Your Opinion is Needed NOW
I ran as a delegate to the State GOP Convention (upcoming Feb. 16) on a “ticket” as an Uncommitted ProLife ProFamily candidate. Similar tickets ran in each of Louisiana’s Congressional Districts.
The collective philosophy of the tickets was to uphold the conservative precepts of the Republican Party, being committed not to a specific candidate, but to conservative ideology. The idea was to hold delegate votes over the heads of would-be presidential candidates, telling them that if they wanted Louisiana’s delegate votes, they would have to demonstrate a commitment to conservative principles. Mere talk would not be enough.
The Uncommitted tickets which ran throughout each of Louisiana’s seven Congressional Districts won 77% of the delegate seats.
Over the past few days, I have learned that a growing number of these elected Uncommitted delegates have now been convinced to immediately throw their support behind John McCain. See LA_McCain_Endorsement_FINAL.pdf
Some Uncommitteds have done so because they were persuaded that, like him or not, McCain was the only viable candidate who could beat Hillary or OBama. (Frankly, I’m not so sure that argument has veracity, but that’s a topic for another post.)
Others who ran as Uncommitted are now supporting McCain because they have been convinced that McCain is going to win most of the delegates on Super Tuesday, primarily because of the conservative vote splitting of Mike Huckabee.
I don’t necessarily fault the Uncommitteds for their decision to back McCain. I simply disagree with its timing, particularly since Louisiana GOP voters have yet to cast the first vote in our Feb. 9 Presidential Preference Primary. While I am not McCain’s biggest fan, the same timing argument would also apply regardless of who the candidate was.
In case it isn’t obvious, I am NOT one of the Uncommitteds who decided to get behind McCain now. Like the other Uncommitteds across the state, I received a number of phone calls with pleas for my IMMEDIATE switch to McCain. As I told the callers, if McCain ends up walking away with enough delegate votes on Super Tuesday to get the National GOP Nomination, I will support him over Hillary or OBama. But Super Tuesday hasn’t even occurred, nor has the Louisiana Presidential Preference Primary.
But the primary reason why I refused to throw my support behind McCain at this point was because of my belief that the people who voted for me and for the ticket did so precisely because we were NOT supporting McCain, or Mitt Romney, or Ron Paul, or Mike Huckabee. These voters knew the field would narrow after Super Tuesday and that the Uncommitteds would eventually support a candidate. But not a mere 8 days after the caucuses.
The Uncommitteds across the state who have switched support to McCain, and those, like myself who refused to commit now, truly need to hear from rank and file Republicans prior to the state convention on Feb. 16, especially those of you who voted for the Uncommitted ticket.
What are your thoughts on the Uncommitteds supporting McCain before the LA Primary occurs, and prior to Super Tuesday?
What weight should the Uncommitteds give, if any, to the results of the Louisiana Primary on Feb. 9?
Should the Uncommitteds remain so until the National Convention in September in Minneapolis?
I’m sure there are other questions I could ask, so please feel free to post some of your own in the Comments Section.
The bottom line for me personally is that myself and the other Uncommitteds were elected by many of my readers, and my friends, and even by many complete strangers, and we are thus, the voice of the voters at the upcoming state convention.
I do recognize that this post may be an exercise in futility since Louisiana appears in no national polls, and seems to be receiving treatment as a complete non-factor in the 2008 race for the White House. It is nonetheless important to me that all of my voters know that the press release LA_McCain_Endorsement_FINAL.pdf does not speak for me.
This post will likely cost me any chance I had at being selected as a National Delegate or Alternate. I would have to be selected by the either the delegates from my district, or at-large by the entire LA Convention. If the press release above is correct, the McCain folks have enough votes to blackball me, at least as an at-large candidate.
But I am at peace with the decision to publish this post, because I’d rather forfeit the dream of being a national delegate than feel as though I was not representing the people who trusted me enough to vote for me, and for my ticket.
Please post your comments below. If you would prefer to send me an email, send it to info@votetherecord.com. I’ll print out every email I receive, and take them to the state convention. It is especially important for me to know if you a registered as a Republican, and if you voted in the caucus on January 22.
Perhaps many will respond to this post. Perhaps no one will. But I at least must try, and this is the fastest method that I can think of to hear from the voters. Thank you.
Evodna Springer
on February 3rd, 2008 at 2:18 pm
John McCain is NO conservative! Nor is he “pro-family/pro-life”!
On budget proposals:
John McCain´s proposals would result in a $6.9 billion spending hike.
Mitt Romney´s programs would result in a $19.5 billion spending hike.
Ron Paul’s proposals would result in a $150 billion spending DECREASE.
Ron Paul has the most support (and donations) from active duty military, military families and veterans of ALL candidates combined. Military folks tend to be pretty conservative. (I know, I was one for 15 years & have been a Republican for 23 years.)
Ron Paul has never voted to raise taxes.
Ron Paul has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
Ron Paul has never voted to raise congressional pay.
Ron Paul has never taken a government-paid junket.
And in a remarkable show of personal integrity:
Paul does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
Paul returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S.
treasury every year.
Overturn the bad ruling Roe v Wade and let the states decide–that NEVER should have been a Federal court ruling!
We do NOT need FEMA bungling rescues anymore and turning away volunteers while people are suffering and dying, generating more Federal Government red tape to muddle through in an emergency! We had crews on the ground after Katrina but FEMA SENT THEM AWAY. Then they wanted us to bring in our cadaver dogs after the people had been dead for months–WRONG, just wrong. Please check out Ron Paul.
on February 3rd, 2008 at 2:42 pm
My understanding was that canidates were running as truly uncommitted to any canidate. Was this really a ruse to avoid a fight, supporting a canidate all along? Like much in the Republican Party of Louisiana, this stinks of a fix. I fear that John McCain is the only canidate who cannot beat Obama or Hilary. Does anyone remember Bod Dole? A fresh, young face with different ideas is what the people are thristing for. Oh, well.
on February 3rd, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Vernon, that was my understanding as well when I agreed to be on the Uncommitted ticket. If it was a ruse, I can assure you that those of us on the 4th Congressional Dist. Uncommitted ticket knew nothing about it.
If it was a ruse, the ultimate goal seems to be that of making it appear as though McCain had won Louisiana. This was evident first, in the press release put out by the state GOP a day or so after the caucuses, and then in the Shreveport Times on 1/26, and on McCain’s web site.I don’t know if other state papers printed the same thing. But the truth is, McCain did NOT win the LA caucus, and I proved that in a prior post.
Then, the logical questions become “WHY?” and, “Who stands to gain from making McCain appear stronger in LA than he actually is?” McCain?? Does he really NEED our delegates? Especially if you believe the media, and members of our party that have all but anointed him the GOP Nominee.
Or could it be that the race for national delegates is closer than the media and even the party make it appear?
McCain and his camp aren’t stupid. He KNOWS that we are a conservative state and I believe he knows that he will not win here on Feb. 9, not if he runs on his liberal RECORD. His admirable and respected military service and sacrifice are duly noted, but those arguments are ringing of the constant “9-11″ reference made by Giuliani throughout his campaign. And we all see where he is.
I don’t know what is going on, but I do know that myself and a number of other true Uncommitteds sincerely want to be a voice at the state convention for those who voted for us.
If the Uncommitteds have been duped, as it is appearing, the truth will come out, and it may be a painful reminder that no one can be trusted in politics, and everyone has their price.
on February 3rd, 2008 at 8:50 pm
I inadvertently deleted a comment regarding delegate Kay Katz from the 5th Congressional District. Would you please resend it? Thanks!
on February 3rd, 2008 at 9:48 pm
If the delegates ran as uncommitted, and their voters voted for them because they were uncommitted, then they should continue to be uncommitted.
I know for a fact that my family and friends voted for them because they were uncommitted. None of them are McCain supporters and even cringe at the thought of having to vote for him to beat Hillary or Barack.
Ron Paul doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the nomination, and I don’t believe he’s even come within 10 points of winning a single state, has he?
Furthermore, Ron Paul blames the U.S. for 9/11. He claims the terrorists attacked us because we were in Saudi Arabia and the terrorists considered it to be blasphemy. To the best of my knowledge, the Saudi government allowed the U.S. to operate in Saudi Arabia, so the terrorists really have no legitimate standing. He believes the terrorists will leave us alone if we simply give them what they want.
As they have stated many times over the years, the Islamic terrorists want the complete eradication of the Jews, and the destruction of western civilization. Our existence on this earth is blasphemy to them, and they will not be content until every non-Muslims is wiped from the face of the earth. The terrorists’ war is not a political one, but a religious one.
Ron Paul does not understand this at all and would rather tuck tail and run like the French and Spanish than fight the Islamic terrorists who seek to destroy all unbelievers.
on February 4th, 2008 at 9:14 am
I am a concerned Republican that cannot beleive this is happening all over this country. The uncommitted delegates should remain uncommitted. McCain cannot win in November. By these delegates remaining uncommitted and possibly forcing a brokered convention, the Republicans choose a true conservative not a liberal. Huckabee and McCain both are more liberal than Hillary. McCain’s ACU rating from 1997 to 2007 is 50 and Hillarys is higher at 55. McCain ranks between Hillary and Obama on the ACU rating if you take out the early years of his Congressional Career (80’s to 91). From 1993 to present McCain has moved significantly left.
This may help those uncommitted to know also, that he will make immigration a non issue in the run for the white house thereby leading the stage for full on amnesty.
on February 4th, 2008 at 9:17 am
McCain is not a conservative. Its that simple.
on February 4th, 2008 at 9:20 am
As a lifelong Republican, I do not support McCain to be the nominee. Out of the viable options, I see Romney as the best of the remaining candidates.
Thanks for asking,
Rev. Armand Prentiss
on February 4th, 2008 at 9:24 am
While there a numerous reasons not to vote McCain, based on his liberal record, his plan to switch to the Democrat Party a few years back, his open-borders staff members, etc. and even more reasons to vote FOR Romney, Valedictorian of his college class, successful businessman, conservative on the issues, experience in actually running something vs. being just another lifelong Washington leech like McCain,I think it just finally comes down to my gut feeling.
I just don’t trust McCain to vote on anything in a conservative manner, no matter what he says.
I just FEEL that Romney has more integrity and core conservative principles.
on February 4th, 2008 at 9:33 am
How can the state party claim that John McCain won when, like me, the vast majority of voters didn’t even know when the caucus/primary was?! I know that there’s a vote on another stupid casino on Feb. 9th, but there was NO MENTION of an event to help nominate our party’s presidential candidate. Now that is just downright sad!
This is a situation of votes not being counted, people not being represented, and is a real power grab by the state party to nominate McCain - who cannot win in November (I agree, does Bob Dole ring a bell?). We need to get this right and not fall in line with the media coronation of McCain who has no interest in Louisiana.
on February 4th, 2008 at 9:34 am
I admire your stance and priciples. If the delegates were to uphold conservative values, then how do they explain endorsing McCain over other candidates? They have switched to another set of guidelines and strayed off course.
I hope the delegates rethink their positions. They should stick to their principles as well.
on February 4th, 2008 at 9:37 am
John McCain is not a Conservative, nor is he a friend of Conservatives. We cannot let the MSM annoint the next Republican candidate for President. Don’t be rail-roaded. Good luck!
on February 4th, 2008 at 10:02 am
The notion that uncommitted delegates could be co-opted in the manner suggested in the “endorsement” call is outrageous to any concept of democracy.
Those uncommitted delegates were elected as strictly that…uncommitted. To attempt to remake them for McCain is an affront.
Charles Heard
on February 4th, 2008 at 10:25 am
WHile I wouldn’t go as far to actually pull a lever for clinton, I will stay home if mccain is the nominee.
on February 4th, 2008 at 10:40 am
McCain is one liberal position away from being a Democrat. Have we all forgotten he flirted with the notion of a Kerry/McCain ticket in 2004? This is unacceptable, people!
You cannot, must not, support McCain.
on February 4th, 2008 at 10:46 am
There is no such thing as “uncommitted”, just as there are no “independents’
If you want your taxes to go up
If you like and except illegal immigration
If you want more gun control
If you want more government interference in your life
THEN YOUR CHOICE IS McCAIN if not then vote for Ronmey
MSG Joseph G. Hunt
US Army
on February 4th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Uncommitted means uncommitted. Like “scott” above, I applaud your stance and your desire to hold to your principles. I will NOT stay home if McCain is the nominee - but I am hoping Mitt makes a comeback.
on February 4th, 2008 at 10:52 am
I’m a Republican in Maine and I was proud to vote for Mitt Romney this weekend in our caucus. Romney took 52% of the vote and perhaps because we’re such a small state, this has not been widely reported in the mainstream media. He best represents the platform of the Republican party. Since when can the New York Times endorse a candidate for the Republican nomination and expect to have that taken seriously. They want McCain because he is the closest to their liberal values not our conservative values.
on February 4th, 2008 at 11:30 am
This election to me is about conservative principles first; everything else a distant second. Winning the War on Terror will not occur in the next presidency (probably not for 3 presidencies) and we can take a reversal at this time if need be (Hillary and Barack both say they will abandon Iraq as soon as possible - tarnishing the reputation of the US for decades - but a setback, not defeat, nonetheless). The current race is not even about the Supreme Court, only 1 nominee could help there, but if McCain, Clinton, or Obama are elected all that will happen is that the elderly liberal members of the court will retire and these three will replace them with new liberal members. No, the way to look at this problem is to look at long term adherence to conservative values. Strategically speaking, which of the 4 candidates will benefit the conservative movement in the long term? Ann Coulter mentions it here. Let me amplify.
Barack Obama - Barack will ‘end’ the war in Iraq. (Not!) Returning US troops to their home stations. (Some in Germany - you know that place we once ‘occupied’ and were offered basing rights to help Europe face off against the totalitarian threat - Sort of like Iraq is asking us to do now - in face of Islamist Fascism and emerging threats from Iran). Other than Iraq, Senator Obama hasn’t let me know what he thinks. He just has the highest liberal voting record among those with a chance of winning the presidency. The short-term implications are bad, yes, withdrawing from Iraq will send the absolute wrong message to every part of the planet, emboldening terrorists everywhere, and convincing Allies that the US doesn’t stand by them. In the long term, however, the imposition of the Liberal values upon America will cause everyone to question their own belief structure and I think that conservative values will win - maybe even by the mid-term election. Summary: Barack signals a bad short term for conservative principles, but long term strengthening of them. Grade him - / +
Hillary Clinton - She also will ‘end’ the war in Iraq, but she is realistic enough to know that it doesn’t end US involvement there. However, just like the Rules of Engagement imposed on the US in Somalia, her policies will cause an increase in the rate of US casualities. This, coupled with Hillary-care, confiscation of profits (”I want to take those profits…” - by the way, impacting every 401K in the country), and amnesty ought to lead to the same conservative backlash mentioned above.
Summary: Hillary is way, way, bad in the short term for conservative principles; but, in the long term the backlash will be the same. Grade Hillary - / + as well.
Senator McCain - John McCain is a war hero. He will happily tell you what he thinks. These are good things. The bad things, though, are something else. McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, the Gang of 14, Voting against the Bush tax cuts, etc. He is even against water-boarding - (the ‘torture’ safe enough for untrained coke pink demonstrators to do to each other - and not get hurt) He does things for “Patriotism, not for profit”. All this tells me is that he lacks a fundamental understanding that profits are the engine that enables us to enjoy our standard of living. Profits and property rights are the inherent quality of our republic that permit us to engage on the world stage.
Summary: In the short term, he will ‘reach across the aisle’ and make deals that sacrifice clear conservative principles; any subsequent failures will be blamed on Republicans. Thus long term, conservative principles will not re-emerge. Grade McCain as - / -.
The only candidate that will help in both the short term (Supreme Court, Economy, Iraq, etc) and long term (strengthening conservative values) is Mitt Romney. Grade him + / +.
Look at the scores, of the 4 viable candidates I will support Romney first, any Democrat second, and McCain a dead last. I am committed to conservative values first, and that order of candidates give me the best opportunity to enjoy a society that is based on those principles (at the worst in the long run).
on February 4th, 2008 at 11:41 am
As a lifelong Louisianian, I am disgusted that the LAGOP is pimping a liberal in Republican’s clothing! I’ve come to the conclusion that IF McCain gets the nomination, I PREFER that a Dem be elected. There’s not much difference b/t him and the Dems anyway; therefore, as Ms. Coulter noted:
“With Hillary, we’ll get the same ruinous liberal policies with none of the responsibility.
At least under President Hillary, Republicans in Congress would know that they’re supposed to fight back. When President McCain proposes the same ideas — tax hikes, liberal judges and Social Security for illegals — Republicans in Congress will support “our” president — just as they supported, if only briefly, Bush’s great ideas on amnesty and Harriet Miers.”
What good is “getting things done” if those things are bad for the country? “Getting things done” for the sake of compromising with liberals is not necessarily a good thing. Hitler “got things done”.
Our measure of a good leader shouldn’t be his ability to compromise and get things done but rather the substance of what he got done and whether or not it was beneficial to the country. It’s the substance that is important, not the symbolism.
After scrutinizing his record, I can only conclude that the Senator has an identity crisis if he believes he is a “conservative”:
* McCain/Feingold— The most brazen frontal assault on political speech since Buckley v. Valeo.
* McCain/Kennedy— The most far-reaching amnesty program in American history.
* McCain/Lieberman— The most onerous and intrusive attack on American industry — through reporting, regulating, and taxing authority of greenhouse gases — in American history.
* McCain/Kennedy/Edwards— The biggest boon to the trial bar since the tobacco settlement, under the rubric of a patients’ bill of rights.
* McCain/Reimportation of Drugs— A significant blow to pharmaceutical research and development, not to mention consumer safety (hey Rudy, pay attention, see link).
* McCain/ACLU- The unprecedented granting of due-process rights to unlawful enemy combatants (terrorists)
* Led the Gang of 14, which prevented the Republican leadership in the Senate from mounting a rule change that would have ended the systematic use (actual and threatened) of the filibuster to prevent majority approval of judicial nominees.
* McCain has repeatedly called for the immediate closing of Guantanamo Bay and the introduction of al-Qaeda terrorists into our own prisons — despite the legal rights they would immediately gain and the burdens of managing such a dangerous population.
on February 4th, 2008 at 11:45 am
McCain is the only GOP candidate who opposes torture.
I urge everyone to vote for him!
on February 4th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
I would simply point out that the ballot for for “Uncommitted ProLife ProFamily candidates”. That is a complex statement that could be read to mean people who were committed to a Pro Life - Pro Family candidate, but had not made up their minds yet on who that was. If they have now made their mind up that would then be acceptable, as long as the candidiate was a Pro Life - Pro Family person.
I think the bigger problem with the switchers has less to do with that they moved and more to do with who they moved to based on the perceived conservatism of the candidate.
I have no doubt whoever you choose to back will be a conservative with Pro-Life values.
on February 4th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Like His Good Buddies the Clintons He Tell The Audience Want They Want to Hear!!!!
But one minute he’s toeing the conservative line (on gay marriage, say, or immigration) and the next he’s telling someone what he really thinks.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/02/mccain200702
on February 4th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
McCain is a very dangerous candidate. He will raise taxes, is in favor of wars with countries like Iran, and is the most unchristian candidate of all.
Besides standing firm behing “Big Business” and “Special Interest Groups”, he will take America in the direction of Globalism and the NAU, which will literally erase our southern and northern borders with Canada and Mexico.
This means all illegal aliens will get Amnesty. And all illegal aliens which have committed a crime will be forgiven and a chance to make a new life all over again. AND the right to collect on our Social Security money that Americans have been paying into our system. This means uncontrolled immigration, croweded hospitals, schools, and resources.
We have got to stop this shameful traitor from becoming the republicans choice. I CERTAINLY WOULD NEVER VOTE FOR THAT MAN!
on February 4th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
In the last 7-10 years there has been solid consistency in who in the Senate Conservatives have had the most collisions with and that is John McCain. The people in his own state do not think he is a Conservative. Other than the Clintons and Ted Kennedy who is the next person the base has head butted? McCain! He currently has a 65 rating in the ranking of how he falls out regarding Conservative principles and policies. He may have an 82 over his 25 year reign in the Senate, but not currently. There is evidence from all over that McCain wants to stick it to the base, Conservatives and Evangelicals. It is beyond my comprehension as to why anyone would support a man that will destroy the GOP. Who is it that is saying McCain is the only one that can beat a Dem nominee? The liberal media! If you took some time you would know that prior to the Florida primary Romney was pulling up and gaining tremendous ground in a Romney v. Hillary race. In 24 hours he had gained 9 points and showed upwardly trending numbers. IF Obama wins, can you imagine a 72 year old up against the energized Dems for Obama? Voting for McCain out of fear is not a strong vote either; fear is not in our party platform! Speaking of party platform; does McCain and all the old, Establishment dudes hanging around him represent the party platform or do they more closely resemble the Dem platform? McCain is not a core Conservative principled man. He is a war hero by being a POW. Our nation is made up of many heroes thank God, but they have not all spent 25 years in Washington advocating for the military to be tried by international tribunals, getting rid of a prison that keeps jihadist out of our courts and our nation and they are not jumping up and down screaming look at my military records, look at my military records; your owe me! The man is a liar and I thought we have had enough of this from Washington. He has Juan Hernandez as a Hispanic liason and Juan does not believe in a American, sovereign republic. Illegal immigration defies our laws, our Constitution and the will of the America citizenry. Telling us he will “give them the g– d— fence if that is what they want, but it will not work!” is not a response that shows regard for the American people. Do you all not want a man that at least respects the American people? I want a man that runs to Conservatives and runs to Conservatism on every level; not just pro-life. Pro-life is a good start, but if the economy is not successful then how can people give money to support pro-life and Evangelical causes? I want a realist too. A man that believes he can abolish totally the IRS now or in 4 years is not a realist. Reform it or reducing taxes is a good way to start, but realistically the whole abolish the IRS thought is a tad out there. Pork is bad, but so are Entitlements and in many ways worse and very harmful to our nation. But what really makes a good candidate is one that will not attempt to start class warfare on any level! Financial and religious warfare does not benefit this nation or the very reasons we fought the British in the first place! So, it is my desire to see our nation’s delegates to go to Mitt Romney. He is by far the strongest of all the candidates in Conservatism and will propel this nation forward in a most positive direction. He is not a perfect candidate and he is not Ronald Reagan, but he is a man of integrity, intelligence and has a love of the American people and our nation that can really energize the nation and the GOP.
on February 4th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
The MSM is driving the Mc Cain bid to be the Republican candidate. The endorsements are coming from the left side of the spectrum and not from conservatives. Accomplishments by the Romney faction hardly receive a nod from the MSM so maybe that should give you a clue as to where your loyalties should be. Do you follow the MSM or follow what is the best for the country? My input is for Romney who will not sell out to the Democrat party when ‘enrichment programs’ are brought before Congress that supports Socialism.
on February 4th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
I certainly object to the state GOP party leadership strong-arming uncommitted delegates into endorsing Senator McCain.
I have the greatest respect for McCain’s military service. Unfortunately, he seems to have had an “ethics dump” when he entered political life. One of the things that really bugs me about his current campaign is that his Hispanic Outreach director is a former Mexican government official (who holds dual US/Mexican citizenship) who feels that Americans of Mexican descent owe their allegiance to Mexico first rather than to the USA.
on February 4th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
McCain’s record (particularly in the last 10 years) is not one of a true Reagan conservative.
If I have to, I will hold my nose and vote for McCain over Hillary or Obama in the fall but I certainly do not see any reason to jump on his bandwagon now.
I would ask you to remain uncommitted for as long as possible, but certainly through the election on Saturday February 9th. If McCain wins that election then he should be the nominee of the party and I am sure that he will have enough delegate votes without yours.
Stay strong in your principles. Stay uncommitted as long as you can then re-evaluate your position after the election on Saturday. I trust your judgment and I will be praying for God to give you guidance and peace about your decision.
on February 4th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
I think this pretty well sums up what Conservative Republicans think about Juan McCain. Any vote for the Huckster of RP is a vote for McCain. I once respected John McCain but he has spent his War Hero capitol and is a sell-out to his country.
The McCain campaign continues to perpetuate its Big Lie in the run-up to Super Tuesday. And thanks to MSM enablers and open-borders Republicans rooting for a McCain win, voters are swallowing the Big Lie. The Big Lie is that McCain can be trusted on immigration and border security. Dinocrat reports that the McCain campaign called him again and left a recorded message touting the shamnesty promoter’s border security credentials. Here’s the text of the call:
On the issue of immigration there is no debate that our borders are broken. There are 12 million people here illegally. I’ve listened are learned. We must secure our borders first and restore trust and confidence in our government. As President, I’ll hire new border patrol guards, build a fence, ask governors to certify that their borders are secure. The two million people who have committed crimes will be deported immediately. No one will be rewarded for illegal behavior. They’ll go the the back of the line, pay fines and learn English. For those already in our country, there will be no special privileges, and we’ll punish employers who hire illegal immigrants. We’ll be humane and compassionate, but we will be firm. It’s a matter of national security.
According to the WaPo/ABC News poll released this weekend, 47% of respondents said McCain was the candidate they trusted most on immigration; 22% said Romney; 10% chose Huckabee; and 5% went with Paul.
If those voters knew about Juan Hernandez and Jerry Perenchio, McCain would be in single-digit Paul territory.
You want straight talk? McCain’s tongue says he’s “listened and learned.” But his heart is with La Raza, the militantly ethnocentric, anti-immigration enforcement Hispanic lobbying group that honored him in 1999 and whose annual conference he keynoted in 2004.
Go back and watch McCain on the Senate floor during the amnesty debate. Refresh your memories. Here he is comparing guest-worker tax treatment to Jim Crow laws:
Let me remind you of how he and his good friend Teddy Kennedy engaged in nauseating identity politics straight out of the Raza playbook. From May 25, 2006, these are the true, extremist views of John McCain:
An extraordinary exchange just took place on the Senate floor over the last 40 minutes. It’s the most important debate of the year, in my opinion.
The questions are these: Who do we let into this country and how many?
On one side of the debate: Democrat Sen. Jeff Bingaman of N.M. and Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama.
On the other side, the blubbering open-borders duo of GOP Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Democrat Sen. Teddy Kennedy of Massachusetts.
Bingaman is offering an amendment to cap the number of visas for legal permanent residents at 650,000. The current Senate immigration bill essentially obliterates the current employer-based green card cap of 140,000. Spouses and children currently count against that cap. Under the Senate bill, that would no longer be true. There would be, in effect, no limits. Bingaman’s cap would be four times the current rate–yet both McCain and Kennedy are responding hysterically as if Bingaman has proposed some human rights crackdown on the world.
When Bingaman pointed out the need for prudence in opening the floodgates to unlimited numbers of low-skilled workers, both McCain and Kennedy pulled the race card. McCain’s immediate response was to sputter that the “Chamber of Commerce, unions, and Hispanic groups” oppose the caps! McCain called it un-American to be selective about whom we let into this country. Yeah, he did.
When McCain accused Bingaman of “discriminating against” poor immigrants, Bingaman pointed out that the McCain-Kennedy bill itself had a 290,000 cap. No response from the Open-Borders Tag Team.
Sen. Tom Coburn, a staunch amnesty opponent, has endorsed McCain. He’s letting bygones be bygones in the spirit of senatorial collegiality.
But I remind you that McCain refused to support Coburn’s amendment to the shamnesty bill calling for full enforcement of our immigration laws.
And here’s a reminder of John McCain’s “leadership” from June 2007 via the Washington Times:
Often lost in the big picture coverage of major legislative issues like the now-troubled Bush-Kennedy immigration bill are the little moments that say everything about how Washington works. They’re the little moments that your legislators don’t want you to know about and figure will never make it back home through the media.
But Stephen Dinan, our excellent national political reporter who has led the way for months on coverage of immigration legislation, captured this priceless moment in his story this morning as the supporters of the bill struggled to keep it together.
The late-night vote was on an amendment that would require illegal aliens who get legal status to have a minimum level of health insurance. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat who is the chamber’s most liberal member, was — not surprisingly — opposed.
Writes Mr. Dinan: “Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and John McCain of Arizona both went to check with Mr. Kennedy before casting their votes to match his. Soon after, (Arizona Republican Sen. Jon) Kyl also switched his vote to match Mr. Kennedy’s.”
The amendment was defeated.
And let’s remember McCain pulling the threat-of-violence card in support of immigration capitulation: If we don’t give in, it’ll be like the banlieus in France!
Crooked talk: He says he’ll build the fence.
Straight talk: He resents what he calls the “V********V fence.”
John McCain and La Raza-The Race share a deep-seated contempt for grass-roots conservatives who worked successfully to defeat the disastrous amnesty bill. And they share a common impulse to marginalize their political opponents as “haters.”
Thus, La Raza-The Race has launched a new “We Can Stop the Hate” campaign–smack dab in the middle of the campaign season–to redefine tough policy criticism from the Right as “hate.” They protest that it is “racist” and out-of-bounds to talk about reconquista–even as the McCain campaign boasts a “Mexico First/”Just A Region”/”Free Flow of People” outreach director who’s practicing it out in the open for the leading GOP presidential front-runner.
Yes, an ethnic separatist group that calls itself “The Race”–a group that has embraced John McCain and vice versa–has the gall to crusade against “hate.” Chris Kelly notes that La Raza-The Race head Janet Murguia is calling for networks to keep immigration enforcement proponents of the airwaves and that both La Raza-The Race and another open-borders group are pushing for Fairness Doctrine policies to shut up their foes.
Read it:
Ms. Murguia argued that hate speech should not be tolerated, even if such censorship were a violation of First Amendment rights: “Everyone knows there is a line sometimes that can be crossed when it comes to free speech. And when free speech transforms into hate speech, we’ve got to draw that line. And that’s what we’re doing here today. And we need to make sure that network executives will hold their people accountable and not cross that line.”
Murgia praised McCain and looks forward to the “tapering down” of immigration enforcement efforts if he wins the White House: “With his emergence as a leading Republican presidential primary contender, I do think that we’ll see this toned down… Does it mean that we know everything he’s going to do in that area of reform? And I know he’s got his work cut out for him with a number of people, and we’ll see him put this whole platform together, but we do believe that if he ends up being in a lead role here, we think that that issue will be tapered down.”
No respect for the rule of law. No respect for the First Amendment.
Like John McCain said: “I’ll rely on people to judge me by the company that I keep.”
The company John McCain keeps:
Russ Feingold.
Teddy Kennedy.
Lindsay Grahamnesty.
Juan “Mexico First/Free Flow” Hernandez.
Jerry “Spanish first” Perenchio. Geraldo Rivera.
La Raza.
Charles Keating.
John Kerry.
The New York Times.
1mcmont.jpg
***
The late GOP Rep. Charlie Norwood of Georgia told the truth about La Raza-The Race and refused to be mau-maued. I’m reprinting his response in full:
It is with great amusement that I read the National Council of La Raza’s (NCLR) defense [from its president and CEO Janet Murguia.] against the facts contained in my article, “The Truth About ‘La Raza,’” that appeared in HUMAN EVENTS, April 10,2006. Instead of addressing the troubling facts outlined in the article, NCLR still seeks to hide from the truth through shrewd distractions.
Murguia claims: “Rep. Norwood mistranslates our name as the National Council of ‘the race.’ The actual definition of ‘La Raza’ is ‘people,’ referring to the Hispanic people or community.”
According to whom? The online encyclopedia Wikipeidia translation reads, “La raza: Spanish: ‘The race.’” Ditto with www.freetranslation.com, translation2.paralink.com, www.freedict.com/onldict/spa.html. But here’s even more online fun: Type in “National Council of the RACE” on Google, the world’s number one search engine, and it will take you straight to NCLR’s home page. Case closed.
NCLR’s second objection is where the real deception becomes glaring: “NCLR did not receive $15.2 million in federal grants last year and no federal funds of any kind were used to fund get-out-the-vote efforts or for any political purpose.”
By “last year” my article refers to the last fiscal year reported by NCLR on its official website, which is fiscal year 2004. NCLR very cleverly fails to mention this fact, even though they surely knew precisely where the $15.2 million the article mentioned was coming from.
According to page 48 of the National Council of La Raza Consolidated Statements of Activities, Year Ended September 30,2004, NCLR itself reports it received $15,170,182 in federal grants. [See Figure 1 on page 9.] In the same statement, under “Advocacy and Electoral Empowerment” NCLR reports on page 27, “while in 2002 activities centered on Get-Out-The-Vote (GOTV) efforts, in 2004 the project expanded to include voter registration, modest GOTV, and some elements of election protection,” and reports on page 48 that it spent $327,585 directly on “Legislative Advocacy” and another $2,611,827 on “Research, Advisory, and Legislation”-all while receiving that $15.2 million in federal grants.
Did NCLR’s receipt of $15.2 million in federal funds allow them to redirect other donations towards their combined $2.9 million in political activities? You be the judge.
But the real outrage in NCLR’s objections to the article is their disingenuous denial of their links to radical, racist and anti-American groups: “NCLR … unequivocally rejects, the motto Tor La Raza Todo, Fuera de la Raza Nada.’ (For The Race everything, for those outside The Race nothing.)”
No group can “unequivocally reject” a position while quietly paying out money to groups that support it, which is exactly what NCLR does.
The motto in question is that of the radical group MEChA and can be found online at the homepage of the Georgetown University MEChA Chapter. On the same site, you can read Georgetown MEChA’s Constitution, which contains the requirement that Georgetown MEChA maintain current membership in NCLR.
The Internal Revenue Service reports NCLR was actively funding the Georgetown University MEChA Chapter as recently as 2003, as documented in NCLR’s IRS Form 990, 2002 Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax, Exhibit 1, Page 1. [See Figure 2 on page 9.]
If NCLR is sincere in objecting to the facts in the article they should have no problem publicly agreeing to all six points mentioned in my article:
1. Denounce the motto “For La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada,” as repugnant, racist, and totally incompatible with American society or citizenship-and stop funding groups who support it.
2. Acknowledge the right of all Americans to live wherever they choose in the U.S. without segregation.
3. Commit to sponsorship of nationwide educational programs to combat racism and anti-Semitism in the Hispanic community.
4. Denounce and sever all ties with MEChA and other organizations which hold to the racist doctrines held by MEChA.
5. Acknowledge our borders, the democratic right of U.S. citizens to determine immigration policy, and the right of the U.S. to enforce immigration law and secure its borders against unauthorized entry.
6. Repudiate all claims that current American territory rightfully belongs to Mexico.
Based on the documented and independently verified statements in the original article, not only does HUMAN EVENTS owe no correction to NCLR, NCLR owes the entire American public an apology for deceptively supporting groups seeking to undermine our national unity and sovereignty.
But perhaps the best solution would be for NCLR, from this day forward, to simply start living by the six points above.
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/02/04/john-mccain-la-razas-voice-in-washington/
on February 4th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
If McCain is the GOP nominee I will not - repeat WILL NOT - vote for him.
“McCain’s record (particularly in the last 10 years) is not one of a true Reagan conservative.”
He does not represent me, my views, or my vote. I would rather cast my ballot for a Democrat then a RINO.
on February 4th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
It seems we no longer really pick the candidates but have MSM and other forces such as the CFR picking our candidates for us otherwise McCain would Not have gotten this far and certainly would not be running in first place.
A note to Madd Chatter.
The info about Dr. Paul saying we are to blame for 9-11 is a myth.What he said which you an read at his campaign web site is they are abosolutely responsible and he even is trying to pass a bill to stop givig student visas to young people from terrorist countries.
It could be this mis-information about Dr. Paul was spread by those forces who know,if he were president,he would get us out of Nafta, Cafta,WTO,stop birthright citizenship and end Illgal Immigration and give our freedom back.
on February 4th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
BREAKING NEWS: ROMNEY ENDORSED BY National Writers Syndicate
ENDORSEMENT:
National Writers Syndicate .com [NWS] Endorses Governor Mitt Romney
For President of the United States
Read more…at http://www.nationalwriterssyndicate.com
on February 4th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
If McCain is nominated I will stay home.I am a conservative voter and have voted Republican in every Presidential election since 1968.John McCain,in my opinion , is not a conservative.If he is nominated the Republican base will stay home,assuring a Democratic win.He is the candidate of liberals and the pro-amnesty groups.This should speak volumes about how he will govern if selected.
on February 4th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Why is it that no one talks about how McCain seriously considered leaving the Republican party in 2000? Why is it that no one thinks it’s relevant that McCain was John Kerry’s first choice for VP in 2004?
John McCain couldn’t be much more against Republican principles if he tried….and he does try.
Here’s a man who repeatedly seems to consider profit a criminal enterprise. Who thinks the pharmaceutical companies and oil companies are the enemy. Maybe John McCain can tell us exactly how many life saving drugs the US Government has invented in the last few decades?
God forbid McCain wins in Nov. Can you imagine what Kennedy and crew have in store when they can count on the ‘Republican’ president to rubber stamp all their liberal economy shattering policies in the name of ‘getting things done?’
The Republicans reward in 2012 for electing the ‘electable’ candidate would be the Dems being able to lay our devastated economy and society at the feet of the incumbent business-hating, class warfare spewing, ‘Republican’ president.
John McCain despises us and is fairly open about showing it.
Don’t you find it amazing how all the Dems say McCain’s the one they’re worried about? Do you think the New York Times would have endorsed him if they thought for a minute the he might actually win in November? Come on. The reason all the talking heads are trashing Romney is because he is the LAST person they want to face in a general election. If McCain wins the Republican nomination, the Dems have already won because both candidates will be big government, nanny state, economy-bashing, dittohead, Dems.
If we’re going to have Democratic policies devastating our economy and our society for the next 4 years, it should come from a Democrat so the voters know exactly who to blame in 2012 and Republicans can come back in a tidal wave that would make the 1994 revolution look like a anthill compared to Mount Everest.
How far have we regressed when JFK’s “Ask not what your country can do for you” has been replaced with today’s message of you can’t do anything for yourself unless we (the government) choose to grant it to you.
McCain’s ability to survive in Vietnam is heroic but he has become a typical idiotic Washington RINO dinosaur who has shown us over and over that his grasp on domestic issues barely matches those of typical government school first graders.
McCain will wind up with 0% of the conservative vote after those of us who will vote for Hillary cancel out those who decided to vote for him against their principles and the rest decide to sit this one out. For McCain to win he’d not only need about 100% of independents but he’d also need a fair share of Democrats to make it a race.
Do any of you really believe the Clintons have any fear of losing to McCain when they have praised him so consistently? And what do you think the main stream media will do once McCain’s wrapped up the nomination? He’ll be lucky to get 2% of the articles about him to have anything nice to say. Then he’ll eventually blow his cool and the media will hit him relentlessly as not having the right temperament for the job. Imagine how far the media could run with that to portray the Republican Party as the party of ‘angry white men’ (all Al Gore, Michael Moore, etc. proof to the contrary.)
Let’s save them the trouble (and ourselves the heartache.) John McCain is about 99% as bad as Hillary Clinton and if we’re going to have the class-warfare, profit is criminal, taxes are too low, gun confiscating, more government is the solution, and amnesty policies of the Democratic party, we want to make sure it’s by a Democrat so voters will be clear as to who to blame in 2012 when those policies inevitably wreck the economy, our society, and ultimately cripple our ability to defend ourselves from those who wish us harm.
on February 4th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
I feel strongly that those who have recently jumped to the McCain bandwagon have done so not because they see him as the best candidate; but that they perceive him as the Republican’s best chance of defeating the Democrats.
That’s not a great reason for electing a President — when Mitt Romney (and perhaps others) are seriously better leadership material than McCain, and less of a loose canon.
Here we are, many months away from the election, and we have tied our own hands because of a fatalistic view that the war is already over.
Better by far to organize and steer than to follow by hanging on to a tail — connected to a dog we are really quite afraid of.
It’s not over, unless you treat the election as if it is.
on February 4th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Please vote for Mitt Romney. He is intelligent, sensible, very level-headed. He will make for a great president. We cannot afford to have John McCain in the White House.
on February 4th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
First and foremost, John McCain is not a conservative. Based on who he has aligned himself with and programs/bill that he has supported in the past, he is no better than the most liberal Democrat out there.
I personally cannot support a candidate who flagrantly disregards The Constitution as it relates to the First Amendment (McCain/Feingold), and the security of our borders and the value of American citizenship (McCain/Kennedy’s Amnesty Bill).
While not the ideal conservative candidate, Mitt Romney is the only hope remaining for November.
Thank you from a LA resident of 23yrs. for taking the time to ask the conservative population here in Louisiana for our opinion.
on February 4th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
My wife and I are life long Republicans. While we feel that only McCain and Romney have a chance at beating one of the two Democrats in the election, our first choice is Romney.
As I was drafted in 1966 under Johnson, and served during the Viet Nam era, I respect McCain, but I also feel he is too far to the left, especially on matters of immigration.
We also believe that voted uncommitted members should remain uncommitted until it is the proper time to commit, so we feel as you do.
A Mrs Argiro Morgan stopped at our house and chatted with my wife. I was off on an errand run and missed her nice visit.
t
Thank you for your efforts in this matter
Dr and Mrs Tony Miranda
on February 4th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Charles said it very well above.
Short form:
Uncommitted = Uncommitted.
I assume this means that you are to use YOUR best judgement (as we hope all elected representitives do) at the convention. You were elected to do that - stay the course. It will change nothing. This is merely a cynical attempt by one side to get support that it has not earned.
I support Fred Thompson (yes I know he left the field). By doing so I hope in my small incremental way to have my voice heard. Romney is a very distant second in my thinking.
I recommend that you go to the convention and TALK it through with your fellow delegates. There you can do the job you were elected to do using your judgement - not the substituted will of the herd.
on February 4th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
I understand the political season is full of lies, half-truths, and innuendos. I won’t add to any of those.
If the GOP choses John McCain, come November I will, God willing, be voting Straight D (might as well be “in for a pound”, as they say) or writing in another Republican candidate’s name.
I feel no loyalty to the party of George W. “Amnesty” Bush, Alberto “Amnesty” Gonzales, Mel “Amnesty” Martinez, John “Amnesty” McCain, Lindsey “Amnesty” Graham, Johnny “We Prosecute the Border Patrol, not the Drug Smugglers” Sutton, Tom “Funding Irregularities” Delay, Mark “Pedophile” Foley, Larry “Wide Stance” Craig, Ted “Earmarks” Stevens, and Arlen “Investigate the NFL, Won’t Appoint Conservative Judges” Specter.
I’m sorry that many good and honorable men and women are associated with the same group of unamerican thugs. I won’t sully their names by mentioning them in the same post.
on February 4th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
I am not a Louisiana resident. Hell, I don’t even live in the south.
I am a Massachusetts Conservative.
Yes, there are a few of us here that have not been beaten to a pulp yet.
The perspective I CAN give is one of life under Romney as Governor.
The problem with this perspective is that even with a full term as Governor, it is hard to tell where he stands as 87% of the State legislature is Democrat controlled, and has been for some time. What I CAN say is the following:
1. Romney did make at least a semblance of an effort to push through the Anti Gay Marriage state constitutional amendment (before the legislature killed it).
2. During his time here, he appeared to make a consistent effort for overall fiscal responsibility.
3. To those who won’t vote for him because of his religion, I can at NO time remember a case of him pushing his religion in the name of politics. He seemed to be guided by it instead of being controlled by it.
Now, the downsides.
1. Some of the most draconian gun laws in the country came to be under his watch, and he did not put up ANY fight against them.
2. At times, he seemed almost disinterested in the job in general, like it was just a stopping point on the way to his next gig.
While I have almost as many philosophical differences with Romney as I do McCain, I can tell you that the former is LIGHT YEARS beyond the latter when it comes to the danger to our country I perceive if elected.
In closing, I ask that for the sake of our Country’s best interests, AND the world’s, that you choose Romney over McCain.
on February 4th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Ron Paul is a fruitcake–(thats for Karen, Madd Chatter had it right), and in some ways worse than John McCain (of which plenty has been said in previous posts).
But let me say something about Mike Huckabee:, although a minister, he hardly acts Christian-like when he accuses his opponents of buying endorsements and the like. Huckabee is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, hoping Evangelicals flock towards him simply because he is a preacher. We dont need a preacher in the White House who will “champion” Christian causes; we need someone capable of efficiently running government in a Conservative manner.
Romney is the only viable Republican left (considering Fred Thompson’s gone, of course). He’s got The business experience to be the ONLY candidate that can talk reality about the economy and all the other positions that Conservatives here in LA need in a candidate. Please support Romney.
on February 4th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Do you mean open-borders “Juan” McCain? I say NO WAY!!! Mitt Romney all the way.
‘Nuff said from here in St Charles Parish
RF Hickey
on February 4th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
Well, have we got here? It seems our country has reached an even deeper low than I ever thought ever possible, with even our own party delegates abandoning conservative voters & silencing their voices before the first vote is even cast.
There will of course be an unprecedented backlash, like no one has ever seen against the Republican party, with the complete destruction of the Party being almost imminent in part due to the rogue actions of uncommitted delegates in Louisiana.
True Conservatives know that John McCain is not one of us, & that he has been bought & paid for by the left in this country. Yet these “uncommitted delegates” care not about principle, but rather being on what they are guessing will be the winning team, complete with a locker room party, & a future of lucrative endorsements & political favors.
As a result, I propose that if these rogue delegates around the country insist on handing us a pseudo Conservative to vote for, than we should write in the names of real Conservatives. I have already decided that should McCain get the nomination, I will write in Conservative columnist & writer Michelle Malkin as my choice in the general election. In the words of the great Ronald Reagan, I want to remind the Republican Party that I didn’t leave you, YOU left me, & every other real Conservative. After the last few years of not being able to recognize you apart from the Democrats, I hereby official disown you, & your chameleon delegates. It’s time for a new party. I leave you with this:
Don’t you love farce?
My fault I fear.
I thought that you’d want what I want.
Sorry, my dear.
But where are the clowns?
Quick, send in the clowns.
Don’t bother, they’re here.
~ Dan Lee
on February 4th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
I would be interested to hear from people who ran on the Uncommitted ProLife ProFamily ticket in Louisiana. Have you switched to McCain as reported in the press release? If so, what was the basis for your decision?
Evodna Springer
VoteTheRecord.com
4th Congressional District, Uncommitted ProLife ProFamily Delegate
NOT Committed to John McCain
on February 4th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
I just do not understand how and why McCain is getting is getting ahead. I am convinced that he would say and do anything to get elected. He wants no immigration enforcement, amnesty, and I just think that he will cater to what the Dem’s Majority wants. I don’t trust him, I don’t think that he is a level headed person who puts thought into what he says. If he wins the nomination, I am voting Democratic all the way. McCain is simply a snake! Sorry if I offend anyone, but I just don’t get it.
on February 4th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
As a Republican, my disgust with our representation is on all levels. This par for course in our current state of you can kiss my a## politics. We don’t count, our voices are not heard and we are irrelevant until time to vote. Then it’s listen to what I say and don’t look my past record because I am what I tell you. John McCain is a traitor to the conservative cause and a liar about his conservative principles. Old, crotchity and dishonest. And this is choice foisted on us by the RNC, media and RINOs.
This whole process is just another step towards communism via socialism via the elitist ringmasters of the Republican and Democrat parties. The lines are blurred because they’re all the same. It’s time for a change with none in sight!
on February 4th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
I cannot and will not support McCain. His OWN MOTHER said that we will have to take him like it or not. Conservatives do not fall in line like good little sheep when we are told to.
But its on principles that I will not support McCain. You can read about them here:
http://dailypundit.com/?p=29500
This should be enough to put your support behind Mitt Romney. Fred Thompson was my first choice (of course!) but Mitt gets the important stuff right. McCain will play good little puppy to the Dems and that’s the last thing we need.
Shelly F. Hynes, M.S.
14 year resident of Natchitoches
on February 4th, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Sen. McCain scares me. He’s so NOT a conservative! I know that there are a lot of things that go on behind closed doors that tilt things in every election, but having John McCain as the Republican candidate just scares me. He’s a hot head and I’m not sure of his family values. Besides, the ILLEGAL alien amnesty issue… I, personally, think any delagate needs to vote as those who voted for them would support the candidates. But, I fear for the Republican Party if they support a candidate who is so similar to the Democratic candidates. Personally, I think Mitt Romney is the only, truly conservative in the lot of those running for President! His family values and other core values are very conservative and he lives the principles he’s running on.
I did not vote during the LA caucus–simply because I didn’t learn it was happening until that day and didn’t every hear where to go to vote. I was disappointed because caucusing is so ill advertised here. I am, however, a registered Republican.
on February 4th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Cannot support McCain and the fact that I have no say in the matter is pretty unhelpful to my continued support of the Republican Party. There is a donation envelope that is sitting on my desk. Promised them 150.00 then by the time the envelope arrived McCain had won. It will sit there until either he loses the nomination or he is defeated in the General Election and the Republican party repents from its amnesty ways.
John McCain is a liar.
He loves finding common ground with Liberal Democrats.
He wants to take away my tax cuts
Amnesty
And finally he is unstable.
on February 4th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
My prayers are with you, Evodna. If I may, please visit my website: www.lifeoftheparty.typepad.com I am a pro-life blogger and did not come to my decision lightly to endorse Ron Paul. I hope you will read the Ron Paul archives as I have done my best to make the case for pro-lifers to vote for Ron Paul.
on February 4th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
The daily pundit link Shiela Hynes posted is a good summary that I wish all delegates would ponder upon.
Especially this one,
“I believe my party has gone astray. I think the Democratic Party is a fine party, and I have no problems with it, in their views and in their philosophy.”
McCain said this in 2004 when speaking at a DEMOCRAT Party shindig at the time he was being TOUTED by the MSM and quite a few Democrats (and maybe McCain himself?) for a possible shot as Kerry’s VP nominee. ”
and, this one:
“He also voted for the Specter amendment, which provided that the government of Mexico, among others, would have to be consulted before building physical barriers along the southern border. Six months later, McCain says he was wrong.”
And, I don’t have the links handy; but, McCain has said that he is favor of gay marriage if all it menas is some kind of ceremony. He is also in favor of federal funds for embryonic stem cell research He has also said that he doesn’t care about the social issues. He also recently said that he would pass the amnesty bill that came to his desk, later when asked in the debates simply said that it wouldn’t come to his desk.
I don’t live in LA. Good luck. I support Romney.
on February 4th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Vote Romney! Don’t be bullied into voting for John Kerry’s proposed running mate.
on February 4th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
I will never support John McCain. & we need to think twice about McCain.
on February 4th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
First, for the Uncommitted delegates in LA that feel like they have been duped. Contact your “election” commission and file a FORMAL complaint. That starts a paper trail and that may be needed. Second, ask your AG to start an immediate investigation and run this by your new governor. The state GOP should be sanitioned by RNC, I’ll contact my state GOP HQ and offer a complaint on your behalf. If other good conservatives do the same then we will make sure it gets to the RNC. The RNC has been calling me wanting more money but I said NO. With McCain been forced upon us I will not give one red cent. The lady who called said she’s been hearing that allot. That’s another avenue the folks who feel like McCain is being forced down our throats. Next time the RNC call..you tell what you think and don’t give them a penny.
Good luck to my friends in LA and thanks for letting Michelle know because it will get picked up by other true conservatives.
Last, DO NOT REMAIN QUITE. Yell to the highest mountain. We’ll keep your message a live.
Good Luck
A friend in TN - Fredhead forever
on February 4th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
A Hawk for Ron Paul:
http://thereaganwing.wordpress.com/2008/02/02/part-5-one-man-two-first-names-ron-paul-the-stone-rejected/trackback/
on February 4th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Please stay uncommitted until our election…give us our voices for you to consider…
on February 5th, 2008 at 1:02 am
I love what Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul has done throughout his tenure in Congress–he has always voted his PRINCIPLES even if he was the only one. He never looked to the consequences and rationalized what would occur IF he had not worked the big “deal” (compromise) instead of holding out.
The result? The Ron Paul rEVOLution!
Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate that is truly conservative and espouses the principles that you have mentioned. He is still in the race and he is is viable (he has won many more delegates than the press has cared to mention–can you say “propaganda”??)
If you are a principled person, you have to vote consistent with your conscience! You are accountable for your choice, not for the outcome of the multitude.
I pray that you will make the right choice!
Blessings–Cherie
www.ronpaul2008.com (check out his position on the issues—he is the real deal and walks the talk.)
on February 5th, 2008 at 4:52 am
Bravo Evodna. Stick to your guns and remain uncommitted. Do not let the state GOP push you around and force you to commit to anyone before the Primary occurs. After the primary, it is up to you whether or not you support the winner. I hope you do because after reading your post you seem a most thoughtful delegate, the kind of person I would want at the National GOP convention to ensure that our Conservative principals are upheld and to force our candidate to agree to them. Good luck.
on February 5th, 2008 at 6:45 am
Vote Huckabee.
Every vote for Huckabee at this time is a vote for the Fair Tax. If you haven’t actually researched the fairtax for yourself at this point, please do. It is the most revolutionary change our country can make at this time. It is more than a mechanism to collect taxes. It is a way to take the power away from the lobbyists and return it to the people.
on February 5th, 2008 at 6:49 am
Look where the conservative voices have turned-Mitt Romney. Those who make their life leading the conservative movement have backed Mitt, because he’s the only conservative that can stop McCain. Sure people hoping for jobs have endorsed McCain, because he appears to be leading, but if you care about good government, then it’s Mitt.
on February 5th, 2008 at 6:58 am
Kay Katz, the National Republican Committeewoman, is an automatic delegate and does NOT qualify for an elected position on any ballot. Yet she proceded to get on the Dist. 5 ballot in spite of knowing it was against the rules. Please work on getting her disqualified, her buddies at the LAGOP won’t help.
on February 5th, 2008 at 7:09 am
“Like the other Uncommitteds across the state, I received a number of phone calls with pleas for my IMMEDIATE switch to McCain.”
Who paid for these phone calls? Why are they so interested in destroying a democratic process in which the votes represent the people, and not special interests or corporations? Why would any delegate accept such a phone call as legitimate? Are delegates really that gullible?
on February 5th, 2008 at 7:11 am
Please post the complete phone numbers of the people who called you, to switch to McCain. Some analysis needs to be done to determine who placed these calls and who paid for them. Then a press release needs to be sent out to the local and independent media across the country.
on February 5th, 2008 at 7:15 am
I am another of the disgusted Conservative Republican voters who is fed up with the rush to McCain. I feel a disaster is forthcoming if the national media and weak kneeded national politicans force McCain down our throats. I note that Mr. Bob Dole endorsed McCain yesterday; more the reason to question the choice. McCain has been running for president for several years and it showed in his miserable recent voting record and conduct. Please do not commit to him. We must have better.
on February 5th, 2008 at 7:46 am
The arguments used in the phone calls which I received from those who were pressuring me to switch from Uncommitted to McCain included:
1.) McCain is the only pro-life candidate who can defeat pro-abortion Hillary or OBama.
2.) McCain will appoint judicial constitutional constructionists who won’t Ilegislate from the bench. (Used w/point 1)
3.) If we gave support immediately (last week), McCain promises to return to Louisiana after elected to campaign for conservatives such as Woody Jenkins who are considering challenging U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu. (Jenkins is perhaps the most notable pro-life figure in Louisiana, and was also elected on the Uncommitted ticket for his district. I don’t know where Jenkins stands presently.)
4.) McCain will give Louisiana “access” to him once elected.
Many of the Uncommitteds are primarily single issue pro-life voters, and it is highly likely that items 1 & 2 were foremost in their decision to switch to McCain.
Evodna
on February 5th, 2008 at 9:10 am
James Dobson just said if it’s McCain or Dems in nov. he won’t vote,personally. The three are are too “virulently anti-family”.I agree
on February 5th, 2008 at 9:46 am
Romney, Romney, Romney.
on February 5th, 2008 at 11:24 am
ROMNEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOT MCCAIN - He is NOT a conservative!!!!!!
Elizabeth Miller
on February 5th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Having read yesterday, of this Republican delegate’s issue, and getting some more information on LA election laws, my conclusion is that party politics exist for the benefit of those who run the parties and not for the nation.
Apparently the insider club of both major parties, the Republicrats and Demopublicans, have conspired over the years to insure, under color of law, that there are no genuinely fair and free elections in this country. The bulk of the citizenry, can not meaningfully participate in the process, and it seems neither can the party delegats.
Apparently, the best either a citizen or a party delegate can do, is to rubber stamp one or the other of the designated prince pretenders, either tweedle dumb, or tweedle dee.
LA should outlaw it’s discriminatory closed primaries, and enfranchise all the legitimate citizens of the state. In fact Federal law is probably the better way to do that, nation wide, so all American, CITIZENS can have a real voice.
McCain’s, empower the illegal immigrant voter assistance, and anti free speech bills should be repealed and the judges who upheald them should be impeached for stupidity. Positive picture identification of registered voters should be required, nationally and locally.
A nation that cannot, or will not protect it’s own children, born or unborn, it’s own borders, and the integrity of it’s elections, is as doomed as an unconcious person when a vulture comes to pick at the eyes, to see if the meal is dead.
Considering the mess that the joint insider club has made of this country since WW 2, and because they have performance dysfunction, it’s time for both of them to give up the ghost.
The next discovery made about LA politics: If Jesus Christ Himself showed up, and offered Himself as a presidential candidate, he would not be allowed on the ballot in LA, because His party isn’t registerd with the state as having 40,000 members.
Just another way for the insiders to protect the insiders.
Shamefull!
And, not only shamefull, with the problems facing us in the future, quite possibly terminal.
on February 5th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
I read the op-ed from Stephanie Grace in this morning’s TimesPic and was appalled to read what is going on with our state Gop caucuses, I didn’t even know there were caucuses in La. And
Thought I was keeping pretty informed with whats going on with the presidential election in general.
However I have been wondering what was going on in our back yard since I hadn’t heard much about our Louisiana primary. So after reading about the shenanigans going on with the uncommitted delegates I decided do a little research on my computer, then I found you and your request to hear from the rank and file Republicans
Well, I,m a happy wife and mother and a proud American conservative registered Republican, definitely put me on the record
UNCOMMITTED DELEGATES THAT WERE VOTED TO BE UNCOMMITTED PROLIFE-PROFAMILY
BY THE VOTERS ARE TO STAY UNCOMMITTED TO A PARTICULAR CANDIDATE UNTIL THE STATE CONVENTION
AND NOT BE “RAILROADED” TO SUPPORT EARLY A LIBERAL REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE LIKE JOHN MCCAIN .
I DID NOT VOTE January 22 AND I BELIEVE THE DELEGATES SHOULD REMAIN UNCOMMITTED UNTIL
THE NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONVENTION, THIS IS A “UNIQUE’” CONTEST THIS YEAR BEST TO WAIT
UNTIL THE NATIONAL CONVENTION
THANK YOU VERY MUCH KEEP UP YOUR GOOD WORK YOU ARE A GOOD CONSERVATIVE AMERICAN
{Courtesy of Xiomara Bourgeois}
on February 6th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
I live out here in AZ. McCain is not our guy. He has opposed every measure that we have used to curb the problem of Southern Boarder Incursion. (I am tired of the other term). We have done what Mitt Romney has suggested. We have sent our National Guard down to the boarder to secure the boarder, the best we can without Federal help. Then we took the next step, we held employers responsible for who they employ. So far we just have anecdotal evidence that people are just leaving. My sister lives in a low rent apartment complex here and has personally seen this happen.
I bring this up because McCain claims that he made this mistake on immigration once. That is a lie. He claims that he has not done one thing to help Arizona, and is proud of that. He claims that he would still veto the family tax cuts that helped give my family back the money that my husband worked so hard for. He is son record as saying he would bomb Iran, joke or not, he said it. He does not understand that facts are facts.
Another thing that is a major issue for me is that America needs a president who understands the economy. No matter how you feel about Reagan, Bush Senior, and Bush Junior, they understand how the economy works. McCain does not!!!
on February 6th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
There is a strong consensus forming around Mitt Romney as the Republican candidate most consistently and strongly aligned with conservative and pro-family values and positions. We hear it most potently from our friends in conservative talk radio, who also seem to understand how dangerous John McCain is to the future of conservatism and the Republican Party as we know and value it today.
Thanks for asking for input. I hope you will support Mitt Romney on behalf of conservatives across America, regardless of moderates and liberals in the party trying to hijack the party processes to make McCain the nominee.
on February 6th, 2008 at 11:50 pm
I’ve posted this on Gatewaypundit’s site and Reliapundit’s site.
Another fellow Hannity.com forum member posted it there as well and we’re commenting on it.
Everyone here who is upset with this should post it on 3-5 different sites and begin calling the phone number on the PDF….write letters of protest to the board of electors in Louisiana.
I’m from Chicago….best wishes. Don’t be taken for fools.
on February 7th, 2008 at 1:28 am
Neither McCain or Romney are true conservatitives. They both have flip-flopped on key issues in the past few years, especially when the time to run for office came around. McCain tried to limit free speech and said he wouldn’t seek to overturn Roe v. Wade. He also voted against Bush’s tax cuts and voted to give illegal immigrants social security benifits. Romney said, he was pro-choice and signed into law a state health care plan that pays for abortions. Both of these men have proven by their record that they cannot be trusted to hold the same views.McCain has already proven that he can’t win the conservative vote and Romney can’t win the evangelical vote both of which must be gotten if we are going to win. If we are going to elect a republican president we need to be able to see that he has a consistent record on the core issues that we believe in.
Mike Huckabee is the only candidate that has shown to be true when it comes to the issues. His commitment to America is strong and he can unify the country. That why I urge everyone to vote for him especially if we expect to keep what we have gained these past eight years.
on February 7th, 2008 at 9:22 am
Evodna,
You have my utmost respect. McCain has shown over the last 8 years that he sides with Democrats more than Republicans. He does not deserve the GOP nomination and will not get the conservative vote. A John McCain candidacy is a replay of the GOP establishment backing the RINO Gerald Ford in ‘76 and will inevitably go down in defeat this November.
on February 9th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
Mitt Romney…hands down. He’s brilliant, a great speaker, debater, and leader. If the country was allowed to see the real him instead ot the ultr-liberal biased media trashing of him, he would win going away.
on February 11th, 2008 at 2:46 am
Hi - just wanted to say good design and blog .
on February 11th, 2008 at 8:34 am
Evodna:
Mike Huckabee won the Louisiana primary and he won by large margins in Northwest Louisiana. He should get some delegates. No candidate got more than 50% of the votes so as I understand the rules, neither McCain nor Huckabee should get all of the delegates but they should split them. In perfect world, they would split the delegates in the same percentage as the election but we know McCain will get the lion’s share.
Stay strong. Huckabee is not perfect and he was never my first choice but he is more conservative than McCain.
I would ask that you vote for Mike Huckabee at the Louisiana Convention.
on February 13th, 2008 at 12:00 am
My Mom and I are both Republicans and we will never vote for John McCain. I think the party needs to rethink their candidate of choice. I want limited government, my rights protected, and to be left alone to live my life with my family. The government is too big, and needs to be reigned in. The real GOP would have done this, the “version” of the GOP we have now I do not want to be a part of. This could be the GOP’s shining moment if they did the right thing, and supported the only true conservative running. John McCain does not deserve the nomination. I have contacted the GOP regarding where I stand on this issue.
on February 13th, 2008 at 7:47 am
You need to take a stand and voice your opinion. You should contact and speak with as many of the other delegates as possible. Elections get more corrupt with every passing year. Now we are forming voter coalitions so when the GOP comes calling we can throw our support behind their annointed nominee.
It’s time to wake up and take our country back.
on February 13th, 2008 at 8:25 am
Sorry Madd Chatter, but you are so incorrect, I don’t even know where to begin.
Let’s begin with the tuck tail and run comment. The reports about Al-Queda in Iraq 7 years estimated that number to be somewhere around zero. He doesn’t want to tuck tail and run, he wants to get out of a region of the world that we should never have gone into. There were no weapons of mass destruction, Sadaam was not a threat, and there was no declaration of war.
You said terrorist have no legitiate standing to attack us because we were invited by the Saudi government, since when did terrorists need a “legitimate standing” to attack anyone. But beyond that, it is not just that we are in Saudi Arabia, it’s the fact that our CIA helped overthrow the Iranian government in the 1950’s. We armed Middle East countries to fight the USSR and then armed other Middle East countries to fight those that we already armed. Did you know Sadaam used to be an ally before he was our enemy. Did you know that the majority of Iraq’s weapons were supplied by the U.S. That goes for Bin Laden as well. We trained them and funded his little army.
Bin Laden than took offence that the U.S. came into the Middle East during the first Gulf war. He wanted the region to take care of Sadaam, not the U.S. We went over there, and never left. We built bases in every Middle East country that would let us.
So why do they attack us? This is simple. Yes first they do have to be slightly our of their minds to be willing to strap on a bomb and blow themselves up. But put yourself in their place for just a few minutes, before they decide to go all radical, or before they decide to teach their kids to hate Americans at all cost.
Let’s say you live in Bagdad. You have a family, wife, kids. Maybe you are a small business owner, or work in a factory. One day you wake up and head into work to find it’s not there anymore because the Americans decided to blow it up because they thought it was a missle factory. So you get back into your car to head home, but the roads are all destroy. So you walk all day and when you get home, your house is destoryed, your wife is dead, maybe your children are permanently disfigured. You spend the next year or more with out power, no tlevision,no clean water. Your alway short on food.
Tell me, how are you feeling about the U.S. right now. Are you thankful that they “liberated” your country or do you wish death on every single one of them?
So lets fast forward 12 years. You found a new job. You got remarried. Had a couple more kids who are all healthy and your disfigured kids are adapting to their medical problems. And all of a sudden, here comes the U.S. military again. Bombing factories and houses and schools and hospitals. You have no power, no running water. In the middle of the night your house gets raided because you are suspected of being a terrorist. You find out that your brother or father or neighbor has been detained and shipped off to a prison camp and tortured for information he didn’t have.
How are you feeling about the U.S?
Don’t tell me that we are not responsible. Don’t tell me that terrorist attack us because we don’t believe in the same god or because they don’t like our way of life.
And for the record, Ron Paul voted to authorize military force to pursue the people responsible for 9/11. He just voted against a war in Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11 and will and is causing more hatred towards the U.S. and will move more people to rise up against us.
on February 14th, 2008 at 9:44 am
Terrorists don’t need a legitimate reason to attack anyone, but that doesn’t mean we have to do what they say. They don’t have sovereign authority or rule over the country and they are not a recognized government.
Furthermore, who is Bin Laden to say who is and isn’t allowed in the country? He isn’t part of the government. It’s like supporting the idea that John Gotti is a valid voice of concern on U.S. foreign relations.
We also trained Timothy McVeigh how to fight as a soldier, but we didn’t train him to kill American civilians. Lee Harvey Oswald was a U.S. Marine, but we didn’t train him to kill our president. The fallacy in your argument is your assumption that we brought all of this on ourselves by training our future enemies. We didn’t train bin Laden and Hussein to do evil things, torture their own people, usurp power and kill family members. They chose to commit these evil acts themselves.
Your example of “put yourself in their shoes” is absurd. Islam has been killing Christians and Jews for centuries. Mohammed and his followers stormed into the Holy Land and killed all of the Jews and Christians. Wherever there is violence in the world, it is usually Muslims who are killing Jews or Christians. There are 1300 years of Muslims killing non-Muslims simply because they are non-Muslims. It is all about religion. The journalists who were captured last year were set free because they were “willing to convert” to Islam.
Saudi Arabia has a huge police force for the Promotion of virtue and prevention of vice, which punishes people who do things which they view as immoral, such as an unmarried man and woman sitting together at Starbucks. It’s all about religion to them.
Finally, the idea that the terrorist actions are valid is called moral relativism. You believe if they think it’s right, then it is. The really pathetic thing is that you allow their beliefs to dictate your own actions. In the end, they’ll cut off your head with a fillet knife quicker than you can say “mujahadeen” because you are not a Muslim.
on February 15th, 2008 at 7:11 am
I voted for Huckabee in the primary, and he won the popular vote. I think the delegates should be split since the vote was so close. If all the delegates go to McCain, then they should not have a primary vote.
on February 15th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Your Opinion is Needed NOW thanks for this post!.
on February 15th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
I commend your position of being truly uncommited and looking for the candidate who represents the voice of the people. That voice says it is time to pull out of the middle east and protect OUR borders. McCain doesn’t have a chance against the democrats because on one hand he wants to continue a senseless war against a powerless country while putting our own country at risk of economic collapse. On the other hand he’s willing to put our country at risk by leaving the borders wide open for terrorist attacks here. He is pro gun-control and believes we should give up our liberty for freedom. He is only an extention of the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton regeme. The people want change and McCain does not deliver.
The only voice that sounds for constutional government is the voice of Ron Paul. The media has done all it can to silence that voice and twist his stand on the issues. McCain has enough support. Huckabee is riding on the TV evangilist ticket. Romney is out. I urge you to at least visit his website at ronpaul2008.com and make up your own mind where he stands. He carries alot of support in Louisana and would have won the caucus if the republican party had not pulled unethical dirty tricks to throw the election.
The Repulican party is shrinking. More of the same Bush agenda is not going to help the party. It has become a voice of warmongering and unconstrutional corporate control at all costs.
We had a tremendous amount of new members to the Republican party in Louisiana who were forced to vote provisional votes. I was one of those voters and my vote did not count even though I registered by the deadline. If we the new party members are not represented that tells me that the Repulican party doesn’t want new members and this is a slap in the face.
Maybe you could consider voting for those of us who had our votes stolen by the corrupt members of the Repiblican Party.
on February 16th, 2008 at 4:29 am
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article Your Opinion is Needed NOW, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.
on February 16th, 2008 at 7:23 am
In terms of pro-life & pro-family, Huckabee fits the description better than any other candidate in the race.
McCain supports federal funding of embryonic stem cell research (see my blog for more details) and has opposed overturning Roe v. Wade.
Huckabee is and has always been 100% pro-life, opposed to embryonic stem cell research, wants to overturn Roe v. Wade.
If you and the others ran on being pro-life & pro-family, the choice is clear.
ps–Ron Paul is a hypocrite. He talks a good game about limiting government, etc, etc and voted against bills because he believed it wasn’t the federal government’s business, but he had nearly $10 million in earmarks for the shrimping industry? How is that the business of the federal government?
on February 18th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
Madd Chatter get lost!
Huckabee is a phony retail preacher, run by the CFR and Richard Haass. He’s no conservative.
Have you been living in a cave? He governed more liberally than Clinton and had numerous ethics violations posted against him.
Ron Paul votes AGAINST earmarks and when he loses on that, takes back as much money for the district as he can. AFTER ALL, they paid into it you moron! He’s not getting a handout from someone else. Don’t you know what an earmark is?
HUCKSTER raised taxes a million times.
on February 18th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
McCain is run by George Soros and even considered turning Democrat in 2000.
He is very dangerous man.
on February 21st, 2008 at 1:26 am
I applaud your integrity, which unfortunately is lacking in most of the rest of the LAGOP. I seriously doubt they care what Louisiana (or the country) actually wants, what CONSERVATIVE actually means, or which way we vote. You do have my respect for not just going with the flow though. It appeared to me at the caucus that the “uncommited” slate was the “everybody against Ron Paul” slate, though Ron Paul IS the conservative Republican running. Apparently the *political machine* has crowned McCain though. Ugh.
on February 21st, 2008 at 6:03 am
Hey!! Found your blog on yahoo while searching for Owner Rate Arizona Home Insurance - quite some good info thanks, J.Sanders
on February 21st, 2008 at 10:08 am
Hi! Found your blog on yahoo while searching for Company Florida Home In Insurance Owner 20 - quite some good info thanks, J.Sanders
on February 21st, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Your Opinion is Needed NOW seems quite interesting - J.Sanders
on February 24th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
Hi! Found your blog on yahoo - thanks for the article but i still don\’t get it.
on March 26th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100%, but it’s just my opinion, which could be wrong.
on March 27th, 2008 at 2:20 am
Hi! Found your blog on yahoo while searching for Home Insurance Owner Rate Arizona - quite some good info thanks, J.Sanders
on March 27th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Hi - just wanted to say good design and blog - cu Frank