Gaddafi / Biden 2012

In 2003, Gaddafi agreed to cooperate with the President of the United States. So how nice it was of Barack Obama to return the favor and now agree so wholeheartedly with Gaddafi.

Obama’s moral relativism is at best shockingly and dangerously naïve. At worst, it’s something far more nefarious. But the problem is that this bankrupt philosophy has become a hallmark of liberalism and of today’s “Democratic” Party.

Moral relativism equates killers and mass murderers like Stalin with those who oppose such brutalities. It equates the burglar with the homeowner trying to defend his family and totalitarianism with those who patriotically resist it. The end result is one of cowardice in the face of evil and the development of a hazy world outlook where fact and fiction are mixed in a way that makes Alice’s Wonderland look sane, orderly and appealing. Indeed, such is the view of most Democrats.

So let’s make this clear. America, a nation that has fought against tyranny the world over has nothing to apologize for (other than for electing people like Obama). Sure, many things are far from perfect, but liberals never address real societal problems. They leave real leadership to conservative Republicans while they moan and groan and publicly defame their own nation on the international stage.

And while we’re at it, your attack on Israel was shameful as well, Mr. Obama. It’s reminiscent of how you treat allies like Great Britain. (Or did you think there was anything statesmanlike about unceremoniously turfing the Churchill bust in their Prime Minister’s face along with a package of DVDs that don’t work in the UK and then following up that class act by giving the Queen an iPod?) It smacks of how you treated Honduras after members of that nation’s ruling party saw fit to remove a thug who had usurped their constitution. All in all, your actions are shameful, they’re disgraceful and you should resign.

But to set the record straight after your outburst at the UN, let me say this much:

Just as America has nothing to apologize for, so too Israel, a country that has taken more precautions to protect the lives of civilians on the other side than any other and who has never started a single one of the wars that were brought upon it, has nothing to apologize for.

Yes, Israel won an increased amount of land in 1967. But Israel did not start that battle. They won it after they were aggressively surrounded by enemies on all sides who were very openly set on Israel’s destruction.

If the battle in Israel were a battle between Chicagoans and people from Detroit; if one side never made an aggressive move while the other side had openly targeted women and children, may G-d protect everyone, the side who justice and decency was on would be clear to all. It is also noteworthy that every discussion of regional peace has been about nothing more than how much Israel would give versus how much its enemies would stop attacking it should they receive something. And each time that Israel gave land, terrorists were emboldened. Netanyahu is right when he says that promoting mutual business, not dangerous land concessions, is the only possible road for peace in the Middle East.

Yet the strange thing is that in Israel, both the right as well as much of the left have come to understand that the only way to stand up to terror is to, well, stand up to it. That’s why Netanyahu and Ehud Barak were able to form a coalition. The only one who doesn’t get it is Tzipi Livni, who to her credit, is doing whatever she can to dispel the notion that all Jews are smart.

And who is harmed by Obama’s outbursts and insanely foolish worldview? America - because in today’s world, America cannot show weakness. Such an attitude invites contempt and emboldens our enemies.

The night that Obama was elected, people at the local McCain party turned to me and asked in a very concerned manner, “what about Israel?” I answered that Israel understands terror. Much of America does not and therefore I worry for its safety. We cannot take our eye off the ball and that weakness in the face of terror would only harm America, may G-d protect this land and our allies.

Let me be clear. While Obama and Biden may be the most naïve of fools ever to occupy our nation’s highest offices (with the possible exception of one peanut farmer who shall remain clueless), the American people know better and will demand a swift reaction against anyone who seeks to harm this nation. I’m just worried about the message that Obama is sending, not about our national resolve.

Obama and his gang have behaved like reckless school children with the US finances. No one with even a rudimentary understanding of history would have order the printing of a trillion US dollars, causing China, Russia and others to start a stampede against our currency. In foreign affairs Obama is seen as simply one of the group, not as the leader of the free world. His leadership is as shameful as his worldview is ridiculous and the sad fact is that his harmful outlook is shared by most of his party.

So what’s next for Democrats? A Gaddafi/Clinton ticket in 2012? Sounds like the next logical progression of a morally bankrupt and ideologically idiotic party. But then whatever would they do with Joe Biden? Not to worry. Perhaps Barney Frank needs a new congressional page.

Welcome Back Carter, Now Please Go Away

09/17/09

Jimmy Carter is a fool. That may not be the most civil of descriptions, but it is the most fitting one. Sometimes it’s more important to be factually correct than to be politically so.

Carter’s statement that Rep. Wilson is a “racist” for calling out Barack Obama on a mistruth is as troubling as the needless and petty resolution passed by his party, if not more so. And in making that statement, Jimmy Carter brings hypocrisy to a new art form.

The Democrats’ own Senate president pro-tempore, Carter’s own Senate majority leader, is an unrepentant former member of the Ku Klux Klan who as recently as 2001 used the n-word on national TV in one of the most tasteless and sickening exchanges since, well… since the Carter administration. Yet Democrats and Jimmy Carter have the temerity to call us racist - we Republicans who have stood up against racism since the very founding of our party.

Republicans have always been the civil rights party. This was true in both the 1860s as well as the 1960s. Charlton Heston was a great civil rights leader and Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican. In the meantime, the Democratic Party has gone from being led by the likes of Hubert Humphrey, Scoop Jackson and Daniel Patrick Moynihan to boasting such luminaries as Diane “Castro” Watson, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Jimmy Carter among its highest ranks and to being organized on the ground level by the likes of Louis Farrakhan.

Carter’s tactic is as dangerous as it is shameful. Those who use the smear of “racism” lightly only increase paranoia and further divide the citizens of this great nation. Using accusations of racism as a political weapon is shameful.

Far worse still is the use of false accusations of racism to stifle political dissent. There can be few things more harmful to the health of a democracy. What’s more, holding someone above reproach because of his or her race is the very definition of racism. Such an attitude also allows for the unchecked growth of federal power.

I asked Bernard Sansaricq, the GOP’s first Caribbean-American congressional candidate, what he thinks about the situation. Sansaricq is the former President of the Haitian Senate and a renown human rights leader. He is running against Alcee Hastings, a Carter appointed judge who was impeached by the entire Congress.

Sansaricq’s answer was unequivocal and shows what a powerful candidate the GOP has in him: “Lack of decorum or not, Representative Joe Wilson shouted the honest truth, a cry from the heart of a great American. You can be sure that before too long, you will see signs popping up all over the country calling for ‘Joe Wilson for President 2012.’ We need straight shooters in Washington, DC and lack of decorum or not, Joe Wilson is a straight shooter and will have my vote for whichever office he chooses to run for, including the presidency.” Amen to that, Senator Sansaricq.

As far as Carter is concerned, some people should just stick to planting peanuts – no insult to the intelligent and hard working peanut farmers of America. We should only ridicule demagogues who plant peanuts.

Congressman Joe Wilson for US Senate

09/16/09

The American people often engage in robust debate. So do the citizens and (even the) parliamentarians of Britain and other Western countries. It’s considered a healthy aspect of most democracies, albeit an annoying one.

So when Democrats voted their disapproval of Representative Joe Wilson, they did a disservice to the American people. They also did a disservice to democracy, which was once a core principle of their party, but sadly is no more.

I’m all for civility. I’m even more for healthy, pointed, passionate dissent. Such dissent harms no one and has the potential to diffuse situations, as it allows each side to present their respective points of view with focused devotion.

Civility and indignation are two equally important aspects to the political health of a democratic republic. Civility allows us to discuss issues and righteous indignation allows us to express our passion in words. Rigorous dissent is healthy and needed. It’s what separates first class societies that engage in rigorous debate from countries that settle their disputes by way of mob violence.

Over the past eight years, I’ve heard Democrat activists and many of their Washington leaders yell an unending and ferocious tirade of curses and accusations at Republicans, at all Republicans. And as tasteless, wrongheaded and false as those tirades were, I would never dream of trying to stifle honest opposition. No Republican would.

What’s even more outrageous is that Congressman Wilson’s comment that President Barack Obama is a liar (which, based on both the Senate version at the time, as well as a proper reading of the House version, was a fair statement) pales in comparison to statements by Senator Dick Durbin, the number two ranking Democrat who compared our American troops to Nazis on the Senate floor. And “pales in comparison” is putting it extremely mildly.

I guess you can only yell outrageous obscenities from the floor of the US Senate. In the House, one must show decorum at all times. Well then, let me be the first to endorse Joe Wilson for US Senate. The difference is that he was standing up for the interests his constituents, not falsely maligning American heroes who risk their lives on behalf of the nation. Maybe that’s what congressional Democrats have a problem with.

Furthermore, in the 2006 State of the Union address, Democrats interrupted mid-sentence. The reaction was a smile from then President Bush followed by a one liner that turned the tables back on them. Not a single person in the chamber didn’t enjoy the exchange, and unlike Joe Wilson, they did not apologize.

Congressman Wilson’s statement also seems downright complimentary compared to that of former Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, who went on national TV accusing our troops of harassing women and children. Of course, false accusations against American troops are nothing new for Senator Kerry. Just ask any Vietnam veteran.

President Obama may be many things. But he’s not more honorable than our American soldiers. He’s also not above reproof.

What congressional Democrats have shown by last night’s vote is how thin skinned all but 17 of them are, not to mention hypocritical.

Why Jews Should No Longer Vote Democrat

Obama’s foreign policy is troubling. Barack Obama has not only alienated Israel, America’s most steadfast ally and given hope to thugs everywhere with his Honduras debacle. Great Britain was also shamed by his actions. Simply put, a man who goes to Buckingham Palace and hands the Queen an I-pod is a lunatic, not a president. But that and the hostile return of the Churchill bust marked this administration’s first overture to the UK.

America has nothing to apologize for. Likewise, Israel, a country that has taken more precautions to protect the lives of civilians on the other side and who has never started a single one of the wars that were brought upon it also has nothing to apologize for.

Yes, Israel won an increased amount of land in 1967. But Israel did not start that battle. They won it after they were aggressively surrounded by enemies on all sides who were very openly set on Israel’s destruction.

If the battle in Israel was a battle between Chicagoans and people from Detroit; if one side never made an aggressive move while the other side had openly targeted women and children, may G-d protect all, the side who justice and decency was on would be clear to all. It is also noteworthy that every discussion of regional peace has been about nothing more than how much Israel would give versus how much its enemies would stop attacking it. And each time that Israel gave land, the terrorists were emboldened. Netanyahu is right when he says that promoting mutual business, not dangerous land concessions, is the only possible road for peace.

Yet the strange thing is that in Israel, both the right as well as much of the left have come to understand that the only way to stand up to terror is to, well, stand up to it. That’s why Netanyahu and Ehud Barak were able to form a coalition. The only one who doesn’t get it is Tzipi Livni, who to her credit, is doing whatever she can to dispel the notion that all Jews are smart.

America cannot show weakness. Such an attitude invites contempt and emboldens our enemies. When Obama was elected, people turned to me at the local McCain party and asked, very concerned, “what about Israel?” I answered that we cannot take our eye off the ball and that weakness in the face of terror would only harm America, may G-d protect this land and our allies.

I know that many of us have friends who are staunchly Democrat. Yet they fail to understand what the Democratic Party has become. For much of our history, the Republican Party was the clear civil rights party. In the 1930s, an economic debate over how to end the depression split the parties, with both sides making compelling arguments as each proposed solutions that they saw best to revamp the economy. At that time, most Jews and most of the American people sided with FDR.

Let this much be clear. No matter what side you were on of the economic debate of the 1940s, one thing is certain. The tables have turned, the parties have flipped and the party of Hubert Humphrey, Scoop Jackson and Daniel Patrick Moynihan has become the party of Diane Watson, Jimmy Carter and Louis Farrakhan.

Compassion is no longer a part of their agenda. Republicans, not Democrats, cut taxes on the poorest income bracket by a third. Democrats sought to reverse this until they realized that they could just cap and trade that bracket instead.

Likewise, Republicans, not Democrats, organized the most comprehensive homeland security overhaul in the aftermath of 9-11 as Democrats sat back and wondered what to do.

Republicans, not Democrats, sounded the alarm in 2002 about the pending mortgage crisis and the abuses of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

And Republicans, not Democrats, put forward sensible prescription drug coverage for seniors that did not rob them of all healthcare options or put them under the control of statist non-doctor panels.

So when people ask why you are a Republican, why not answer this?:

I’m a Republican because I believe that hard working people should be encouraged to make jobs for others, not hindered in that task. That’s why I’m a Republican!

I’m a Republican because I believe that seniors are our most valuable members of society and they deserve far better than second rate government rationed so-called healthcare. That’s why I’m a Republican!

I’m a Republican because I believe that people should be protected and that madmen should be stopped. That’s why I’m a Republican!

And I’m a Republican because I believe that age old values and wisdom are better than feel good momentary fixes. That’s why I’m a Republican.

The problem with the Obama administration does not stop and end with Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton has repeatedly shown a lack of understanding of the nature of terror and Iran has no greater friend than Joe Biden. When you hear about “conservative Democrats in Congress” you need to ask what exactly is conservative or even slightly moderate about acquiescence to the lunacy of this administration. Increasingly, the words “conservative Democrat” are as much a misnomer as calling Congressman Barney Frank “erudite.” It’s like calling Joe Biden “articulate!”

You see, Democrats and the state media fail to realize that Mahmoud Abbas is anything but a moderate. He was a high ranking PLO member when the PLO, not Hamas as wrongly reported, made the suicide bombing Mickey Mouse. He’s never backed down from his calls to violence to fellow PLO members. Simply put, in the eyes of the media, a moderate is a murderer with a smile on his face.
Had local politicians and the equivalent of state representatives stood up in Chile in the late 1960s there would have been no radical government of Salvador Allende that terrorized the populace.
Had local politicians stood up in Venezuela in the early 1990s, there would have been no Hugo Chavez.
And had local leaders raised their voices in Cuba in the 1950s, the murder squads of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara would have gone to Russia instead of wreaking havoc 90 miles off of our shores.
We need to be keenly aware that failed dogmas have been allowed to take hold on every continent of our globe because local leaders have failed to articulate their sound beliefs. And we need to stand up and do something about it.

Jews believe in human rights and by and large have been among the chief proponents of a better society for all since the beginning. It is high time for all Jews, all Christians, all people of faith and all decent people to abandon the vestiges of the Democratic Party, a name that has become yet another misnomer.

The Biblical traditions upon which this nation was founded tell us that G-d will eventually perfect the world. Indeed, over the past 25 years, we’ve seen many breakthroughs in medicine and technology and most of all, in human rights.

But during these last trying times each of us has a role to play to promote better government and to do our part to ensure a better society for all; one that values human rights, one that values age old traditions and one that values people, families and community.

We will not let the superficial dictate to us, no matter how strong their platform. Their world view has failed time and time again. What we will do is stand with innocents, stand with what is right and promote common decency. In those matters, we are assured of victory and each of us have a crucial role to play.

Parents Should Form Study Groups Rather Than Have Their Children Participate in National Indoctrination Day

09/08/09

I have no problem with a President of the United States addressing school children, even in the classroom. But when the Department of Education formulates a lesson plan asking teachers to glorify the Office of the President and calls for students to read books about presidents “and Barack Obama,” the line is crossed between a nonpartisan speech and partisan political indoctrination.

An address by any president has an impact on a child. Those who grew up in the late 1980s anywhere in the western world likely remember hearing the words of Ronald Reagan. As a nine year old child, I remember hearing his speech on judicial activism and his summation that judges should uphold the law, not invent it. Those words had an affect on me and on my generation, albeit a mooted one, as most 30-35 year olds have yet to understand conservative philosophy.

The difference was that we chose to watch those political speeches or newsclips on our own time and hopefully under the supervision of parents. Subjecting all children to a speech in which presidents play up their agenda issues absent parental input is a problem. The Obama speech does touch on such issues and teacher guidance will likely highlight these points. This, however, would admittedly be inconclusive were it not for the lesson plan put forward by the Department of Education.

The lesson plan, which calls for teachers to glorify the Office of the President minutes prior to the President’s speech, is a subjective form of indoctrination that should be shunned. The same ultra liberals who think that the speech and the accompanying Obamacentric lesson plan are good ideas would have rightly been mortified had President George W. Bush announced a speech to the nation’s students on the day before a vote on Medicare Part D and further ordered the Department of Education to draw up lesson plans asking for students to be taught “what it takes to become president” and read books on presidents “and about George W. Bush” moments before the speech. If that had ever happened, their outrage would be justified. Yet that’s exactly what the current administration has done with this misguided “lesson plan.”

Do they not realize that the next Republican president will likely be pushed to do the same? Does anyone believe that this is healthy on any level?

Democrats should recognize the harm in this just as Republicans do. Central to our citizen based government is that we do not have a ruler - rather, citizens elect a president to lead them for a specific duration of time. Use of phrases like “Obama will begin to rule” by advisors such as Valerie Jarrett prior to the inauguration were problematic. Today’s glorification of the current office holder is just plain ridiculous and shameful.

In light of this, many have called for parents to take their children out of school for the day, but I do not believe in additional days off.

What I propose instead is that parents form study groups for their child’s class and invite all other students to participate. Failing that, parents should spend the day helping their children with necessary academic work. At the very least, parents who work should leave a study schedule for children to complete at home so that the day is spent learning, not merely taking off from school.

It is truly a shame that the White House has so politicized the address with a partisan lesson plan aimed to glorify Barack Obama and further a cult of personality from which little good can emerge. Parents should rightly avoid the process.

But what is shocking is that while a statewide solution is easy, no one in the nation has seen fit to propose one.

Florida (and any other state) can and should prohibit public school administrators and any other public school employee from engaging in subjective comments before or after the speech, including those outlined in the outrageous lesson plan provided by the US Department of Education. The course outline is suggestive and the Department of Education is actually prohibited by law from enforcing any specific type of material, so issuing a state decree that schools are prohibited from entering any suggestive comments prior to or after the address is a simple matter that any state can legislate.

Which bears the question: Why has no state done so and why is my campaign the first to propose this?

On another note, I’ve heard a lot of calls from numerous candidates essentially asking parents to let their kids skip school. None have advocated for organized study groups that will help children further their education or master the 3 Rs.

Well if my campaign is the only one to put forward a sound proposal, then that’s exactly what we’ll do.

Lastly, this is not an isolated issue. Our schools must be nonpartisan. This was true when schools canceled class to watch the inauguration of President Obama, while the second inauguration of President Bush was met with deafening silence in the halls of academia. (His first inaugural was on a Saturday, but there’s no reason to believe that schools would have aired that one had this not been the case). This is true when students are berated by staff for not supporting the candidate of their choice and this is especially true when school employees wear partisan political pins on school premises.

Most Republican and Democratic voters alike want to achieve a better standard of living for all, even if elitist Democratic politicians don’t. We argue only over how to get there. It’s important that schools allow parents and students to lead that debate without rigid or dogmatic interference. And when the federal Department of Education sees fit to thrust itself into the debate, such a move must be opposed by all citizens across the board.

Only One Way to Fix the GOP Brand

09/02/09

As a party, we should own all of the issues. Republicans, not Democrats, organized the most comprehensive homeland security overhaul in the aftermath of 9-11 as Democrats sat back and wondered what to do. Some were even thankful that there was a Republican administration – Remember, I’m talking about right after 9-11, when Democrats realized that we were in danger and before politics clouded the national security debate, causing them to oppose the same measures they themselves had co-authored, albeit only after Republicans pushed for a needed overhaul.

Republicans, not Democrats, sounded the alarm in 2002 about the pending mortgage crisis and the abuses of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Democrats accused the Republicans of trying to curb homeownership at a time of record growth. Republicans were sensible. Democrats were not. But Republicans were assigned blame.

And the list goes on. Republicans, not Democrats, put forward sensible prescription drug coverage for seniors that did not rob them of all healthcare options or put them under the control of statist non-doctor panels. It should be noted that Republicans did this after decades of Democrats doing nothing, yet Democrats have the temerity to call themselves the party of compassion.

So it is not the positions which we advocate for that are the problem, rather it is our failure to properly advocate for those positions.

Do you get sick watching those Sunday political shows? When Maxine Waters yells out that whatever the Democrats are doing is better than those “tax cuts for the rich?” The last I checked in the tax cuts she was referring to Republicans cut taxes on the poor by a third while only cutting a few points for the wealthy, and those cuts to the upper brackets stimulated near record job growth. By contrast, Democrat congressmen, like Charlie Rangel who doesn’t pay taxes anyway, and Diane Watson, who praised Fidel Castro as the ideal fair arbiter of income distribution, fought to raise taxes on the lowest income bracket from ten percent back to 15.

Republican economics work. Republican solutions work and Republican values work, but we need to be able to articulate them as a party. These are not federal or state issues. They are issues that affect our brand name across the board, and local leaders must finally set the record straight.

But here are some of the state issues that are absolutely central to any campaign and should be part of the GOP message:

Current property tax rates are unsustainable and assessed values must come down to reality. A 1.35% property tax cap would be a good start, but we can do even more to stop exacerbating the foreclosure crisis.

Educational reform is key to our nation’s success. Spreading my lifeskills course is just one thing that needs to be done and that I will work on as we seek new methods to improve student motivation and to achieve success throughout the state.

Criminal justice reform, with shorter but harder labor sentences is key to stopping first time and nonviolent offenders from becoming career criminals. Long sentences, aside from being wrong and useless, have allowed radical Islamists to recruit within the prison system. There is a better way that focuses on rehabilitation while allowing the corrections system to fill necessary labor contracts. As always, society benefits from simply doing the right thing.

Furthermore, taxes are a family values issue. This is so because we must never allow the government to increase the burden on those who work hard to provide for their families and pay for their children’s education. It’s just a shame that it takes a candidate for State House to say so.

And speaking of missed opportunities, for some reason I’m the first candidate in the nation to make an issue of the simple fact that our shores are the frontline in the war on terror and that their proper surveillance should be priority number one.

This point is absolutely critical. Right now, anyone can take a ship from Saudi Arabia, or from anywhere else in the world, park 12 nautical miles off of our shores, load up a small yacht and we treat it as if that yacht had just come in from Chesapeake Bay. Am I hesitant to mention this? No – because this fact is well known to our enemies. The only question is, “What are we going to do about it?”

We must also be keenly aware of the need to stand up on all issues and all matters of importance.

Had local politicians and the equivalent of state representatives stood up in Chile in the late 1960s there would have been no radical government of Salvador Allende that terrorized the populace.

Had local politicians stood up in Venezuela in the early 1990s, there would have been no Hugo Chavez.

And had local leaders raised their voices in Cuba in the 1950s, the murder squads of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara would have gone to Russia instead of wreaking havoc 90 miles off of our shores.

We need to be keenly aware that failed dogmas have been allowed to take hold on every continent of our globe because local leaders have failed to articulate their sound beliefs.

So when Obama and his fellow socialist Democrats pledged to ration healthcare and relegate seniors to the backline, I called State Sen. Carey Baker and gave my input, as he was about to propose an amendment that would protect Florida from Obamacare.

You see, the way that we treat seniors says a lot about who we are as a society. I may not yet be elderly and I am not infirm, but I am the father of two small children and I don’t want them growing up in a society that does not value its senior citizens or fight for the infirm. Such an attitude is the exact opposite of American values. Such an attitude also cheapens the medical profession and stops doctors from realizing that their mission is to save lives across the board. Simply put, when you tell doctors whose lives they can and cannot try to save, you destroy motivation in a professional where staying motivated is crucial.

When the federal government decides to do all it can to return a communist thug to power in Honduras after the democratically elected dictator’s own party removed him from office and their courts declared his power grab unconstitutional, Florida can and should do what it can to help the people of Honduras as they do the right thing. We can promote sensible trade. Even our words of encouragement can make an untold difference.

If Obama’s team, the same people who prevented the CIA from communicating with the FBI before 9-11, now dares to harm our CIA agents who stand on the frontline in keeping our nation safe, we must withhold all Florida law enforcement resources and file amicus briefs on behalf of our agents.

And there’s no reason that every Republican in the nation shouldn’t be pushing with tremendous force for all of the same things.

All in all, local officials must raise the rallying cry against the advocacy of seductive yet harmful policies and against the demagoguery that is the hallmark of today's political left. I will do this without fail, because it is the responsibility of each of us to do so across the board; especially those who are running for office.

Our nation is in need of solutions if we are to continue to remain strong and vibrant. The answers are clearer than one would be led to believe and are routed in common sense and in a willingness to do what is right. That is what my campaign is about.

Lastly, I can tell you this:

We Republicans often take a lot of flack from friends, coworkers, employers and even employees. But as I stated earlier on, it is not the positions that we advocate for that are the problem; it is our failure to advocate for those positions.

When we’re asked by others why we are Republican, let me propose a few clear answers:

I’m a Republican because I believe that hard working people should be encouraged to make jobs for others, not hindered in that task. That’s why I’m a Republican!

I’m a Republican because I believe that seniors are our most valuable members of society and they deserve far better than second rate government rationed so-called healthcare. That’s why I’m a Republican!

I’m a Republican because I believe that people should be protected and that madmen should be stopped. That’s why I’m a Republican!

Lastly, I’m a Republican because I believe that age old values and wisdom are better than feel good momentary fixes. That’s why I’m a Republican.

When we see that in some areas more teens were dropping out of school than were graduating, we need to do something about it. I wrote a motivational course that was used by local schools and the United Way, but each of us, all creative Republicans, can do our own thing to find innovative solutions.

When we see issues that are in need of solutions, we must propose sensible ones and when we see the need to speak out, must do so. That’s representation in action that will trump the Democrats each and every time. That’s the kind of representation that we owe our nation and that’s the kind of representation that will rebuild our party.