Democrats in our Congressional delegation have overwhelmingly voted to support nearly every plank in President Obama’s platform that failed to stimulate the economy, failed to create jobs, and failed to take a strong stand against our terrorist enemies around the globe.
Two of those Democrats, Vic Snyder and Marion Berry, realized they’d followed President Obama too far down his Socialist path and have already chosen not to run for reelection. But Blanche Lincoln and Mike Ross believe they can use their millions in out-of-state cash to convince voters to ignore their votes for Obama’s Socialist agenda.
Other Democrats are stepping into the voids left by the Snyder and Berry announcements. These will claim to be different than those they hope to replace, but we’ve seen how effectively Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid bend Democrats to their will.
We need clear alternatives, candidates who will go to Washington and represent us. Candidates who will challenge the establishment and stand up for what’s right.
The problem is that Washington, DC establishment Republicans also failed to uphold Arkansas’ conservative values when they had the opportunity.
That’s why we need real change in 2010; ordinary men and women who will go Washington and take the extraordinary step of challenging the status quo, men and women who understand their job is to uphold the US Constitution and make the country a better place for our sons, daughters, and grandchildren.
Since both parties have dropped the ball recently, some are tempted to support independent or third party candidates. But history shows us these candidates have almost no chance to win. This year, they are more likely to split the conservative vote and guarantee at least two more years of the Obama Hell that we’ve suffered these past months.
Fortunately, we have an opportunity to accomplish our goals. But it will take a concerted effort on the part of conservative voters across the state.
Historically, participation in Arkansas’ Republican primary has been extremely light.
In 2004, only 54,000 of Arkansas’ 3 million residents voted in the GOP primary. More importantly, fully 41% of those reside in three counties. Eight of Arkansas’ 75 counties supplied over 67% of voters in the 2004 GOP Senate primary. This resulted in voters from a handful of counties actually selecting the GOP nominee.
If the same pattern holds this year, voters in 67 Arkansas counties will have virtually no say in who will run on the Republican ticket. If we hope to nominate a conservative candidate who can win statewide, we need that candidate to be chosen by voters statewide.
If we again allow only 8 counties to choose the GOP nominee, Arkansas will likely send another crop of Obama-Pelosi-Reid lap dogs back to Washington to continue on the path of destroying our country.
The Republican Party is counting on the Tea Party energy and emotion to deliver in the fall for whatever candidate wins the GOP nomination in May. But they may well be counting their chickens before they hatch.
Most Tea Party activists aren’t looking for Republican candidates to support, they’re looking for conservatives. And not just Republican candidates who say they’re conservative during the campaign. These disgruntled voters have had enough of experienced politicians who say one thing on the campaign trail but go to DC and play the game.
2010 could be an historic year for the Republican Party of Arkansas. There are more candidates running as Republicans than we’ve ever seen. The US Senate race alone has 9 declared candidates even though the GOP couldn’t field an opponent to run against Mark Pryor in 2008.
But not all of these candidates will satisfy the Tea Party activists’ hunger for honesty, integrity, and responsibility in their candidate of choice this year. In races across the state; veterans, small business owners, and other non-politicians stood up last spring and said “I’ll stand up for limited government, fiscal responsibility, and accountability against the Obama-Pelosi-Reid lap dogs” –before establishment Republicans realized Berry, Snyder, and Lincoln were vulnerable.
Over the last few weeks we’ve had several professional politicians and other Washington insiders jumping in these races, attending out-of-state fundraisers and claiming they’re the best candidates because they’re “electable.” Our question to them is, “Where were you when Tea Partiers and Town Hall attendees were challenging these once powerful politicians last year?” These are the candidates who will turn off Tea Party voters.
If we hope to elect “real people” who will represent Tea Party activists at the state and federal level, we need voters statewide to participate in the GOP primary. We need GOP nominees who voters in every county can support and we’ll only achieve that if voters in every county take part in their nomination.
If you agree with the 60% of Arkansans who want to stop the Obama-Pelosi-Reid train to Socialize the American economy, encourage your friends and family to vote in the GOP primary on May 18.
Help us nominate real conservatives who will represent Arkansas values in all levels of government.
by Dr. Bill Smith : Fox News calls the Iraq Veterans for Congress Political Action Committee “The driving force behind a nationwide coalition of veterans vowing to shake up Capitol Hill.” The number of veterans in Congress have declined over the years – note the below bar graph:
As a result, Congress has over time lost touch with one of its primary Constitutionals mandates to provide oversight, funding and support for the US Military forces. Over recent years, Congress has turned to focused on expanding domestic programs and ignored much of the threat to American from other countries. This has precipitated numerous events and situations like the 9-11 attack on the United States, nations seeking to develop nuclear weapons with no fear of the consequences, modern day pirates raiding U.S. ships on the high seas and more. Leaders of Congress and its members have increasingly disparaged members and branches of the military and its commanding officers. Even today’s Coast Guard has been moved under the Homeland Security Department and is presently being downsized when we have greater threats to our coastal cities and invasion of our coasts by terrorists and other.
The Iraq Veterans for Congress PAC, or IVC, is seeking to make a difference. IVC is a federally registered political action committee supporting the congressional campaigns of conservative Republican Iraq Veterans. They seek determined conservative Republican veterans to become a voice for our troops, military families, and hardworking patriotic Americans who believe that our country, our Constitution and our way of life are worth fighting for.
They began their first year of operation in 2008 and helped elect two rock-solid conservatives and battle-tested Iraq Veterans to be elected to Congress: Reps. Mike Coffman (R-CO) and Duncan Hunter Jr. (R-CA). They have continued their funding efforts and anticipate more victories in 2010.
IVC likes to target Liberal Democrats who are the biggest threat to America’s safety and security. And they have remained in constant contact with fellow Veterans across the country and looked for the best and strongest candidates for the most competitive and winnable races. Once endorsed, the PAC helps to fund the candidates.
Presently, Iraq Veterans for Congress, has endorsed and is supporting 35 Republican veterans candidates for the House of Representatives and 1 candidate for the US Senate for 2010. Out of the 35 people endorsed for Congress, three of the veterans are in Arkansas. Arkansas has the largest number of endorsed Veteran candidates and at present, is the only state with an endorsed candidate for US Senate. The endorsed candidates from Arkansas are:
U.S. Army Veteran
| Rick Crawford
U.S. Army Veteran
For U.S. Senator
U.S. Army Veteran
from the Drudge Report
SENATE WARNS EMPLOYEES TO AVOID THE DRUDGE REPORT
Tue Mar 09 2010 08:53:37 ET
Just as the healthcare drama in the capitol reaches a grand finale, congressional officials are warning employees to avoid the DRUDGE REPORT!
The Senate’s Committee on Environment and Public Works issued an urgent email late Monday claiming the DRUDGE REPORT is ‘responsible for the many viruses popping up throughout the Senate.’
The committee ordered hill staff: ‘Try to avoid’ the DRUDGE REPORT ‘for now’.
On Monday DRUDGE served over 29 million pages with NOT ONE email complaint received about ‘pop ups’, or the site serving ‘viruses’.
The site was seen 149,967 times since March 1st from users at senate.gov and 244,347 times at house.gov. [10,825 visits from the White House, eop.gov]*
The Systems Administrator may want to continue taking her antibiotic until the prescription runs out.
On Monday, Arkansas’ Democrat Lt. Governor Bill Halter announced he will run against incumbent Democrat Senator Blanche Lincoln. Many are writing that conservative GOP candidates will reap big rewards from Halter’s challenge, and it will certainly help them in some areas. But the primary competition could actually help Lincoln with Arkansas conservatives who historically vote Democrat.
It’s been widely reported that Lincoln has over $5 million in the bank while the crowded field of Republican candidates have struggled to raise campaign cash in the midst of the current recession. But, in only two days, left-wing special interest groups including Moveon.org, Act Blue, and powerful labor unions have filled Halter’s campaign coffers with $4.75 million. This puts the two Democrats on an essentially even playing field for the primary and will prevent either from hoarding funds for the general election.
The far left fringe of the Democrat party is declaring an all out war on Lincoln. The powerful left-wing labor union AFL-CIO alone has agreed to funnel $4 million to Halter’s campaign. These left-wing forces are upset because Blanche has spent her political career trying to play both ends against the middle. She supported nearly every plank in President Obama’s platform last year, but the start of the campaign has her courting the conservative majority of Arkansans. Her votes for the Wall Street bailouts, auto industry bailouts, record budget deficits, record federal debt, and Obamacare weren’t enough to satisfy the left-wing loons’ demands for more government interference in Americans’ lives.
Since returning from the Senate’s Christmas recess, Lincoln has been slinking slightly to the right. The Democrat Senator who so angered Arkansas’ conservative majority the past year by voting for the President’s Socialist policies even fired a shot across Obama’s bow last month in an effort to win back the support of her conservative constituency. In addition to asking the President to “push back against people at the extremes” of their party, she directly attacked him for his lack of administrative experience when she relayed the concerns of a constituent who worried that no one in the White House “understands what it means to go to work on Monday and make a payroll on Friday.“ Her actions since the beginning of this election year make clear the Senator believes the key to her success lies in recapturing the support of Arkansas conservatives.
But Leon H. Wolf at Redstate predicts that “Halter’s very presence in the Democratic Primary will effectively force both candidates to tack left for the Democratic primary vote.” And while a primary challenge by a left-wing Democrat in most states would do just that, several factors in Arkansas may mean Blanche’s veer to the right may be the key to a primary victory in May. Arkansas’ open primary, conservative electorate, and historical unwillingness to send Republicans to the US Capitol could benefit Lincoln more if she DOESN’T follow Halter to the left.
Arkansas’ open primary permits registered voters, regardless of party affiliation, to vote in either the Democrat or Republican primary. In the 2004 primary, 278,000 Arkansans voted in the Democrat primary vs. only 54,000 in the Republican primary. According to the Arkansas Times, in January of 2008 there were only 57,851 registered Democrats and 44,437 registered Republicans in the state. So, registered independent voters outnumbered registered Democrats participating in the 2004 Democrat primary.
These numbers indicate a Democrat primary victory in the state may be possible without the support of the far left. And it could happen that, if Halter comes across as an extreme left-wing liberal, many more conservative voters may be motivated to participate in the Democrat primary for no other reason than to vote against him. If that occurs, these voters will likely find it much easier to support Lincoln in November.
So Halter’s entry in the race will certainly benefit real conservative candidates by forcing Blanche to spend some of her hoarded campaign stash, but it may also strengthen her with those conservative Arkansans who still remain reluctant to pull the Republican lever in the voting booth.
Conservatives who want Blanche gone need to work together to exploit a Halter vs. Lincoln primary. The goal is to maximize the damage done to Lincoln’s campaign and minimize the benefits. Look for Part II of this article later this week for ideas on how to do just that.
by Larry Elder at Townhall.com
Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., “shocked” President Barack Obama and his party by announcing his plan to retire from the Senate. Appearing on CBS’ “The Early Show,” Bayh explained: Washington suffers from acute partisanship. Washington doesn’t work. It is broken.
How noble — a principled position against “divisiveness.” Let us honor a good man standing tall against the lack of “bipartisanship.” Pass the barf bag.
When has Washington, D.C., not been “divisive” under a president pushing unpopular ideas — whether the war in Iraq, the Senate “amnesty” bill, partial privatization of Social Security or Bill Clinton’s attempt to allow gays to serve openly in the military?
Could it be that the “fed-up” senator feared losing re-election? Don’t ask. CBS didn’t. The possibility that Bayh faced a tough re-election wasn’t even hinted at. But imagine Bayh, who explored a 2008 presidential bid, running for re-election while justifying to skeptical Hoosiers his votes for “stimulus,” TARP, the auto bailouts and ObamaCare.
Here’s the big underreported story.
For the past year, Senator Lincoln has sucked up to President Obama and Harry Reid, voting for Obama’s $787 trillion “Porkulus” bill, his budget that set a record $1.4 trillion deficit (TRIPLING THE OLD RECORD!), and casting several yea votes in the dead of night and even on Christmas Eve to help the Senate pass Harry Reid’s version of Obamacare. Lincoln’s Arkansas constituents wanted none of these, and let the Senator know it.
She ignored them. Lincoln even went so far as to not answer phones on days when important votes were taking place. It took intense negative pressure for the Senator to agree to meet with constituents during the Senate’s August recess last year, and then she made every effort to meet with the few handpicked supporters of the health care legislation and leave out any who opposed her desire for the government run health care system.
By November, she had chosen to stand on the fence for a while to appear deliberative and responsive to the chorus of criticism being leveled from every corner of Arkansas. In the end, she proved that she had always had her mind made up to vote with Obama and Reid. In the face of uncountable calls, emails, and faxes from constituents demanding she vote against Reid’s version of Obamacare, Lincoln cast her vote with the tyrannical Democrats running the White House and Capitol instead of voting for those she supposedly represents.
Now that it’s an election year, she suddenly remembers that she represents folks back home, especially Arkansas’ farmers. Here’s the text of her latest mass email to constituents:
Earlier today, President Obama released his budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2011. As Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, I am opposed to cuts to programs important to agriculture and rural communities.
Throughout my Senate career, I have been a strong, independent voice for Arkansas’s agricultural producers. Now, as Chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I am standing up for farmers and ranchers and all of rural America once again by opposing cuts that will harm the hard-working men and women who are the backbone of our rural economy.
Put simply, the President’s proposal picks winners and losers. By targeting policies that rural America relies upon, this proposal places a disproportionate burden on the backs of farmers and rural communities. While I too believe we must reduce the federal deficit, we must all share in this responsibility.
In 2008, I worked hard to pass a five-year farm bill that was fiscally responsible. This bill contained over $4 billion worth of cuts to farm programs, was completely paid for and did not contribute to the deficit. The Farm Bill is a contract with our farmers that they depend on to make business decisions. Changing the rules in the middle of the game would be detrimental to their operations and would cost us even more jobs in rural America.
I thank the President for his recommendations, but Congress writes the budget. I intend to support measures to reduce the deficit but fight many of the President’s proposed cuts that will harm farmers, ranchers and rural communities.
What Lincoln means is now that it’s an election year, I have to stand up for my constituents or I’m guaranteed to lose the election. She’s banking on the long-standing assumption of DC politicians that constituents have short memories. The Senator believes her constituents won’t remember her giving them the finger throughout 2009, if she strokes them behind the ears for the next 9 months.
She’s right the President’s budget picks winners and losers. Just like the “Porkulus” bill, his takeovers of private industry, and his last year’s budget that Lincoln voted for. Now that it’s an election year she can’t bring herself to support his obvious bias that benefits blue states and punishes red states.
Only because it’s an election year!
Don’t be fooled Arkansas. Senator Lincoln will try to appear to address your concerns from now until November. If she’s re-elected, she’ll be right back in the laps of Obama and Reid.
by Curtis Coleman, Arkansas GOP candidate for US Senate
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) voted to borrow another $1.9 TRILLION this past week…and our children are going to pay. What kind of immorality is this that we are recklessly throwing away our children’s future? What happened to us that we care more about our comfort than their freedom?
Of course, Sen. Lincoln had little choice since she and her cohorts in Congress have been consistently spending more than is coming in. It’s called deficit spending. If it continues, it inevitably leads to bankruptcy. Which is where the U.S. is headed on a high-speed train.
There is a very important distinction between a deficit and the debt. Deficit spending means we’re spending more than we’re taking in. Debt is what results from deficit spending. The deficit is how much we are borrowing. The debt is how much we have already borrowed from lenders like China.
So, as a country we have already borrowed $12,400,000,000,000 to finance our deficit spending. That’s our debt. President Obama is now asking us to spend $1,700,000,000,000 more in 2010 than the federal government’s projected income. That amount will be our deficit this year. The result? We’ll have a new total debt of $14,100,000,000,000 at the end of year. Let me bring this closer to home. This debt is not the money somebody else owes. This is the money you owe. The only money the government has is your money.
Your portion is $45,000. Pay up, please! Don’t have it? Well, then we’ll have to borrow it from somebody (probably the Chinese if they’ll still lend it to us). So our children will have to pay it back – plus interest.
Is this really okay with you?
The POLR (Pelosi/Obama/Lincoln/Reid) Administration is now talking about reducing the deficit starting next year. (That’s kind of like me starting a diet- tomorrow.) All that means is that we’ll slow how fast we’re still borrowing money! We must stop deficit spending, but we must also attack the debt. Our country’s debt is a clear and present danger, an urgent matter of national security, and it must be attacked as our worst enemy.
What is the solution?
Well, let’s start with the profoundly obvious: Spend less than we have. When our outgo exceeds our income, our overhead will be our downfall. So, we can either increase our income or decrease our outgo. Or do both!
First, how do we increase our income? The liberals believe we do that by increasing taxes. That approach seems to make sense – but it doesn’t. Our economic history has consistently shown that when we increase taxes, we suppress growth in our economy and discourage initiative and achievement in our people. The government ends up taking a bigger piece of a shrinking pie. This process is a death spiral – and one the U.S. is on today.
What we must do is allow U.S. businesses and individuals to generate more income by (1) reducing taxes and (2) getting a stifling, smothering, anti-business bureaucracy out of our faces, out of our offices, and out of our pocketbooks. Our economic history has consistently shown that reducing taxes creates economic growth. The result is government can take a smaller piece of a much bigger pie and still increase its income. When Americans discover that they get to keep more of the income they generate, they’ll generate a lot more income – and the pie gets even bigger! But government’s intrusion into every aspect of our economy creates huge inefficiencies as businesses and individuals must deal with the demands placed upon them.
Increasing income is only ½ of the solution. We must also decrease our outgo. How do we do that?
The cost of government has gotten too big because the size of government has gotten too big. We reduce the cost of government by reducing the size of government. Easier said than done? You bet!
So where do we start? Well, you can poke the federal government just about anywhere and hit fat, so our choices are almost endless. Let’s start with eliminating some of these bloated, competitive, and duplicative bureaucracies. (I’ve been in the food safety business for the last decade. I’ve been told that there are as many as 17 different federal agencies that regulate food safety. That over-regulation could explain why we don’t have safer food – and a budget deficit!)
We must rein in some terribly out-of-bounds if not out-of-control federal agencies such as the EPA, which has become something like a 21st century American Gestapo. It recently told Congress that it will do by regulation what Congress refuses to do by legislation. When a federal agency blackmails Congress, it is time for that bureaucracy to have its wings clipped and its chain dramatically shortened.
But more fundamentally and much more importantly, we must make a multi-generational commitment to return and reshape the federal government to the original prescription of the Constitution.
The biggest challenge to reducing the size of the federal government is the inevitable battle over what we will be cut and what will be kept. Those decisions – though painful – are not as difficult as they are made to seem. We already have an adopted blueprint for the role of the federal government. It’s called the Constitution of the United States of America. It clearly defines what the federal government is supposed to do, and perhaps more importantly, what the federal government is not supposed to do.
We are far adrift from its prescription. If we’re going to survive this seemingly insoluble situation, we must make the commitment – an indisputable, multi-generational and solemn commitment – to reshape and restore the federal government according to the Constitution’s prescription.
This is the fundamental battle we must fight and win in Congress. We start now and we must not waver nor be deterred. We must put – not just politicians – but leaders in Congress; bulldogs instead of blue dogs; warriors who understand that nothing less than liberty and freedom for our children and their children are at stake.
If you agree that the battle to win the U.S. Senate seat in Arkansas will be nothing compared to the battle that must be fought after we win this seat, please stand with me by contributing your time and money. Please make the most generous contribution you possibly can today at www.CurtisColeman.com. This is the time to use every resource and leverage every relationship we have to carry this fight to Washington.
Thank you for standing with me in this fight for freedom!
By Debra J. Saunders at Townhall.com
Former U.S. Rep. Tom Campbell announced Thursday that he is dropping out of the California GOP gubernatorial primary and instead will run against Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Last year, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom bowed out of the Democratic gubernatorial primary, leaving former governor and current Attorney General Jerry Brown as the only Democrat in the race — and he has yet to announce that he is running.
Come to think of it, former Lt. Gov. John Garamendi also dropped out of the Democratic gubernatorial primary to run for (and win) Rep. Ellen Tauscher’s vacated seat. The governor’s race is starting to look like an Agatha Christie story, where all the characters get bumped off one by one. Call it: “And Then There Were None.”
Campbell knows that some supporters are disappointed that he won’t remain in the governor’s race. Some had this fantasy that he would best the two moneybags in the race, much as Gray Davis beat Democrat richies Al Checchi and Jane Harman in 1998.
Sorry, Campbell explained, he was “not within hailing distance” of winning because he raised only about $1 million last year. By contrast, the two gazillionaires each tossed $19 million into their campaign coffers as if it were tip money.
As Democratic political guru Darry Sragow noted, people forget “in the telling of the story, Gray did have enough money to make his presence felt.” Campbell wasn’t in Davis’ fundraising league.
There is also a nostalgia element to the switch. In 1992, Campbell lost the GOP primary to Bruce Herschensohn, who then lost the general election to Boxer. According to conventional lore, if the more moderate Campbell had won the primary, Boxer never would have won her Senate seat.
“Nobody Made A Greater Mistake Than He Who Did Nothing Because He Could Only Do a Little.” -Edmund Burke
Last week we let you know how you can help elect Lt. Col. Scott Brown (R) to Ted Kennedy’s old Senate seat in Massachusetts, and you responded! Brad Marston, another patriot from MA who’s working to get Brown elected was impressed by your response and left the following comment on that post:
Wow! Thank you so much for posting this. We lost the Public Policy poll vote (Those Ron Paul folks are good) but people can still make phone calls and of course donate if you can.
You can watch Scott’s latest ad at https://www.icontribute.us/scottbrown/initiative/truck
Thank you all.
Dozens of you responded to Brad’s calls for donations and volunteers! And your efforts are resulting in huge gains in this battle for our American way of life. But we musn’t rest on our laurels now, for Liberal politicians are already plotting to subvert the will of Massachusetts voters when they lose this battle!
Soon after we posted last week, Rasmussen released a poll showing Brown trailing MA Attorney General Martha Coakley 50-41, but today the landscape has changed dramatically. Left-leaning pollster Tom Jensen with Public Policy Polling released numbers yesterday that have him in a state of near panic. Brown now leads Coakley 48-47 in the race!
Jensen points to the fact that Republicans are far more motivated to vote in this election than Democrats, and that Brown leads with independents by a stunning 63-31 margin. This in one of the most liberal states in the Union. Jensen then goes on to enumerate steps he believes can overcome Brown’s positives, which largely depend on motivating the Democrat base in MA.
Now, high ranking MA Democrats are promising to delay implementing the will of the Bay State’s voters when Brown wins next Tuesday! Paul Kirk (D-MA), who was appointed in a shady move to repeal MA law to give the Obama-Pelosi-Reid axis their 60 vote majority in the Senate, declares “We want to get this resolved before President Obama’s State of the Union address in early to mid-February,” speaking of completing work on the unconstitutional health care bill.
But, Kirk and Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin are conspiring to ignore the voters when Brown wins next week’s election. Brian McNiff, a Galvin spokesman, told the Boston Herald, “We’d have to wait 10 days for absentee and military ballots to come in.” And another Herald source states the results of next Tuesday’s election won’t be certified before February 20th.
Long enough that Kirk and other Democrat conspirators hope President Obama, Sen. Harry Reid, and Rep. Nancy Pelosi will have told Massachusetts voters “It doesn’t matter what they want or think or vote for, our ruling Democrats will do whatever the Hell they want and the voters can be damned if they don’t agree!” Because that’s exactly what passage of Obamacare will mean if Brown wins this election.
The message is clear from Democrats: “Massachusetts voters don’t matter, we’ll do what the Hell we want regardless of the outcome of the election!”
But Obama, Pelosi, and Reid aren’t accounting for the shock wave that will run through Democrat ranks in Congress when Republican Scott Brown wins the seat occupied so long by the ultra-liberal Ted Kennedy! Democrats took this race for granted because, after all, we’re talking Massachusetts here. The state where champions of the left Barney Frank and Ted Kennedy couldn’t lose!
A victory by a Republican here, in what some might consider the heart of liberal America, would put every left-leaning liberal Democrat on notice: “Vote for Obamacare at your political peril!”
And Democrats are scared!
“It would be unconscionable for the seat held for 40 years by the inestimable Senator Kennedy to be allowed to pass to an enemy of everything he stood for.” “Massachusetts is a progressive state, always has been, always will be. Scott Brown is the antithesis of a progressive. He has no business running in this state. …His election would be an insult to Kennedy’s memory.” ~Harry Reid (D-NV)~
A Brown victory may even turn some progressive Democrats from supporting this bill that WILL increase taxes AND raise health insurance premiums, that WILL make taxpayers responsible for abortions, that WILL increase the deficit, that WILL result in the rationing of health care (especially for seniors), and that WILL eventually cover illegal aliens!
That’s why it’s essential conservatives across the country rally behind and support Lt. Col. Scott Brown’s campaign for US Senate! Now’s the time to donate what you can. Even if it’s only $5, please donate what you can. Now’s the time to volunteer. Even if you can only make a couple of calls a day.
This race could be the hinge that allows the door to begin to swing the other way. Please step up and help however you can!