Tuckered Out - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
Tuckered Out

Re: William Tucker’s A Plea for Democracy

William Tucker: Is this guy for real??
Colin McCauley

The other day on the radio Tim Russert, apparently trying to sound balanced and objective, compared the (mendacious) Democratic charge that Bush will bring back the draft with the (muted) Republican inference that Kerry would be a disaster as Commander-in-Chief. Both sides, according to Russert, are guilty of “fearmongering.”

Back in the Clinton years, when conservatives were, in Tucker’s terminology, “demonizing” Clinton, I don’t recall the conservative treatment of the sybaritic buffoon coming close to the manic contumely visited by the Left on the basically decent Bush. And Tucker fully anticipates the Left’s behavior to get much worse after Kerry loses.

But if Bush loses, Tucker expects — even pleads for — better comportment from conservatives. Fine. But does the expectation warrant distorted comparisons of the Russert variety?

What is there about the Left that gives them such control over the very terms of debate, even among conservatives?
John R. Dunlap
San Jose, California

You seem to have forgotten the long term damage that Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton did to this country. Forget about the tax increases on me, a Social Security recipient, and others. Mr. Carter is the father of modern Islamic terrorism. Ayatollah Khomeini walked in and formed a terrorist state right under his nose and he did nothing, then there were the hostages, held for 444 days by these people. The President can make us an impotent country, Carter sure did.

Bill Clinton, among other things, gave nuclear materials to North Korea, allowing them to build nuclear weapons. Yes, I know It was suppose to be for generating electricity. And I know Madeleine Albright was shocked, shocked to realize that the Communists in Korea LIED to her!.

Mr. Kerry is a traitor to this country has no allegiance to the United States and is a Globalist. If Mr. Kerry wins, I suggest we do everything we can, as Republicans, to stand in Kerry’s way. Mr. Kerry’s statement that it’s OK for American soldiers to die for the United Nations but not for the United States, is reason enough to oppose him at every turn. Have you completely lost your mind?
Steve Dufau
Fountain Valley, California

Should Kerry win and we start loudly criticizing his administration and declare it to be a miserable failure after an appropriate period of time, say, 24 hours, we are only being patriotic. That’s what has been drilled into my head for the past 2 years: DISSENT IS PATRIOTIC! And at about that decibel level, too. Besides, Kerry’s the boy genius who has all the answers for a stronger America and a better tomorrow. His promises to fight a smarter war against terrorists, create jobs, bring bowling scores way up and mini-golf scores way down are seared, SEARED!, into my memory. Anyway, I wouldn’t really worry about conservatives being sore losers. What you should really worry about is that if W. wins, we will be sore winners. Heh, heh, heh!
Andrew J. Macfadyen, M.D.
Omaha, Nebraska

The thoughts in this article are good. They would also be acceptable if John Kerry were not John Kerry. You are, however, overlooking the fact that the terrorists want to destroy us. John Kerry’s history and current constant lies lead to the obvious conclusion that we will not be safe with him as President. If he is elected, you stay and maintain calm and peace and think happy thoughts. If he is elected, I will move to Australia which has recently proven that they understand the threat under which we exist now and which will take necessary actions to protect its citizens. John Kerry will not.
D.J. Wilbur

I was speechless after reading William Tucker’s piece this morning. While the basic premise may be correct (that conservatives should not behave in the same way as the anti-American grubs infesting our country), the statements about John Kerry and Bill Clinton are incredibly wrong.

First, the Clintons demonized themselves — they needed no help from anyone else. Nobody went snooping around their sex lives. It wasn’t about sex. It was about sexual harassment and lying under oath in front of a grand jury. This activity was punished by stiff fines and the loss of Bill’s law license, proof of criminal activity, not right-wing payback for bad dating habits.

Second, “reasonably well governed” is difficult to swallow when you credit a balanced budget against failing to recognize a real and growing terrorist threat. It’s easy to raise taxes, not so easy to take a stand against a web of terrorists when Yasser Arafat is sleeping in the Lincoln bedroom. Suggesting that this oversight has now been corrected is naive. Stopping this war in its tracks in 1993 is a long way from starting to win the war in 2001. And that Clinton prosperity you mention seems to have been nothing more than a high tech market bubble which burst well before George Bush even won the primary, only to be well covered up until after the election was over.

Third, a Republican control of Congress (not assured at this point in the Senate) is only beneficial if fighters like Gingrich are around. Right now we can’t even get a judicial nomination through, thanks to the current leadership.

And the biggest outrage of the article; “Kerry has enough aristocratic starch… that he may be able to stand up for his country.” Huh?? The same man who sold out his country during the Vietnam war? The same man who repeatedly voted against almost every new weapon system? The same man who voted against funding the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq? The same man who now exploits lies about missing explosives in Iraq for political advantage? Are we talking about the same Kerry?
Tom Cook
Raleigh, North Carolina

I must admit, as much as it would be cathartic to rage and storm at a Kerry win, I must agree with Mr. Tucker that the best thing will be to let John Kerry do his job. Yes, we will have an unprincipled egoist in the White House (again), but we will also have a re-invigorated Republican Congress to keep him on his toes and make sure that he doesn’t take the country off the deep end. And once the specter of Cowboy George fades from the electorate’s collective mind (6 months), people will begin to realize that maybe their vote for “anyone but Bush” was perhaps not the wisest choice they ever made.

Worried about judges? Don’t be. If the Democrats can hold up the judges they dislike then Republicans can certainly do the same, and with more legitimacy, seeing as how they hold the majority of seats in the Senate. Besides, it appears that Congress is beginning to feel its Constitutional oats as far as the judiciary is concerned. The passage in the House of a bill limiting the court’s jurisdiction on matters concerning the Pledge of Allegiance is a promising sign that Congress is willing to rein in the reign of judges.

Concerned about big government? Not a problem. If fiscal conservatism was a religion, then the Republicans will find Jesus pretty quickly in a Kerry presidency. The single fact of being an opposition party will pit the Republicans against the vast majority of Kerry’s spending proposals. In short: Don’t worry, be happy. If Kerry wins, there is four years of fun and partisan hijinks to look forward to. Let’s run with it and have fun.
Sean Paroski
Camarillo, California

I don’t disagree with William Tucker’s call for Republicans to behave if Kerry wins. But there is a dangerous difference between Carter and Kerry. Carter was merely a self-righteous ass who blamed Americans for his problems. Kerry remains the same communist sympathizer he was in college, and indeed his intellectual immaturity, combined with his personal arrogance and opportunism, foretell disaster even with Republicans controlling Congress.
Mary McLemore
Autaugaville, Alabama

William Tucker, one of the finest policy mavens of his generation, misses one thing: Rewarding a party that steals an election by vote fraud and mendacity layered upon an orgy of hatred directed at a President not seen since the 1960s, only encourages bad behavior in the future. Politics is one arena where two wrongs — reciprocity — sometimes makes for a longer-term right, by nullifying gains derived from wrongful acts. No, Republicans should neither imitate Democrat street violence tactics, nor hatred and mendacity. Quiet, focused, determined opposition that frustrates much of Kerry’s agenda will do — especially on Supreme Court nominees. Support his war efforts if he does the right thing, of course, and temper criticism so as not to give aid and comfort to our enemies, but Mr. Tucker is wrong if he thinks Kerry will stay in Iraq. He will be out before the 2006 elections, declaring victory even if Iraq collapses.
John Wohlstetter

If the unthinkable were to happen next Tuesday (it won’t), Republicans won’t storm the gates and throw their medals away. No, as we all know, this is not the Republican style. Why would the Republicans not stop Kerry from governing? Love of America is a high priority for Republicans.

The president has taken the high road in this campaign. If he takes that road to defeat, missed opportunities will be apparent. John Kerry has a history of scandal that in unparalleled in American history. This has not been emphasized. His three years of manipulation on behalf of the Viet Cong should have been a part of the campaign. What did he say to Madame Binh? What type was his original discharge? Why did he lie before a Senate committee? Why is he afraid to face the tortured POWs? We may never know.

The Kerry campaign, on the other hand, with unprecedented help from the liberal media, has assaulted the First Amendment with threats against the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, Regnery Publishing, and the TV stations who wanted to show their ads. The Dems apparently roughed up the creator of Stolen Honor when he was giving out copies (after the left shut the theater showing down. Reports fly of violence against Bush campaign HQs, registration fraud by groups of leftists. The mainstream media is uninterested.

So, Mr. Tucker, fret not! Republicans will support the Republic regardless of the outcome of the election. This will continue until Kerry (who will not win) and his leftist buddies take those fateful steps toward shifting sovereignty, for the benefit of humanity they will say, to the U.N. At that point, the arrogant elitist leftists will have a problem because, as I said, Republicans love America.
Robert Byrne
Garden City, Kansas

Cats don’t change their spots. Kerry has cut and run before (repeatedly choosing the enemy’s side over ours). He’ll cut and run from Iraq because the problem is too large for his short-sighted, narrow view of the world.
Judith L Miley

Mr. French Nuance will be a one-term dud after the American people actually get watch Kerry build on his 20 year Senate record.…
Ed Krach
Austin, Texas

Tucker’s plea bargain: Republican’s roll over. I hope not. What Tucker is hoping for is the Republicans will govern and the Democrats will get all the credit. Some perspective is required on some of the items mentioned in the let us be wimps status quo. For starters, nobody balanced the budget. A booming stock market with plenty of short term capital gains flushed the treasury. Welfare reform was crammed down Clinton’s throat and after the third try he swallowed. The high tech industry created the economy of the Clinton years, not the government. Al Gore did not invent the Internet. Next, Kerry’s got one constituency (the MSM) who don’t care about anything he does as long as he occupies the White House and they will see to it in their daily propaganda that he is kept in a good light. During the Supreme Court nominee fights rest assured that the Republicans will be tagged as right wing extremists who wish to take all of our rights. If the Democrats are perilously close to insanity now does anyone really think they will somehow find common sense with a Democrat on the throne? Does the name Clinton ring a bell? I wouldn’t characterize the Clinton years as wonderful coexistence. The MSM will use the Democrat talking points to identify a new Republican boogie man.

ZERO accommodations should be made. Let Lurch bumble on his own, assume the leadership and take it on the chin just like our current President. Kerry’s foreign policy approach IS like Jimmy Carter’s but without the grin. The Democrats will not abandon their play book for play nice and the Republicans had better get a new one with strategies designed to savage the opposition. Some self-restraint such as not undermining the government in time of war is acceptable, but that seems to be about it. For the sake of the Republic I hope the Republicans start using their majority tools to fight if there is a Democrat administration. If President Bush does prevail next week the same strategy should be applied to the Democrats. It doesn’t matter what Republicans do or say because they will always be cast by Democrats as something less than nothing.
Diamon Sforza
San Diego, California

If Kerry wins, Democrats deserve terrorism. I just hope they start with Boston — the heart of hate America Democrat traitors. I am a Veteran and I will not support a traitor in the White House. If Kerry wins, better get ready for a draft. How many Veterans want their kids and grandkids to support a traitor as Commander-in-Chief. Thanks,
Howard Lee
Bogalusa, Louisiana

I could not disagree with you more. I used to be one of the level headed conservative Republicans in this country who might have agreed with you. No longer, Michael Moore, George Soros, Al Gore, Howard Dean, James Carville, Paul Begala, Alan Colmes, Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, etc. etc. etc., have convinced me that we are at war with the demonic Democrats as much as with the Islamic fundamentalists. This party is evil, not just wrong, but evil. I believe that these people are just like the Islamists, they understand only one thing, a swift punch in the face. Fight them, fight them, fight them at every turn!
Kent Brown

This article is pabulum and not worthy of your publication.
Karen Klausmeyer

You have got to be kidding. If this traitor should steal the election then the true patriots must obstruct, obstruct, obstruct. Only now are you interested in “pulling America together.” What a joke. Where were you while the current administration has been obstructed at every turn?
Craig Smith

I agree with Mr. Tucker on most of his points, but something in his argument struck me.

The things that we didn’t do right — ignoring the terrorist threat, allowing nuclear proliferation — were part and parcel of the deal and have now been corrected.

True, but at the cost of some 3,000 innocent American lives. John Kerry’s foreign policy could be equally or even more disastrous than Clinton’s and Carter’s. Are we supposed to wait for another attack in order for Kerry’s policy to be corrected? I’m all for accepting the results of the election, but if Mr. Kerry is elected I think we need to keep a sharp eye on his actions regarding the war on terror. I think we can do that without sinking to the depths of attacking Mr. Kerry’s personal life. Simply allowing Mr. Kerry to follow his misguided path with no debate is irresponsible.
Chuck Lazarz

… Unlike Little Bill Tucker, I INSIST that Republicans oppose every action Kerry takes at every turn and grind his administration to a halt!

In fact, I’m hoping Texas secedes and names Bush President of the Republic of Texas!
Ray Herbert, Jr.

I have two comments, I will go along with any Kerry victory if you can show me the Democrats did not win by vote fraud. Second, I see nothing in John Kerry’s “aristocratic starch” or his 30 year record that makes me believe he will make any decision for the benefit of the United States over the benefit of John Kerry and the democrat party.
Gregory Baum
Westerville, Ohio

Thank you for the article about showing political restraint if Kerry is elected. Personally, I believe Kerry is the worst choice the Democrats have ever made. More importantly, I believe the Country’s traditions are more important than any particular party, or even any particular set of circumstances, foreign or domestic. This election has shown, again, that this Country has some growing up to accomplish.

Thank you.
Peter Hughes
Sacramento, California

I agree that if the unthinkable should happen and John Kerry should somehow capture the White House, we, the loyal opposition for the good of the nation as a whole, should graciously accept the result and wish him well. However, if it is the verdict of this nation to place John Kerry as leader of the free world, I reject the notion that the new president will have to accept the inevitable responsibility of doing the right thing in Iraq and see this thing through to some sort of acceptable conclusion.

The position of John Kerry, the candidate, was crystal clear, despite all the hedging and flip-flopping, and that is — the whole Iraq enterprise is the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time. Our enemies will know it, our allies will know it, and most of all the Iraqis will know it. If, as John Kerry sees it, he tries to make the best of a bad situation, I foresee a replay of the whole Vietnam debacle where the last man leaving Saigon is seen vainly trying to leap onto a departing helicopter as the last Americans get the Hell out of Dodge.

I do not want to see us die the death of a thousand cuts as we vainly try to extricate ourselves from the inevitable. After putting the world on notice that we will exiting Iraq on a near-term date certain, John Kerry should march right over to the United Nations and drop the whole matter in their lap, offering whatever assistance we can and let the chips fall where they may.

Hopefully that will be the last lesson we will have to endure from the Vietnam experience and John Kerry is the perfect person to deliver it.
Jerome Brick
Beaver Dam, Arizona

William Tucker says that a President John Kerry will be forced to abandon his antiwar supporters in the face of the reality of the situation in Iraq. I only hope this is the case. Unfortunately it seems more likely he will resist a cut and run only as long as the political reality of staying longer does him no damage. When he reaches the point of no return, that is when “Bush’s War” becomes “Kerry’s War” (in about 6 months), I am afraid he won’t have the character and courage to proceed. We just don’t know what this guy will do and that is what makes a Kerry presidency such a frightening prospect.
Jon Daly
Hart, Michigan

William Tucker’s “Plea For Democracy” was refreshingly responsible, although, in the event of a Kerry victory I may well opt for a deliberate 4-year hiatus from politics via a self-imposed news black-out.

Regardless, his plea will, I fear, fall upon deaf ears unless we have a clear winner on November 2nd: a protracted post-election battle may lead to civil war and not necessarily a “cold war.” In a shooting war, my money would definitely be on the Red States.

And, regarding terrorist threats, isn’t it comforting that the major blue states are on either coast?
J.B. Casper

I think Mr. Tucker showed guts in releasing this piece before the election; I personally find his argument persuasive — being a “good loser” is intrinsic to gentlemanly, or ladylike, honor. May we not have to call upon these qualities for a long, long time!!!

And yet, I do not fully endorse Tucker’s assessment of the treatment of Mr. Clinton. If governance was adequate in these years, it was in spite of Mr. Clinton and not because of him.

Moreover, responsibility for “…ignoring the terrorist threat, allowing nuclear proliferation” have not, repeat not, been corrected in any reasonable sense– and Congress bears an equal share of responsibility for our collective neglect of these vital issues.

Our lack of foresight in response to these two issues, our present sensible efforts notwithstanding, reflect that our political leadership did NOT govern effectively during Clinton’s tenure with a Republican Congress.

Again, I say, I hope all this is moot come Wednesday morning!
Mark Stoffel
Arlington, Virginia

Throughout your article I waited hesitantly for the punchline, alas it never arrived. I will not dispute some of your assertions, for instance the Democratic Party is filled with spoiled two-year-olds who if they don’t get their way are going to break something, take their ball and go whine and pout in a corner; whereas the Republican Party, normally, consists of mature adults. Neither will I maintain any inaccuracy of your descriptions of Clinton or Carter. There is one area in which, under no circumstances, should the Republican Party allow President Kerry (heaven forbid) to govern: judicial appointments. This obsessive governing by Judicial Fiat that our colleagues have engaged in poses the greatest threat to our freedoms. As we have seen (and hopefully take note of), there is no recourse to the courts. Should Kerry take office in January, not a single one of his appointments to the bench should ever be approved by the Senate.…
Frank White
Albuquerque, New Mexico

It’s 5:30 am and I’m late for work, yet I find myself compelled to respond to William Tucker’s article “a plea for democracy.” His premise is completely off base. Do we not remember the term “Finlandized”? How do you think Finland got that way during the Cold War? It was because they were a small nation which had courageously fought against the mighty Soviet empire. They weren’t strong enough, so they had to knuckle under to the goons in Moscow, although they retained a quasi sort of “independence.” If they had STARTED OUT by saying “let’s be Finlandized,” they would have been Sovietized, and completely destroyed. Sorry Bill, but I’m not ready to “co-govern.” If we start from that premise, we’ll be co-opted, and everything we hold dear will be flushed down into the sewers which gave birth to the hate filled ranters who dominate today’s Democratic party.
Paul LaRue

P.S. We need to have a lot more faith in the rightness of what we do.

Why must we as conservatives always be the ones to take the high road? With the last election as close as it was, had we been on the losing side, would we have had the right to behave the way that the Democrats and liberals have for the last four years? And would we have?!? I don’t think so.

I will be for making the Kerry single term presidency a living hell for the Democrats. I have never felt like taking an active roll in politics before, but I will on November 3rd (or whenever they can actually figure out if Kerry is the legitimate winner, I hope that never happens).
Jim Hartwig
(Note: I have never written a letter to the editor before or called into a talk show, but I am so incensed by the behavior of liberal Democrats that I now feel compelled to.)

I appreciate Mr. Tucker’s concern and his comments. I, for one, will be willing to let Kerry govern, assuming for the sake of argument, that it can be believed that he won the election honestly. I was convinced on election night 2000 that Gore was attempting to fix the vote. I no longer think that was true, but his refusal to concede and his plunging of the nation into a crisis that arguably continues to this day was worse than anything an honest political cheater would have attempted. It will be completely unacceptable during war time, however, while we can be certain that Bush would not pull such a stunt, we cannot feel the same way about Kerry.

And this brings me to my main point. Mr. Tucker is far to kind in his assessment of John Kerry. His “aristocratic starch” is sprayed on at best, and he has never stood up for this country. He endured a few month of combat and ran like hell as soon as he could finagle it. He gave aid and comfort to our enemies, foreign and domestic, and is inarguably a traitor.…
Jessica O’Connor
Bayonne, New Jersey

I was aghast. Is Mr. Tucker channeling the ghost of Bob Michel? If anything that is amiss is that there is no guerrilla element in the Republican and Conservative movements. For too long we have played the Republican Charlie Brown to the Democrat Lucy. They always promise to hold the football and we always fall for it and fall on our back. If you are going to channel ghosts, please channel Lee Atwater, Mr. Tucker.
Ron Pettengill

William Tucker’s article on how conservatives should behave if Kerry wins is excellent. I hope your readers take it to heart.

All I can say is that I wish I believed everything he writes about Kerry is true. But I don’t.
Glen Hoffing

Can’t do it! You make an reasonable argument. But one thing I’m convinced of (NOW more than ever), the Democrats sure as HELL won’t follow your advice — they’d just as soon trash the entire country to have their way.

If they pull it (the election) off, Wednesday will mark Day 1 of my devotion to the right-wing to retake America (God Bless Her) BACK from the lying socialists who are trying to steal her away from me (and millions of others).

If Kerry “wins” by obvious cheating and/or legalisms, we owe it to our country do at least three things: (1) make his entire Presidency as tough as it has been for Bush — this “be a good loser” approach is nonsense; it leads to liberal gains that are impossible to reverse — and never let up on his service in Vietnam, post-Vietnam protest actions, and his false Catholicism, ensure they are distractions for his entire four years; keep him on the defensive; (2) ensure we (everyday Conservatives-the folks who vote for GW) bankrupt or otherwise put CBS out of business as the first action of breaking the bias of MSM; begin a concerted effort to cut the conservative subscription or readership for NYT by highlighting and exposing their pretense of quality journalism; (3) find someone in the Republican party who can lead our fight against Kerry effectively; the current House and Senate leadership are not leaders at all but weaklings and figure heads who must be replaced quickly. The first stop might be ensuring a new Republican Senator from “Kalifornia” gets on the scene.
Paul Moody
Gainesville, Virginia

I disagree 100% with this article. John Kerry does not have what it takes to stand up for our country; he has proved this throughout his entire life after returning from Vietnam. If this Country elects an anti-war, northeast ultra-liberal Senator from Massachusetts to lead us in the war on terror we are in serious trouble. By electing Kerry we give a victory to terrorists all across the world. There is no doubt their main goal is to defeat President Bush through the beheadings and car bombings. If the American people give them what they seek and in turn hand them a victory, then shame on America. If John Kerry wins I will take down my American flag at my house and on my car because this won’t be my America anymore. It will be an America that cowards in the face a brutal enemy, and our leader (John Kerry) will reflect that cowardice. If he wins on November 2, America reaps what it sews.
James Torrell

At what point do we wipe the “Let’s be reasonable” smile off our face and end the charade of political business as usual? The actions you propose are akin to a codependent spouse politely correcting a dangerously drunken partner as he/she careens down the highway in a stupor.

At what point are we justified in “direct action” as you so obliquely put it? At what point, when our republic is threatened, do we turn off the cable news, switch off the Internet and let the people who are destroying our country right under our noses pay a price for their actions other then mere words of remonstrance. Mere words mean nothing to these people. Our scorn and anger means nothing to these people. The Constitution means nothing to these people. At what point do we fight?

They shoot up and vandalize our campaign headquarters. They offer crack for votes. In PA they sent absentee ballots to prisons yet Dem Gov. Rendell will not extend the absentee deadline for our warriors in Iraq to have their votes counted because his cronies sent them out late. Is this Zimbabwe or the USA? And you want me play nice with these poltroons?

These people are cowards. Their most potent weapon, in fact their every success, relies upon our consistently impotent civility and aversion to bruising our knuckles. Hell, If we don’t fight over this election what will we fight for?

Thomas Jefferson wrote to James Madison, “A little rebellion now and then is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.”

It is time to fight back and fight back hard.
Bill Talbott
USMC (Ret)
Hampstead, Maryland

William Tucker is either: (a) delusional, (b) intoxicated, or (c) on drugs. In any case he needs professional help. But, he did get one thing right: “Kerry is not Jimmy Carter” He is worse. He is a combination of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. If — God forbid! — he manages to steal–by hook or by crook or by media — this election, he will outsource national security to the U.N., a heralded tribune of freedom and liberty around the world. Uh, how any members of the U.N. are dictatorships, theocracies, or communist regimes? Can anybody count that high without a computer?

Pathetic. UNLESS, of course, the entire piece was intended as a farce. It had no characteristics of a farce that I was able to discern.
C. R. Melton
Arlington, Virginia

“But all this will be possible only if we don’t first destroy the Presidency in the process of choosing one. For the sake of the Republic, what Republicans should exercise now is a little intelligent self-restraint.”

I agree that would be the better way to go. However, if the nastiness continues, when they get in office, and perhaps carry out their long wished for attempt to impeach George Bush –that would destroy any self-restraint.
Margaret Schlosser
Bethany Beach, Delaware

Get a grip, Tucker. W is going to win.
Greg Shannon

Sign up to receive our latest updates! Register

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: The American Spectator, 122 S Royal Street, Alexandria, VA, 22314, http://spectator.org. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!