As I expected Obama and his supporters are already setting the path for a clean get away. President-elect Obama's acceptance speech Tuesday night set the tone with words such as "The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even one term," "There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as President, and we know that government can't solve every problem."
Why would Obama use words like this? Is this simply a victory speech or as a lawyer is he preparing his argument in advance, "I told you it would take a long time." Is he going to drag his feet on bringing change in order to run a second term on the platform of "let me finish what I started."
I never expected to see anything really accomplished in the short run by the Obama Presidency. And I doubt very seriously that Obama will head in a different direction than the track we are already on. This of course is a contradiction to the words in his speech where he said, "This victory alone is not the change we seek – it is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were," never the less don't get your hopes up people.
Now today I turn on the TV to hear a news commentator say that it will be very hard for Obama to implement his policies right away. He will most likely have to stay with things the way they are for now. Oh yeah that terrible George Bush policy that McCain was going to follow. That dreaded same old, same old, policy that is the cause of all our nations woos. Please don't insult my intelligence any longer. All the Bush bashing of the last 2 years was just political propaganda to win the election for the Dem's. Now we will see that what was tauted as the failed Bushenomics of the last eight years will now miraculously become the only means of getting this economy going again.
Mark my words people, Obama will go back on his promises of tax cuts on the grounds the economy can't sustain them right now. He will allow the Bush tax cuts for everyone including the middle class to expire in 2010 and say it is only for a time. Then right in time for the election of 2012 he will move to implement the tax cuts for the middle class and poor. In the mean time he will take the 700 billion in stimulus plus an additional 500 Billion and disburse it as handouts to special interests of the Dem's choosing. Don't believe me, you will see. Meanwhile I have my eye on you Mr. President.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
ELECTION BEREAVEMENT
A friend of mine texted me a bereavement message the day after the election. It was a welcome laugh. He is a stonch democrat and I am a stonch republican, but we get along great. It is nice to have someone to banter with over the issues. Someone intelegent who can challenege me on my views. The bereavement card idea was great. I needed a laugh, something, anything to lighten my heart after the devestating loss of the night before. Here is a copy of his text.
Dear Friend,
I want to remind you not only of the inner strength you have but of the support you can always count on from me. My friend my heart goes out to you, I wish there was something I could do to erase the sadness you feel. I hope you'll let me know if you need someone to listen when you want to talk, to give you a hug when you need one, and to remind you how many people care about you. I want to help make the time pass more quickly so memories will bring smiles instead of tears. I hope you know I'll be here with open arms anytime you need me, night or day.
In response to his text I sent him the following, I hope you enjoy this. WARNING: The following message is a little bit of a reality check for some who might have supported Barrack Obama proceed at your own risk.
Dear Friend,
I am sorry but there is no amount of consolation that can fully relieve my intense feeling that we have now headed down a road we most likely will regret later. However I am sure given President-elect Obama's propensity to change his position when confronted with reality, that he will no doubt go back on the pormises he has made, no doubt continuing the policies set by Bush. The very thing he used as the cornerstone of his election bid to defeat McCain, will now somehow become the acceptable road forward by his administration. Be it taxation, the economy, the war etc, etc. With that said, thankyou for your concern, and know that I too am here for you as we head into this time of great uncertainty. :-)
Dear Friend,
I want to remind you not only of the inner strength you have but of the support you can always count on from me. My friend my heart goes out to you, I wish there was something I could do to erase the sadness you feel. I hope you'll let me know if you need someone to listen when you want to talk, to give you a hug when you need one, and to remind you how many people care about you. I want to help make the time pass more quickly so memories will bring smiles instead of tears. I hope you know I'll be here with open arms anytime you need me, night or day.
In response to his text I sent him the following, I hope you enjoy this. WARNING: The following message is a little bit of a reality check for some who might have supported Barrack Obama proceed at your own risk.
Dear Friend,
I am sorry but there is no amount of consolation that can fully relieve my intense feeling that we have now headed down a road we most likely will regret later. However I am sure given President-elect Obama's propensity to change his position when confronted with reality, that he will no doubt go back on the pormises he has made, no doubt continuing the policies set by Bush. The very thing he used as the cornerstone of his election bid to defeat McCain, will now somehow become the acceptable road forward by his administration. Be it taxation, the economy, the war etc, etc. With that said, thankyou for your concern, and know that I too am here for you as we head into this time of great uncertainty. :-)
POST ELECTION BLUES
I am sitting here thinking about how terrible I felt watching as John McCain lost the election. Why was I so upset? Was it because I don't like Obama or was it because I feared what this would mean for my nation? Where does my deep disapproval of President Obama come from? It's not about race, I could care less about race. It's not about likability, he is a very likable guy. Neither is it about intelligence, he is extremely intelligent in my opinion.
It all comes back to trust and policy. The fact is I just don't trust him. there is this deep sense that underneath the surface of that likable exterior is a black liberation social fascist. On top of that I deeply disagree with his policies, e.g., his approach to our faltering economy, his approach on Iraqi withdrawal, his tax policy, his social reform policy, his energy policy, and his desire make deep cuts in military defense.
These are all deal breakers for me. I think these policy will ultimately hurt our nation. Only time will tell what this all means for our nation. I am resolved to pray for President elect Obama and for our country that God will be merciful and lessen the impact of the unwise policies he has planned to implement during his reign.
It all comes back to trust and policy. The fact is I just don't trust him. there is this deep sense that underneath the surface of that likable exterior is a black liberation social fascist. On top of that I deeply disagree with his policies, e.g., his approach to our faltering economy, his approach on Iraqi withdrawal, his tax policy, his social reform policy, his energy policy, and his desire make deep cuts in military defense.
These are all deal breakers for me. I think these policy will ultimately hurt our nation. Only time will tell what this all means for our nation. I am resolved to pray for President elect Obama and for our country that God will be merciful and lessen the impact of the unwise policies he has planned to implement during his reign.
Saturday, October 4, 2008
THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA'S HEALTH CARE POLICY
On Friday I came accross the following opinion regarding the VP debate. Who are these people?
PALIN: Criticized Obama's "plan to mandate health care coverage and have universal government run program" for health care, and added: "I don't think it's going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health care being taken over by the Feds."
THE FACTS: Wrong on several counts. Obama's plan does not provide for universal coverage, only mandates insurance for children and doesn't turn the system over to the government. Most people would still get private insurance through their work. Obama proposes that the government subsidize the cost of health coverage for millions who have trouble affording it and he'd set up an exchange to negotiate prices and benefits with private insurers — with one option being a government-run plan.
Fact Check may have their fact right but have completely ignored Gov. Palin's ability to sees past the initial phase of implementation to the resulting collapse to follow. This reform maverick's insight is visionary and she should be commended for it.
The following opinions are mine but I don’t think any thinking reasoned person could in good conscience argue with them.
The problem with Obama’s health care policy as I see it is this. Obama seeks to insert a socialistic style health care system into a free market system. The result of which would eventually cause the collapse of the free market system. He doesn’t say that or see that, which leads me to see his ignorance as inexperience shining through or blind socialist tendencies. Regardless of whether he acknowledges it the scenario would progress somewhat as follows.
Eventually under his system all the competing providers would be driven out of business by the government system, because the government system is paid for by tax dollars. How could they possible compete? Dahhhh.
With the demise of every competitor the government system would end up being the only system and would have to shoulder all the burden of coverage. Taxes would then need to be raised to pay for that increased burden upon the system. In the end government oversight would limit coverage and procedures to save money. Instead of each person being seen as a shopper to be taken care of, they would be seen as merely a number, a cost to the system. Decisions once made by between physicians and patients would now be made by policy from a Washington “exchange,” benefits would be reduced, and who gets what procedure when would be relegated to the government bureaucrats. These are the same bureaucrats who caused our current financial woes as a nation. Do we really think they are up to the task of fairness, or oversight, or getting anything right for Main Street?
Proponents of the system will tell us that the forgoing scenario won’t happen but it has already happened. People already abuse the social system we have in place. It has been happening for years and Washington bureaucrats have known about it and do nothing, because the people that abuse the system are voters and they need those votes to be re-elected.
They would have us believe that they would pass laws to protect taxpayers, that there would be heavy oversight to prevent abuses. But once again that is just another way of saying we plan to grow government!
So when Obama says that every American can have the same insurance as the senators in Washington for free or less than they pay now. People need to understand that such action will precipitate a mass exodus away from the current health care providers.
Businesses and individuals will see this as a way out of the high costs they now have to pay. This would force more government intervention. Laws would then need to be pasted that force business to provide some of the cost of health care for workers. MORE TAXES! Is it just me or is government already getting bigger in this plan.
What Obama proposes is government intrusion into our lives. That is how socialism works, and it is a failed system. But that is the system Barack Obama is touting in his campaign. He doesn’t say it in those words but that is what it is. In his failed system the burden of the cost for health care for the nation would eventually fall back entirely on the government backed system, which is just another way of saying the tax payers. The government will then become the big brother of every family doctor. The government would grow bigger and BIGGER, decisions on care would be relegated to government bureaucracy. Government oversight would reach all the way into the home of every American family needing medication and or surgery. With the competition put out of business the bureaucrats would run the show, just as it was in the old Soviet Union. Welcome to Russia!
The people would be subjected to the will of those in office. The bureaucrats would be in charge of decisions that affect the people right where they live without being subject themselves to the same restrictions. Because in a socialist system you can offer people the same health care without offering them the same service.
Government Bureaucrats would be granted preferential treatment in the system. Their needs would come before the people. That is the way socialism works. If the decision is between a heart transplant for Joe Biden, and a heart transplant for you, you loose because he is more important than you. You are not necessary, he is.
Now that is change! But I don’t think that is the kind of change we want as a nation. Such change flies directly in the face of the constitution. Our constitution promises a government for the people by the people. But the change Obama proposes is to make us a nation for the state by the state.
That is my opinion, what do you think? Am I off base? Where am I wrong about government health coverage?
PALIN: Criticized Obama's "plan to mandate health care coverage and have universal government run program" for health care, and added: "I don't think it's going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health care being taken over by the Feds."
THE FACTS: Wrong on several counts. Obama's plan does not provide for universal coverage, only mandates insurance for children and doesn't turn the system over to the government. Most people would still get private insurance through their work. Obama proposes that the government subsidize the cost of health coverage for millions who have trouble affording it and he'd set up an exchange to negotiate prices and benefits with private insurers — with one option being a government-run plan.
Fact Check may have their fact right but have completely ignored Gov. Palin's ability to sees past the initial phase of implementation to the resulting collapse to follow. This reform maverick's insight is visionary and she should be commended for it.
The following opinions are mine but I don’t think any thinking reasoned person could in good conscience argue with them.
The problem with Obama’s health care policy as I see it is this. Obama seeks to insert a socialistic style health care system into a free market system. The result of which would eventually cause the collapse of the free market system. He doesn’t say that or see that, which leads me to see his ignorance as inexperience shining through or blind socialist tendencies. Regardless of whether he acknowledges it the scenario would progress somewhat as follows.
Eventually under his system all the competing providers would be driven out of business by the government system, because the government system is paid for by tax dollars. How could they possible compete? Dahhhh.
With the demise of every competitor the government system would end up being the only system and would have to shoulder all the burden of coverage. Taxes would then need to be raised to pay for that increased burden upon the system. In the end government oversight would limit coverage and procedures to save money. Instead of each person being seen as a shopper to be taken care of, they would be seen as merely a number, a cost to the system. Decisions once made by between physicians and patients would now be made by policy from a Washington “exchange,” benefits would be reduced, and who gets what procedure when would be relegated to the government bureaucrats. These are the same bureaucrats who caused our current financial woes as a nation. Do we really think they are up to the task of fairness, or oversight, or getting anything right for Main Street?
Proponents of the system will tell us that the forgoing scenario won’t happen but it has already happened. People already abuse the social system we have in place. It has been happening for years and Washington bureaucrats have known about it and do nothing, because the people that abuse the system are voters and they need those votes to be re-elected.
They would have us believe that they would pass laws to protect taxpayers, that there would be heavy oversight to prevent abuses. But once again that is just another way of saying we plan to grow government!
So when Obama says that every American can have the same insurance as the senators in Washington for free or less than they pay now. People need to understand that such action will precipitate a mass exodus away from the current health care providers.
Businesses and individuals will see this as a way out of the high costs they now have to pay. This would force more government intervention. Laws would then need to be pasted that force business to provide some of the cost of health care for workers. MORE TAXES! Is it just me or is government already getting bigger in this plan.
What Obama proposes is government intrusion into our lives. That is how socialism works, and it is a failed system. But that is the system Barack Obama is touting in his campaign. He doesn’t say it in those words but that is what it is. In his failed system the burden of the cost for health care for the nation would eventually fall back entirely on the government backed system, which is just another way of saying the tax payers. The government will then become the big brother of every family doctor. The government would grow bigger and BIGGER, decisions on care would be relegated to government bureaucracy. Government oversight would reach all the way into the home of every American family needing medication and or surgery. With the competition put out of business the bureaucrats would run the show, just as it was in the old Soviet Union. Welcome to Russia!
The people would be subjected to the will of those in office. The bureaucrats would be in charge of decisions that affect the people right where they live without being subject themselves to the same restrictions. Because in a socialist system you can offer people the same health care without offering them the same service.
Government Bureaucrats would be granted preferential treatment in the system. Their needs would come before the people. That is the way socialism works. If the decision is between a heart transplant for Joe Biden, and a heart transplant for you, you loose because he is more important than you. You are not necessary, he is.
Now that is change! But I don’t think that is the kind of change we want as a nation. Such change flies directly in the face of the constitution. Our constitution promises a government for the people by the people. But the change Obama proposes is to make us a nation for the state by the state.
That is my opinion, what do you think? Am I off base? Where am I wrong about government health coverage?
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
HOW REPUBLICANS CAN BE THE PARTY OF AMERICA AGAIN!
While it is true old news is no news in politics. It does serve us well to remember from time to time where we came from. History after all is said to be our greatest teachers, and in my humble opinion the party that fails to look back fails to progress. So when the Republicans took over the White House 8 years ago we needed to look back and we did. We looked back to the Clinton years and saw all the missteps and abuses their. We looked back to the Reagan and Bush 1 years and saw all their successes. Now it was our opportunity to determine a straight path forward for America but we failed from the start.
And while I personally like Bush and voted for him in both elections, I feel its the Bush White House that must accept responsibility for much of the blunders over the past 8yrs. After all it was they, who in their ambition to defeat terrorism after 911 failed to look out for the people at home (i.e. Katrina, Enron, the sub-prime morgage debockle). It was they who in their efforts to keep the terrosits on the defensive and make their mark in the Middle East, failed to count the cost of war and plan ahead (i.e. bad intelegence reporting, the hasty acceleration to war in Iraq, the lack of insight into what the outcome would be for us and them). And finally, it was they who in their stubborness failed to consider our reputation in the world at large; and to retain the high ground prior to war, and maintain our integrity as a nation of values (i.e. wire tapping, torture, and water board interrogations). These missteps and others I have probably overlooked have created a kind of sour grapes attitude toward the Republican Party as a whole in America. Thus the tables were turned at the 2006 mid-term election as the public cried out for change.
Now with President Bush suffering from the lowest approval rating ever, and the Republican Parties reputation tarnished as a result, the left wing neo-liberals have successfully embedded their "new" brand onto the same old political machine. It was the perfect storm in which to re-introduce the failed political policies that lost them the last few presidential elections. So under the brand of "new" they took a young Barrack Obama with a bright smile and eloquent tongue and hardly a shred of experience and enamored the American people into thinking what's old is actually new. And with the party in tow and the media to their back they set sail, but not without difficulty.
They faced a stiff head wind at first, in the form of Hillary Clinton. Nevertheless tacking back and forth through the primaries they were finally able to toss their arch rival Hillary overboard. This they did primarily to protect their invention of "new" from being marred by the old. But it only lasted a few weeks, as much to their dismay they realized they needed Captain Hillary to steer the ship. So they invited her back on board, with the understanding that Obama would be Captain and she would be first mate.
So what's the Republican Party doing about it? The same old thing. Mud slinging and character assassinations. I am telling you its going to take more than mud slinging and character assassinations to win this election. You can't win this election running the same old campaign. The American public is looking for something "new," and anything that looks old is going to get the smack down like Hillary did. They don't care if it's coherent or makes sense so much as it takes us in a different direction. Knowing this the Dem's have attempted to re-define themselves as younger, hipper, and more apt then the Republicans. But its all a smoke and mirrors, like putting a new paint job on a Rambler to hide the fact that its old. The truth is Obama is a newbie but his policies are as old as the Democratic Party. That is a mix that should translate into a sure win for the Republican Party, but it hasn't. Why? Because we have failed to communicate who we are to main street.
What Republicans need to do is get back to basics. That's the wonderful thing about it. We don't need to re-define ourselves, because what this nation really needs is good old Republican governance. Not the Bush America of the past 8 yrs. That was not a true depiction of what Republicans governance is really about. In fact it was contrary to Republican values in many ways. What we need is good old conservativism, that riegns in wasteful spending, adheres to physical responsibilility, reduces the size of government, and eliminates the pork in Washington. Those are true republican values and the nation is screeming for them. But we are not telling them in plain english that is who we are and what we do best. The way I see it, its been so long since we've seen true Republican governance in America that it will appear "new" to all of us.
Now with the nation seeking something new the Dem's are trying paint themselves as the party for America. When in fact we are the party who cares about people, they only care about polls. We are the party who gets things done, they only talk about getting things done. We are the party who cares for the poor, and stands up for the weak.
Why don't we grasp that? That should be our montra! Why do we allow the Dem's to paint us into the corner on these issues? Sure we've had to make some hard calls in the past and that can make it seem like we don't care as much as the Dems. But the truth is we do care about this country and its people. That is exactly why we must make the hard call. Because we are looking at the bigger picture. Its called leadership! And real leaders make hard decisions, they don't cater to the crowd or the special interests, they rely on reason, wisdom, and conscience. Their decisions are made on the basis of reason and what's good for all, not on what can get me re-elected. What matters is; is it the right move? I don't see this type of country first mentality among the Democratic party. The leadership in the Democratic Party doesn't seem to be looking at the big picture. They are more concerned about the short term fix. (i.e. special interest groups and lobbyists). People that will put them back in office. Protecting their own personal future is what's most important to them. Doing whatever is political expedient in order to advance their career seems to be their highest aim. And that's why I like John McCain. His country first attitude stands in stark contrast to the norm in Washington. He'd rather loose an election then see his country take a hit. Its this maverick, get the job done even if it cost you your career attitude that is needed right now in Washington. That is why we need to send John McCain to the oval office.
The way I see it the Republicans Party can reverse the tide of negativism and be the party of America once again! But in order for that to happen we need to stop with the defensive posturing, admit the failures of the Bush years and begin to clearly communicate how we intend to move this nation from where it is to where it needs to be. The struggles we are facing as Americans are real and they deserves real answers not political rhetoric. The American people will decide this election and they are tired of being treated like a bunch of dumbies. We can see through the smoke screens and the smiles. We can see through the rhetoric of change to the reality of who can bring it.
Now after a year and a half of campaign promises about change, and running a different kind of campaign the Obamaites have taken to mud sligging themselves. In doing so they have exposed their soft underbelly. Now is the time for decisive action, rip the top off their campaign and expose it for what it really is. The same old ship with a new flag and a new captain. The biased media and the leaders of the democratic party are no match for the truth. So give them truth, let the public know who we are as Republicans. Show them we can move them forward and how? Now that would be NEW!
And while I personally like Bush and voted for him in both elections, I feel its the Bush White House that must accept responsibility for much of the blunders over the past 8yrs. After all it was they, who in their ambition to defeat terrorism after 911 failed to look out for the people at home (i.e. Katrina, Enron, the sub-prime morgage debockle). It was they who in their efforts to keep the terrosits on the defensive and make their mark in the Middle East, failed to count the cost of war and plan ahead (i.e. bad intelegence reporting, the hasty acceleration to war in Iraq, the lack of insight into what the outcome would be for us and them). And finally, it was they who in their stubborness failed to consider our reputation in the world at large; and to retain the high ground prior to war, and maintain our integrity as a nation of values (i.e. wire tapping, torture, and water board interrogations). These missteps and others I have probably overlooked have created a kind of sour grapes attitude toward the Republican Party as a whole in America. Thus the tables were turned at the 2006 mid-term election as the public cried out for change.
Now with President Bush suffering from the lowest approval rating ever, and the Republican Parties reputation tarnished as a result, the left wing neo-liberals have successfully embedded their "new" brand onto the same old political machine. It was the perfect storm in which to re-introduce the failed political policies that lost them the last few presidential elections. So under the brand of "new" they took a young Barrack Obama with a bright smile and eloquent tongue and hardly a shred of experience and enamored the American people into thinking what's old is actually new. And with the party in tow and the media to their back they set sail, but not without difficulty.
They faced a stiff head wind at first, in the form of Hillary Clinton. Nevertheless tacking back and forth through the primaries they were finally able to toss their arch rival Hillary overboard. This they did primarily to protect their invention of "new" from being marred by the old. But it only lasted a few weeks, as much to their dismay they realized they needed Captain Hillary to steer the ship. So they invited her back on board, with the understanding that Obama would be Captain and she would be first mate.
So what's the Republican Party doing about it? The same old thing. Mud slinging and character assassinations. I am telling you its going to take more than mud slinging and character assassinations to win this election. You can't win this election running the same old campaign. The American public is looking for something "new," and anything that looks old is going to get the smack down like Hillary did. They don't care if it's coherent or makes sense so much as it takes us in a different direction. Knowing this the Dem's have attempted to re-define themselves as younger, hipper, and more apt then the Republicans. But its all a smoke and mirrors, like putting a new paint job on a Rambler to hide the fact that its old. The truth is Obama is a newbie but his policies are as old as the Democratic Party. That is a mix that should translate into a sure win for the Republican Party, but it hasn't. Why? Because we have failed to communicate who we are to main street.
What Republicans need to do is get back to basics. That's the wonderful thing about it. We don't need to re-define ourselves, because what this nation really needs is good old Republican governance. Not the Bush America of the past 8 yrs. That was not a true depiction of what Republicans governance is really about. In fact it was contrary to Republican values in many ways. What we need is good old conservativism, that riegns in wasteful spending, adheres to physical responsibilility, reduces the size of government, and eliminates the pork in Washington. Those are true republican values and the nation is screeming for them. But we are not telling them in plain english that is who we are and what we do best. The way I see it, its been so long since we've seen true Republican governance in America that it will appear "new" to all of us.
Now with the nation seeking something new the Dem's are trying paint themselves as the party for America. When in fact we are the party who cares about people, they only care about polls. We are the party who gets things done, they only talk about getting things done. We are the party who cares for the poor, and stands up for the weak.
Why don't we grasp that? That should be our montra! Why do we allow the Dem's to paint us into the corner on these issues? Sure we've had to make some hard calls in the past and that can make it seem like we don't care as much as the Dems. But the truth is we do care about this country and its people. That is exactly why we must make the hard call. Because we are looking at the bigger picture. Its called leadership! And real leaders make hard decisions, they don't cater to the crowd or the special interests, they rely on reason, wisdom, and conscience. Their decisions are made on the basis of reason and what's good for all, not on what can get me re-elected. What matters is; is it the right move? I don't see this type of country first mentality among the Democratic party. The leadership in the Democratic Party doesn't seem to be looking at the big picture. They are more concerned about the short term fix. (i.e. special interest groups and lobbyists). People that will put them back in office. Protecting their own personal future is what's most important to them. Doing whatever is political expedient in order to advance their career seems to be their highest aim. And that's why I like John McCain. His country first attitude stands in stark contrast to the norm in Washington. He'd rather loose an election then see his country take a hit. Its this maverick, get the job done even if it cost you your career attitude that is needed right now in Washington. That is why we need to send John McCain to the oval office.
The way I see it the Republicans Party can reverse the tide of negativism and be the party of America once again! But in order for that to happen we need to stop with the defensive posturing, admit the failures of the Bush years and begin to clearly communicate how we intend to move this nation from where it is to where it needs to be. The struggles we are facing as Americans are real and they deserves real answers not political rhetoric. The American people will decide this election and they are tired of being treated like a bunch of dumbies. We can see through the smoke screens and the smiles. We can see through the rhetoric of change to the reality of who can bring it.
Now after a year and a half of campaign promises about change, and running a different kind of campaign the Obamaites have taken to mud sligging themselves. In doing so they have exposed their soft underbelly. Now is the time for decisive action, rip the top off their campaign and expose it for what it really is. The same old ship with a new flag and a new captain. The biased media and the leaders of the democratic party are no match for the truth. So give them truth, let the public know who we are as Republicans. Show them we can move them forward and how? Now that would be NEW!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)