series of questions like – what does the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute do?” Easton said. “After the interview they asked for a tour of our headquarters which our attorney gave them.  When they came to my office door the male agent looked at a large photograph on my office wall of me with President Reagan (who I worked for during the 8 years of his Administration) and his eyes widened and his jaw dropped in dismay.”

Then, Easton said the IRS made seven separate requests for “massive amounts of documents,” the first request being for a “List of contributors and Amounts.”

Easton said she and her attorneys fought against giving that information up, and ultimately did not give it up. “We vigorously defended the names of our supporters from the intrusive IRS,” she said. “But our supporters are such tremendous Americans and were worth the effort to preserve their privacy.”

The IRS demanded 2009 documents after the 2008 ones, she noted too. Ultimately, the entire process took away from their ability to be effective in their core role: promoting conservative women.

“To comply with the seven massive document requests from the IRS, the Institute had to provide boxes and boxes, reams of documents (for example they made us provide copies of bank statements, broker statement, check registers, schedule of accounts payable, schedule of accounts receivable, credit card statements and on and on),” Easton said. “This took the greater part of 2011 and cost tens of thousands of dollars to comply with the IRS demands. And naturally, greatly decreased the time we could spend promoting conservative ideas.”

Easton said her organization was finally fully cleared by the IRS, but not after a few more hiccups.

“At the end of all this harassment, the IRS concluded that while the Institute ‘continues to qualify for exemption from Federal income tax’ that the Institute owed taxes from past years and in future years because the IRS claimed we were operating a list rental business,” she said. “It was a truly insane finding as we have a small staff, we use a mailing company to make all list rental decisions for our mailings and have nothing at all to do with list rentals. After additional thousands more in legal costs in the appeal of this ridiculous finding that we ran a list rental business, we were finally totally cleared by the IRS.”

Powered by WPeMatico

 The Leadership Institute (LI) was audited as part the scandal unfolding at the IRS. Among other questions the tax agency asked LI was who the group’s former interns are and where those former interns are currently employed. The audit cost the group more that $50,000.

LI is a nonprofit based in northern Virginia just outside Washington, D.C., that focuses on training conservative activists and aims to build their ranks around the country. Since LI works with so many other organizations, and its former students are all over the country, such an audit by the IRS reaches deep into the conservative movement.

In early June 2011, the IRS opened an audit of LI’s 2008 activities. According to the LI website, the IRS asked for “copies of applications for internships and summer programs” including “lists of those selected for internships and students in 2008.”

The IRS asked LI to provide information “regarding where the interns physically worked and how the placement was arranged” and for information about where those students now work after the LI internships were completed. “After completing internships and courses, where were the students and interns employed?” the IRS asked according to LI’s website.

The IRS also asked LI about “training programs conducted in 2008” including asking for “copies of training materials utilized in 2008 to include syllabi and/or curriculum” and details about how training sessions and program are “advertised” and how students are “solicited.”

“Are there students in the programs that are not of the conservative viewpoint?” the IRS also asked. “If so, please provide documentation of such.”

The IRS also asked for detailed information about LI’s instructors.

Leadership Institute president Morton Blackwell told Breitbart News this is the third time LI has been audited since he founded the organization in 1979. “The first one was during the Reagan administration and it appeared to me to be a random audit and it was entirely fair, it was not onerous and they were in and out very quickly,” Blackwell said in a phone interview.

“In the Bill Clinton administration, we were savagely audited for two and a half years and wound up spending $70,000 in lawyers fees in that one plus an immense amount of work here,” Blackwell added. “And because we were smaller then than we are now and I didn’t feel I had the resources to fight a public relations battle on the subject, I decided as many other conservative groups decide when the IRS has audited them just to suffer in silence.”

Blackwell thinks the audit during President Barack Obama’s administration, and the questions that were asked especially those about former interns, show somebody or some group of people in the administration “were on a hunting expedition for conservatives.”

“We have done cosponsored training with all of the different significant Tea Party and Tea Party-like organizations and dozens of other nonpartisan organizations,” Blackwell said. “We’ve done cosponsored training with Tea Party Patriots, Tea Party Express, Tea Party Nation, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, many local and state Tea Party organizations, and so it’s not surprising that if they’re going after these organizations, if they’re trying to do them damage or persecute them, that they are asking questions about the Leadership Institute.”

Blackwell said that one specific question he vividly remembers from this administration’s audit of LI was “on how you could distinguish the Leadership Institute from the American Campaign Academy case, where the IRS denied tax exempt status to a campaign training arm of the Republican National Committee on the grounds that they were not educating the public; they had limited themselves just to one party, which is what the American Campaign Academy case was about. We had a real good answer to that: ‘The Leadership Institute was mentioned in the American Campaign Academy court decision and held up as an example of the right way to do political training.’”

While that question could have easily been answered by the IRS themselves as any attorney could have looked up the case, Blackwell notes that the time spent having to answer questions like this is time not spent training conservative activists. “They have full knowledge of the fact that it costs time, talent and money to deal with this,” Blackwell said. “You’ve got to do it. You have no choice but to do it. It’s very costly. It takes an immense amount of time and a lot of money. And that hampers our education program. It also hampers and sometimes kills groups that are applying for tax status. The IRS has treated nascent conservative organizations like Kermit Gosnell treated the nation’s babies.”

Another unanswered question, and what Blackwell says is a sign that the IRS as a whole was involved in this not just one small division, is that the Hawaii Tea Party–which was applying for tax exempt status–was, according to Bloomberg News, asked about its connections to the Leadership Institution.

“Our audit was from the Baltimore office,” Blackwell said. “This has got to be widely known, with coordination, because why else would the Cincinnati office be asking the Hawaii Tea Party about the organization’s connections to the Leadership Institute?”

Powered by WPeMatico

Virginia Republicans nominated Mark Obenshain, a state senator and respected lawyer, for Attorney General on Saturday in the same Richmond building where his late father, Richard Obenshain, received the Party’s U.S. Senate nomination 35 years ago shortly before tragically passing away in a plane crash. 

Obenshain spoke to Breitbart News after his victory about what type of Attorney General he intends to be and about his late father. In the wake of the Obama administration’s recent scandals involving the IRS and AP reporters that have scared conservatives, independents, and liberals concerned with excessive government overreach, Virginians across the Potomac may be even more receptive to an Attorney General who will fight for liberty–and them–instead of for bureaucrats intent on expanding government’s reach for political purposes. 

Perhaps more importantly, Obenshain can advance his brand of conservatism in a way that appeals to independents, minorities, immigrants, and women who are making up a greater share of Virginia’s electorate. He vowed to stand up to the federal government if it unfairly targets Virginia Tea Party groups–or any group, for that matter–with vigor. 

Obenshain, in many ways, is like his late father, who was ridiculed in the 1970s for believing candidates like Ronald Reagan could win let alone have such a meaningful impact on the country. 

Obenshain’s father built Virginia’s Republican Party and was a true Reaganite from the beginning before it was cool. Richard Obenshain, like Reagan, understood the concerns of working class Americans and built a coalition of conservative Democrats and Republicans who were against liberal overreach and cronyism on both sides of the aisle. He believed this coalition of voters has been and always would be America’s backbone. Unfortunately, he did not live to see his beliefs vindicated, as Reagan, as they say, won three terms (George H.W. Bush’s 1988 win is largely considered to have been a vote for Reagan’s third term) while defeating the Soviets and ushering in a wave of prosperity that lifted up all Americans. 

The Republican Party has lacked messengers who can resonate with and unify broad segments of the electorate with a conservative working class message. Obenshain even connects with voters who may not fully agree with him because he is honest and not a phony–voters know where he stands. 

If Obenshain wins in November, his beliefs, ideas, conservatism and personality may well resonate far beyond the Commonwealth’s borders. 

Breitbart News: Why will Virginia’s Attorney General position be even more important during President Barack Obama’s second term? And why should Virginians trust you to be the people’s attorney? 

Virginia Republican Attorney General nominee Mark Obenshain: 

“The present administration in Washington seems to believe that it has a mandate to advance its policy initiatives against all obstacles, constitutional impediments included. Some liberals may cheer the outcomes, but liberals and conservatives alike should be concerned about an administration that runs roughshod over individual liberties, and about the precedent that it sets for future policies and future administrations. From Obamacare to attempts to designate stormwater a pollutant, the Obama administration has repeatedly exceeded constitutional authority. As Attorney General, I will defend the rights and liberties of all Virginians, and will work to preserve and expand the realm of personal freedom.”

Breitbart News: Virginia is becoming the national bellwether in many respects. How will you persuade the state’s significant number of independent voters that you would best serve them? 

Mark Obenshain: 

“I believe that the message of individual liberty and personal responsibility resonates across the political spectrum, and I think that most Virginians want the same things: safe communities, responsible government, and a firm defense of their liberties. I will be an Attorney General for all Virginians – the coal miners, commuters, small business owners, watermen and farmers, immigrants, and teachers, young and old, Republicans and Democrats, the successful and the struggling. Because we all have a stake in this thing called liberty — and it’s worth fighting for.

Breitbart News: Can you reflect on what this nomination means to you 35 years after your late father, who built Virginia’s modern Republican Party, received the U.S. Senate nomination in the same building?

Mark Obenshain: 

“Winning the Republican nomination for Attorney General of Virginia is an incredible honor, but it is even more special to me, because it happened in the same location where, as a 15 year old, I saw my father win the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate 35 years ago. After his tragic death two months later, my mother found a well-worn piece of paper in his desk on which he had written a personal credo: ‘The most important goal in my life is to have some significant impact in preserving and expanding the realm of personal freedom in the life of this country.’ I’ve made that my life’s animating purpose as well. It is a tremendous honor to have my party’s support in my bid for Attorney General of Virginia as I carry that message forward.”

Powered by WPeMatico

According to The Washington Free Beacon, more than 26,000 members of the Federal Law Enforcement Association (FLEOA) are calling for a “Watergate-style” investigation into what was and wasn’t done when the U.S. consulate in Benghazi came under attack.

FLEOA “is the largest association of federal officers in America.” And it has submitted a letter to Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) in support of his efforts to push a bill creating a select committee.

FLEOA president Joe Adler says Diplomatic Security Service (DSS) officers are among the tens of thousands of members FLEOA. He said DSS officers–especially those wounded in Benghazi–”deserve the unwavering respect and commitment of our Congress.” 

According to Adler, emails and documents the administration has reluctantly released, and even the testimony of former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton, “have proven insufficient in addressed numerous unanswered questions.”

Adler believes Obama has been “stonewalling efforts to find the truth” to this point, and believes serious, investigatory hearings are needed now.

Powered by WPeMatico

U.S. District Judge David Campbell handed both sides a partial victory at the first stage in a case challenging Arizona Governor Jan Brewer’s executive order that her state will not issue driver’s licenses to illegal aliens allowed to stay in this country temporarily under President Barack Obama’s amnesty program of not pursuing deportation for many illegal aliens. But the judge also signaled that Brewer was likely to lose this case in the end, and these illegal aliens will end up with Arizona licenses.

In 2012 Obama issued an executive order creating his temporary amnesty program. After Congress refused to pass Obama’s proposed DREAM Act on enact an immigration bill granting amnesty to millions of foreigners who entered this country illegally, the president violated his constitutional duty to take care to faithfully execute the law by announcing that he would not deport large groups of illegals that he thinks should receive amnesty. A federal judge is Texas recently held the administration’s actions illegal, but that issue has not yet been resolved on appeal.

In response to Obama’s executive order and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s subsequent halting of deportations, Brewer issued an order to the Arizona Department of Motor Vehicles ordering them to stop accepting federal documents from those illegal aliens granted temporary amnesty for purposes of issuing driver’s licenses. An advocacy group for illegal aliens filed a lawsuit challenging Brewer’s actions in Arizona Dream Act Coalition v. Brewer.

Brewer filed a motion to dismiss the suit, and the plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to block Brewer’s actions while the lawsuit proceeds. On May 16, Judge Campbell denied both motions.

Campbell rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that Brewer’s order violates the Supremacy Clause by conflicting with federal law. He correctly reasoned that Obama’s order and Napolitano’s follow-up actions carry no force of law under the Constitution, and therefore do not amount to a federal law that would trump state law.

However, Campbell held it was very likely that the plaintiffs’ alternative argument that Brewer’s order violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment will ultimately succeed. Although he correctly held that the lowest form of judicial scrutiny—called rational-basis review—is the legal standard for a case like this, he then reasoned that Brewer’s order was likely to fail under even that deferential standard when he issues a final ruling on the merits of this case.

Campbell writes:

 “The Governor’s disagreement with the DACA [amnesty] program may be a rational political or policy view in a broad sense—reasonable people certainly can disagree on an issue as complex and difficult as immigration—but it provides no justification for saying that an Arizona’s driver’s license may be issued to one person who has been permitted to remain temporarily in the country on deferred action status—say for an individual humanitarian reason—while another person who has been permitted to remain temporarily in the country on deferred action status under the DACA program is denied a license.”

The court noted that both groups of aliens have their deportation actions deferred through prosecutorial discretion, both have temporary status, both are federally eligible to work, and both have documents that have always been accepted by Arizona for driver’s licenses. Campbell noted that Arizona asserts four bases for why Brewer’s law is rational, but concluded that Brewer’s order blocking one group of illegal aliens from getting licenses, but not the other group, undermined the argument of why her order was reasonably related to advancing the public interests she asserted in court.

Campbell has the pedigree of a conservative judge. A Utah native, he clerked for Justice William Rehnquist (before he became chief justice) on the Supreme Court. The opinion is well-written and gives Brewer her due. It seems unlikely that he will change his mind later in this case, or that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will reverse his decision.

And so the latest fight between Obama and Arizona over immigration continues.

Breitbart News legal columnist Ken Klukowski is a fellow with the American Civil Rights Union.  

Powered by WPeMatico

E.W. Jackson won the Republican nomination for Lieutenant Governor of Virginia on the fourth ballot in a dramatic primary convention held in Richmond on Saturday. 

Jackson is only the second African-American candidate to receive the Republican Party’s nomination for a statewide office since Reconstruction. A former Marine, graduate of Harvard Law School, and a minister, Jackson is a spellbinding orator with a loyal following among evangelical Christians and Tea Party grassroots activists.

The convention also nominated current Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli for Governor by acclamation and gave Mark Obenshain the nod for the Attorney General’s nomination in a razor-thin victory over Rob Bell on the first ballot.

Despite the hotly contested race among the seven candidates campaigning for the Republican nomination for Lieutenant Governor in the weeks leading up to the convention, Jackson finished in first place by a wide margin on every ballot.

After the first round of balloting, State Senators Steve Martin and Jeanmarie Davis were eliminated. Vote totals for the first round were:

EW Jackson 3,732 (31.3%)
Susan Stimpson   1,798 (15.1%)
Corey Stewart   1,769 (14.8%)
PeteSnyder   1,739 (14.6%)
ScottLingamfelter   1,375 (11.5%)
Jeanmarie Davis          861 (7.2%)
Steve Martin                662  (5.5%)

(Total weighted votes cast: 11,936)

After the second round of balloting, Scott Lingamfelter and Susan Stimpson were eliminated. Estimated vote totals were:

E.W. Jackson 4,560 (38.2%)
Pete Snyder   2,029 (17.0%)
Corey Stewart 1,910 (16.0%)
Susan Stimpson    1,874 (15.7%)
Scott Lingamfelter 1,432 (12.0%)

(Total weighted votes cast: 11,936)

After the third round, Corey Stewart was eliminated, but E. W. Jackson’s vote total was so close to 50% plus 1 vote the contest was essentially over. Vote totals were:

Jackson 5,934 (49.7%)
Snyder 3,652 (30.6%)
Stewart 2,350 (19.7%)

(Total weighted votes cast: 11,936)

A fourth round of balloting took place, but the results were never announced. Pete Snyder withdrew from the contest and E. W. Jackson was nominated by acclamation.

More than 8,000 out of a possible 13,000 delegates showed up for the all day event. As candidates were eliminated after the first and second rounds, many of their supporters left the convention hall and did not participate in subsequent ballots. In the fourth and decisive ballot, talk radio host John Fredricks, who provided gavel-to-gavel coverage in an online radio 11 hour marathon broadcast, estimated that only 5,000 delegates remained. 

Due to the weighted voting system used in the convention, which allocated votes  based on the voting population of the geographic area represented by each delegate, some delegate votes counted more than others. In every round, the total number of weighted votes cast was 11, 936. As delegates from a geographic area left the convention, the weighted value of each of the remaining delegates votes from that area increased.

The presumptive Democratic nominee for Lieutenant Governor, Aneesh Chopra, wasted no time in attacking Jackson, the newly minted Republican nominee. In a press release issued within minutes of the official announcement of Jackson’s victory, Chopra attacked Jackson for his “extremist” views.

Jackson ran unsuccessfully for the Republican nomination for the Senate in 2012. Eventual Republican nominee George Allen was defeated by Tim Kaine for the seat in the November general election. Jackson’s past record of business bankruptcies and tax liens was used unsuccessfully by some of his Republican opponents in the contest for the Lieutenant Governor’s nomination. It is expected that it will be used by the Democrats against him in the general election.

The Democrats will select their nominees for statewide office in a June primary election. Clinton confidante Terry McAuliffe is expected to win the party’s nomination for Governor, and former Obama administration official Chopra is expected to win the nomination for Lieutenant Governor.

Powered by WPeMatico

With the brutality of abortion on full display during the recent trial of Kermit Gosnell, pro-life members of Congress are poised to draw the nation into a conversation about why abortion clinics like Gosnell’s have been allowed to continue in operation. Though abortion supporters have persistently claimed that the passage of Roe v Wade in 1973 would finally make the practice “safe” and “legal,” it is being revealed that Gosnell, and others like him, have been engaging in gruesome and unsafe practices for decades.

The way in which pro-life congressional leaders seize the moment, however, to investigate how states regulate abortion clinics, and to design pertinent legislation, will likely be critical to their success. Therefore, if you are pro-life, you’re hoping this moment doesn’t get screwed up.

For example, in the Washington Post on Thursday, Lori Montgomery wrote that, after a “two-hour listening session” in the basement of the Capitol on Wednesday, she learned that “rank-and-file lawmakers” were strategizing for the next debt limit “showdown.”

Writing from a particular perspective, Montgomery wrote that the “good news” is that most Republican legislators “agree that they probably should not block a debt-limit increase” this time around. On the other hand, Montgomery observes that the “bad news for President Obama” is that the GOP will require something in exchange for voting to raise the debt ceiling.

“But what should they ask for?” Montgomery wonders. Among the suggestions she says she heard was tying restriction of late-term abortion to a vote to hike the debt limit.

Though the “listening session” produced no decisions, the notion of linking restriction of late-term abortion to raising the debt ceiling could be a surefire way to mix apples with oranges and, consequently, be left with nothing but fruit cocktail.

At a time when we are seeing increasing evidence that gruesome “back-alley” abortions are as prevalent today as they were in 1970, why not use the direct approach? Indeed, there is much data to support it.

Kermit Gosnell, now a convicted murderer, was permitted to keep his Philadelphia clinic open for decades, without state oversight or intervention. As a result, the abortionist was allowed to continue his practice of killing babies born alive during abortions.

The president of Planned Parenthood Southeast Pennsylvania admitted that she knew what was happening at Gosnell’s “house of horrors,” through reports from women who went there to receive services, but her organization, which claims to be a group that advocates for women, did not report the concerns to state health officials.

Planned Parenthood abortion clinics themselves have been found to be unsanitary, with claims made of conditions and practices similar to those at Gosnell’s clinic, perhaps because the abortion giant’s clinics were treated with kid gloves by state oversight agencies eager to stay on the “correct” side of political opinion.

The practices of other late-term abortionists, like Douglas Karpen, LeRoy Carhart, Curtis Boyd, Cesare Santangelo, Robert Alexander, and others, have been exposed, many by Live Action, Operation Rescue, and Life Dynamics, pro-life advocacy organizations.

In fact, direct methods of addressing the abortion issue have been illustrated by at least two Republicans in Congress: Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ) and Senator Mike Lee (R-UT).

Franks announced on Friday that he will change the language of an existing bill to protect all babies who can feel pain from being aborted. Based on research that indicates that babies developing in utero can feel pain at 20 weeks gestation, Franks said the proposed legislation would establish a national abortion limit of 20 weeks after fertilization.

Since Franks’s original bill, the “D.C. Pain Capable Unborn Protection Act,” would apply only in the District of Columbia, he is amending it “to broaden its coverage so that its provisions will apply nationwide.” The new bill is called, the “Unborn Child Protection Act.”

“Knowingly subjecting our innocent unborn children to dismemberment in the womb, particularly when they have developed to the point that they can feel excruciating pain every terrible moment leading up to their undeserved deaths, belies everything America was called to be,” Franks said. “This is not who we are.”

Franks added that while the Gosnell case has shocked millions of Americans, the fact remains that “had Kermit Gosnell dismembered these babies before they had traveled down the birth canal only moments earlier, he would have- in many places nationwide- been performing an entirely legal procedure.”

The House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice–which Franks chairs–will hold a hearing on his proposed legislation next Thursday.

Sen. Mike Lee introduced a resolution that calls upon the Senate to review public policies that led to the illegal abortion practices of Gosnell and others like him. Lee hopes to investigate abortion practices and the interstate referral of women and girls to abortion facilities that engage in late-term abortions. In addition, his resolution also recognized the 20-week pain threshold for babies in utero. Senate Democrats, needless to say, have objected to the resolution.

Franks and Lee, as well as other pro-life leaders in Congress, have spoken out about the need to address protection for the unborn, for those babies born alive during abortions, and for the women themselves. With the nation focused, pro-life members of Congress should not hesitate to draw the attention of Americans to conversation and legislation regarding abortion directly. 

Any notion of using the gruesome and brutal spectacle, to which we have recently been exposed, as a bargaining chip in other national debates will likely cheapen and obscure the issue. The result would be failure–perhaps forever–for the pro-life community and, most unfortunately, for the most vulnerable among us.

Powered by WPeMatico

Walk into any lecture hall nowadays and a majority of young people will still say its “cool” to be liberal and vote for Obama. Too often, teachers and professors misrepresent conservative viewpoints, and intentionally muddle what it means to be a conservative. 

I know many young conservatives all across the country that are isolated and ostracized due to their beliefs. They are portrayed as bigots, misogynists and ignorant just because they are conservative.

A new book entitled Young, Conservative, and Why It’s Smart to be Like Us hopes to counter that narrative. This book is the brainchild of Liz Wheeler, who brought together young conservatives from all across the country to tell their story. It is a wonderful portrait of the diverse demographic makeup of America, as well as fascinating composition of the many different types of conservatism.

This book is unique, because it includes completely different stories and narratives from a variety of socio-economics backgrounds. Wheeler says, “I knew these young conservatives from all across the country had different backgrounds, different beliefs, different priorities, but I felt like their stories were not being told. This book offers people a snapshot of the many faces on young conservatism and the stories behind it.”

As a young conservative myself, I can personally relate to many of these stories told in the book. It is extremely difficult to stand up for principles when many of your friends are automatically liberal or just do not care. Reading this book reinforces my view that the next generation of conservatives is as strong as ever, and the message of smaller government, lower taxes, and more freedom is alive and well for our children and grand kids.

It is a truly fascinating read, with tons of anecdotes that paint a dynamic portrait of what it’s like to be a young conservative in today’s overwhelmingly liberal culture amongst our nation’s youth. 

Gabriella Hoffman, who is a first generation American, talks in great detail about her grandparents and parents growing up in a collectivist Soviet Union. In a phone interview, Gabriella said, “Most young people would be conservatives if they understood history. I meet students everyday that don’t understand the brutality or inhumanity of communistic regimes. Since my family had to live through it, I have a deeper appreciation for the country we live in.”

Young, Conservative, and Why It’s Smart to be Like Us not only enlightens the reader as to the different types of young conservatives present across the country but it also serves as a blueprint for the future. 

Through reading the different stories and perspectives, it is very evident these young people don’t agree on everything. In fact, some of these conservatives in the book have categorical ideological differences with each other. Despite these differences they can all unite behind one central theme: “Conservative government is the best way to protect our freedom, now and in the future.” 

After reading all the personal stories and perspectives, if one has to boil it down to a common denominator it would be a belief in the collective notion that we should leave our country better than the way we inherited it.

A beautifully composed mosaic of the next generation of conservatives, “Young Conservative, and Why It’s Smart to be Like Us” is a must read and can be found at  

Powered by WPeMatico

Appearing on CBS’ Face the Nation, White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer said that it was “largely irrelevant” who edited the talking points the Obama administration trotted out in the aftermath of the terrorist attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Host Bob Schieffer asked, “That was just a PR plan, to send out somebody who didn’t know anything about what had happened. Why did you do that? Why didn’t the Secretary of State come and tell us what they knew, and if they knew nothing, say ‘We don’t know yet?’ …. Why are you here today? Why isn’t the White House Chief of Staff here to tell us what happened?”

Pfeiffer’s answer: “What we do is we want to go out and speak to the problems as they happen. And what’s important here is that when problems happen, the President takes responsibility for them and tries to fix them. That’s what we’re talking about in Benghazi. It’s an absolute tragedy what happened. The question isn’t, ‘Who edited what talking points?’ That’s largely irrelevant.”

Powered by WPeMatico

Despite the spate of scandals hitting the Obama administration, a new CNN/ORC poll shows that the American people still largely approve of President Obama. His personal approval ratings remain solid at 53 percent, with just 45 percent disapproving. That’s actually up two points since April.

While a full 71 percent of Americans agree that the IRS’ targeting of conservative non-profit groups represents “unacceptable” action, just 35 percent of Americans think the Obama administration is fibbing about its level of involvement in the scandal. Sixty-one percent say they think Obama has characterized the scandals accurately, and 55 percent say the IRS acted on its own.

The numbers aren’t quite so rosy for the administration with regard to Benghazi, where 53 percent of Americans say they are dissatisfied with the White House’s actions and explanations. A full 59 percent of Americans say that the government could have done more to stop the terrorist attacks, and the same number of Americans believe that the Republicans in Congress are justified in their investigations.

A bare majority of Americans, 52 percent, believe that the administration should not have seized the Associated Press’ phone records, although 43 percent said it was acceptable for the Department of Justice to do so.

Powered by WPeMatico