Shea-Porter vs. U.S.

by Peter Bearse Ph.D

Our current U.S. Representative, Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter, has finally gone over the edge in revealing that she sees her role in Congress as pandering to polls and running for re-election rather than serving her country’s best national interest.

Our Congresswoman has voted with her Democratic Party colleagues to prohibit permanent American military bases in Iraq. This is outrageous. It is one thing to act defeatist in Iraq, undercut our American soldiers’ mission and call for their return. It is quite another to undercut one of their major accomplishments – the establishment of an American presence in Iraq – and so say to military families whose sons have died in Iraq that, in effect, their deaths have been in vain. We need a continuing military presence in Iraq to ensure that Iraq will not become, like Afghanistan was under the Taliban, a training ground and supply-source of terrorists worldwide.

Previous press coverage and letters had revealed Cong. Shea-Porter to be a left-handed, Democratic version of her Republican predecessor – a rubber-stamping, go-along/get-along party politician voting in virtual lock-step with Party leadership and the Party’s Congressional Campaign Committee. Her most recent vote on Iraq issues, however, reveals that she is oblivious to the fact that her politically-motivated behavior dishonors our soldiers’ sacrifices and endangers our Republic.

Most voters in NH would like to see most of our soldiers in Iraq gradually disengage from fighting for the Iraqi government and brought home ASAP. These desires, which I share, do not mean that most voters support Congressional votes that threaten our national security. Nor would 2008 general election votes from the non-party-enrolled (independent) voters that gave Shea-Porter her winning margin in 2006.