Conservable Economist: Timothy Taylor- President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the Opportunity Cost of War

Posted on January 4, 2016 by Derik Schneider

DDE

Source:The New Democrat

General and then later President Dwight Eisenhower, represents at least one major lesson that Neoconservatives never learned. Which is the limits of American military power and the limits to what America can do by ourselves militarily. President Eisenhower, in his 1961 farewell presidential address, made the term Military Industrial Complex famous. When he said that he was worried about the growing military industrial complex in the United States. This is not some Far-Left dovish pacifist, whose always opposed to American use of force. But a World War II general, who commanded Allied Forces during World War II in Europe. Every dollar that is spent on defense that is not needed., is money that is not spent on other priorities, or money that Americans can’t spend for themselves.

Dwight Eisenhower, was not just a strong anti-Communist, but he led the battle against Nazism in World War II and led the battle for America during the Cold War against the Communists as President during the 1950s. But being against communism and being in favor of an unlimited national security state and unlimited national defense, are two different things. Conservatives, are anti-Communists, but put limits on what ever the American military can do. Neoconservatives, I’m sure are anti-Communists as well, but don’t out any limits on military spending, or the national security state, even if that means infringing on civil liberties to protect the state. Which is how we got the Patriot Act in 2001-02. A true fiscal Conservative, could never believe in a neoconservative foreign and national security policy. Because it is too expensive and puts civil liberties at risk.

But that is all before you get to waste in spending money on defense that you don’t need to spend on things that you don’t need, or already have plenty of. Because that is money you might have to put on the national debt and keep your deficit up as a result, or taxes up as a result, as well as money that could be better spent on real defense priorities. Or money put into infrastructure, or research, or cut taxes. So having a defense budget that is too big not only comes with costs to your financial outlook as a government and a country, but it can hurt you economically as well. Money that otherwise could have been invested in the economy, or to pay down you deficit and debt. And Dwight Eisenhower knew these things more than sixty-years ago.

Posted in American Presidents, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Prager U: Dennis Prager: ‘How Big Should Government Be?’

Posted on January 4, 2016 by Rik Schneider

Prager U

Source:Prager U– on the role of government.

Source:The New Democrat

“How big should the government be? And what is its proper role in the daily lives of Americans? The Left and Right have opposite answers.”

From Prager U

Talking about the differences between the Left and the Right, is like talking about the differences between car A and car B. First you have to know what car A and car B are. Dennis Prager talking about the Left and Right, is sort of like the world capital of overgeneralization and overgeneralizing. There has never been one Left anywhere or one Right anywhere. Everyone country in the world has a Center-Left and a Center-Right, as well as a Far-Left and Far-Right. What might look Center-Left in one country, could look Far-Left here and the same thing with the Right.

The Center-Left everywhere in the world, generally believes in a good degree of personal freedom and even property rights, as well as personal responsibility. People who could be in American be called Classical Progressives (which closeted Socialists have hijacked the word progressive) have always advocated for a good deal of individual freedom. As well as a public safety net for people who truly need it, and a regulatory state to protect consumers and workers.

The Center-Right everywhere in the world, people who in America could be called Classical Conservatives (since the Nationalist-Right has hijacked the word conservative) have always believed in a good deal of personal, as well as economic freedom, as well as federalism, and personal responsibility. To go along with a strong national defense, well-funded and responsible law enforcement state, that protects everyone’s civil liberties and individual rights, as well as equal justice and equal rights for all.

So I guess my questions for Dennis Prager when he talks about what he calls The Left and The Right, who exactly his he talking about? Is he talking about Socialists and Communists on the Left, or is he talking about let’s say Teddy Roosevelt or FDR, or Harry Truman Progressives? And when he talks about the Right, is he talking about religious theocrats and Nationalists, or people who could be called Classical Conservatives, or even Classical Liberals such as myself?

Posted in Prager U, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

New America Foundation: Double Take- Speaking on Freedom of Speech

Posted on January 4, 2016 by Erik Schneider

Free Speech

Source: The Daily Review

At risk of sounding like a nationalist, but people right and left have debated whether America is exceptional or not the last ten years or so and debating what is called American Exceptionalism. Is America an exceptional place or not and if we are, are we exceptional in a positive sense. Do we represent as Americans the right values or not. Our First Amendment which of course is our guaranteed constitutional right to Freedom of Speech, is one example of why we are exceptional. Along with our diversity which is across the board and our other guaranteed civil liberties and constitutional rights.

No constitutional right is absolute and that includes both the First Amendment and the Second Amendment. But what it means is that Americans essentially have unlimited free speech and free expression rights and basically and unlimited ability to express ourselves and how we feel about things, places, issues, culture and even people. Short of inciting violence, violently harassing people, or falsely libeling people. And then others have the same right to express how they feel about us. Which means Donald Trump can run his nonsensical reality show disguised as a presidential campaign and say all sorts of garbage about groups of Americans. And the rest of the country has the same right to express out they feel about The Donald. The Captain of Reality TV.

Free Speech, is not a threat to America. The opposite is the truth, which is fascism in the form of political correctness, whether it comes from the Far-Left or Far-Right. That says the political correctness warriors knows best what is acceptable and unacceptable speech. And they’ll decide what people should think and what we can say. You can’t have a liberal democracy without free speech and a liberal right to free speech. Put all the views out there and then let the people weigh in on what the speakers and thinkers are saying. Correct the falsehoods, reward the truth tellers and critique the liars. That is how liberal democracy and free speech works. Instead of having some Board of Experts deciding what is appropriate and improper speech in a developed society.

Posted in New America Foundation, The Daily Review | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Remember This: C-SPAN- Carl Rutan Interviewing Pat Buchanan in 1988: Back to The 1950s and 1980s

Posted on January 3, 2016 by kireschneider
e43ac388-3ca5-49ac-9334-4daff198dcb0

Source: Remember This- Pat Buchanan 

Source:The New Democrat

The world that Pat Buchanan was talking about and advocating for in this 1988 interview, simply doesn’t exist anymore and we were moving away from it in 1988 if not only escaped from there by then. Gays, no longer live in the closet. African-Americans, have just as much right to vote and are treated the same as Caucasian-Americans now. Women, now work and hold very responsible jobs, making good money, running and managing their own business’s. The music is much different and much more open about life. Americans, now have the freedom and feel the freedom to be themselves. Which is Americans and individuals and we live our lives the way we want to. Not how Pat Buchanan and other Christian-Conservatives feel we should live.

The 1950s, was great for America in many ways. We were not just the economic superpower of the world, but became the number one military and diplomatic power in the world. This was post-World War II where our economy boomed and our infrastructure system boomed as a result. But the problem with this era was that many Americans didn’t benefit from these American advances. Not because of anything that they did, but because of how they were born. Their complexion, their race, their ethnicity, their religion, their gender. Not because they were, or could be any less productive than Anglo-Saxon Protestant men. What the 1960s and the 1980s brought to America, was true individual freedom. Both from a personal and economic standpoint.

If you watch this video, think you see Pat Buchanan, essentially acknowledging what I’m arguing here. That the America that he grew up with in the 1950s simply no longer exists. And when he was asked, “do you want to use government to bring that America back?” He answered truthfully and honestly and said he doesn’t believe that, because its simply not possible. Which is a very practical answer and the correct answer. As far as the 1988 presidential election, you had Vice President George H.W. Bush, for the Republican Party. Who represented President Ronald Reagan and his policies in that election. Going up against Governor Michael Dukakis, who represented the New America and the direction that America has been moving to ever since.

Remember This-C-SPAN: Pat Buchanan 1988 Interview

Posted in Book TV, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Week in Review: 2015 Holiday Season

Posted on January 2, 2016 by Erik Schneider

Port Ludlow

Source:The Daily Review

My 2015 holiday season other than not seeing the sun at all until really my last day in Port Ludlow, Washington which is about an hour or so outside of Seattle in Kitsap County just off of Bainbridge Island, was by in large positive. I don’t see my family other than my parents that much to begin with. My family for the most part is now in California, while I’m in Maryland just outside of Washington. So we’re three-thousand miles apart physically, as well as miles apart personally as far as being very different people. I’m talking about my two brothers really. Who both are now married with their own families. So I don’t go out-of-my-way to stay in touch with them.

I haven’t seen my brothers and sister in-laws, their wives for three years before we saw each other last week. My choice really. I’m fine with my older brother who generally speaking is a great guy with a great and really cute and friendly wife, my older sister in-law. And they have three great kids. My nephew and two of my nieces. But he rarely speaks unless spoken to. He’s pretty aloof, at least in my experience with him. How his wife communicates with him I may never know. Perhaps they just talk about what’s for dinner and whose picking up the kids, some weather we’re having and that sort of thing. But I had a great time with them and the two days I had with them last week. Especially my nephew Nicholas, who reminds me of me as far as his interest in sports and history.

My little brother, is sort of the opposite of Alex, but we don’t get along very well. He’s got an opinion about everything and we’re almost complete opposites when it comes to personality. He can be bit a judgemental prick and that might be an off day for him. As a Liberal, I’m a live and let live person. My attitude on life is basically, “its your life pal, as long as you’re not hurting someone.” And I could care less how someone eats their spaghetti and how they comb their hair. Plus, he can be very stupid, but in an insulting way. Ask really dumb questions as if they’re legitimate, or state the obvious as if he’s being informative. Our father, is very similar, but Kit is much worst and at least Dad won’t be really sensitive when I call him out on his insulting stupidity. Kit, will act like he’s completely not at fault. He and his wife, are perfect for San Francisco and that yuppie snobby universe.

But, it’s not as if I don’t love my family, including my in-laws. It’s just that I don’t feel the need to see and talk to them on a regular basis. But it was three-years and my little brother and his wife, just had their first baby in late 2014, so I was thinking this would be a good opportunity to meet my new niece. And catch up with my other nieces and nephew, as well as my brothers and sister in-laws. Even if it meant spending a week in the Seattle area, where you have a better chance of drowning in a flood, than ever seeing the sun while you are there. Which is why I went out there to hang out with them and see if I could get along with my little brother and little sister in-law. Perhaps hear my baby niece’s first words and try to have a good time.

Another reason why I don’t go to Seattle where my parents have a second home in Port Ludlow, is because it’s basically like flying to Alaska from the East Coast. You literally spend the whole first day traveling, or waiting for your plane, ferry, or ride. I tend to leave early in the morning East Coast time and finally get to the house late at night ECT. So that tends to wear me out. But the first three days that I had with my parents, little bother, sister in-law and brand new niece, were fairly positive. We saw Goodfellas together as a family. A movie the whole family likes. One of my parents friends from that area joined us for Christmas and she’s great and we had a good time with her. We managed to not get on each others nerves. Which is a hell of an accomplishment for the Schneider Family when we’re all together. I took a couple of hikes in between rain storms up there.

The next two days were with my older brother Alex and his wife my older sister in-law Sandra. Had dinner with them their first night in town. Played basketball, hung out with them at their second home in Port Townsend. Threw the football with my nephew Nicholas and talked NFL history. Think about that for a minute. I’m talking about NFL history and the history of the San Francisco 49ers, with a nine-year old boy. Hanging out with him was not like hanging out with a kid. We played basketball together. he knocked down a couple of three-pointers, we played pool together, threw the football around and talked football history. This is a nine-year old boy, who lives in the San Francisco area, that might know more about the Washington Redskins than a lot of Redskins fans. Hanging out with Nick, was like hanging out with myself, or grown man. He’s just a lot more advanced than a lot of kids his age. This coming from his uncle, but its true.

Coming back from Seattle, is really a blog in itself. Seattle, a little more than half the size of the Washington, DC area, is a fairly large community with a lot of tourist attractions, but they only have one big city airport, which is SeaTac. Which might be the worst big city airport in America. The Washington area in contrast, has three great major airports. So getting through SeaTac, plus dealing with TSA, is not fun. And by the time I get to my gate to go to Minneapolis, my stop before Washington, I find out my flight has not only been delayed, but by two-hours. So no I know my trip home has been screwed and what do I do once I get to Minneapolis. Delta, whatever you think of them, are very customer friendly and don’t like losing customers. They put me up for one night at the Raddison in Bloomington, Minnesota. Which is near their airport.

By in large, this was a very positive trip. Still not crazy about going to Seattle especially during their rainy season, which is only twelve months a year and every time I go out there the weather is Washington tends to be warm and beautiful, which makes the experience even worst getting local weather reports back home. But I will make bigger effort in the future to see my brothers and their beautiful families more often and would like to go to San Francisco to visit them. Where they all live now and perhaps avoid Seattle instead.

Posted in Life, The Daily Review | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Lifetime: Barbara Walters Interviews of a Lifetime: Raquel Welch (1985)

Posted on December 28, 2015 by Erik Schneider

 Lifetime_ Barbara Walters- Interviews of a Lifetime_ Raquel Welch in 1985

Source:Lifetime– Hollywood Goddess Raquel Welch, being interviewed by ABC News correspondent Barbara Walters in 1985.

Source:The Daily Review 

“This interview aired in 1985. This interview aired in 1992. These interviews with Cher and Cybill Shepherd originally aired in 1985. I don’t have the third interview with Barbra Streisand. These two interviews aired in 1978 and 1983.”

From Pearl Guthrie

Hollywood Goddess Raquel Welch I believe in the 1990s, but I don’t know for sure. This photo is from another video that is not currently available online right now.

Raquel Welch

Source:The New Democrat– Hollywood Goddess Raquel Welch.

Raquel Welch by 1985, was not the big star in Hollywood that she was in the early and mid 1970s, but she was still a big star. Who could find work easily and didn’t have much if any trouble staying busy.

She was 44-45 at this point and as you can see you still looked great. Even with the short hair, but take it up twenty-five years later to 2010 the year she turned 70, she was still red-hot and baby-faced adorable as a seventy-year old woman who was collecting Medicare and Social Security. But that is Raquel Welch. Raquel said several times before that she sees part of her job to look great all the time. To take care of herself which is what she’s been doing ever since she came to Hollywood in the 1960s.

Raquel, isn’t a Hollywood goddess because she was born with a great face and body and hair. Those things are obviously part of it, but the real reason is because she’s a true professional. She takes care of herself and does projects that makes her look great. And by the mid and late 1970s I believe we finally got to see Raquel as the actress and entertainer, doing roles that showcased her talents as a singer and as a comedian.

Myra Breckinridge, whatever you think of the movie and I love the film, she was great and very funny in it, but go up to 1977 with Mother Jugs and Speed, where she uses all of the sexual talk about her and plays off of it and throws it back in those guys face. To show them how they sound, you see the great comedic timing, ability and improvisation of her as well.

Raquel Welch, is a true Hollywood goddess, because yes she’s physically a goddess, but you need more than that otherwise you’re going to burn out at a certain point when you’re no longer considered fresh.

The reason why Raquel stands up from let’s say Hollywood playmates and even bimbos, because she has real talent as an actress and entertainer. She’s a Golden Globe winner and has worked on Seinfeld and done other TV roles mostly in comedy. And has done more TV in her seventies as well.

You don’t last this long in Hollywood if you can’t do the job. Play the parts that are given you, or even have the ability to create parts for yourself if you don’t like what’s coming your way. Raquel Welch, is built to last and when she turns 80, she’ll probably still be seen as a Hollywood goddess.

Posted in Hollywood Goddess, Raquel, The Daily Review | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Nation: Rebecca Vallas & Melissa Boteach: Paul Ryan Just Accidentally Made a Great Case For Raising The Minimum Wage

Posted on December 17, 2015 by Derik Schneider

Paul Ryan

Source:The New Democrat

Am I missing something here, or has The Nation come back down to Planet Earth and finally just left Planet Utopia where there’s no such thing as war, poverty, bigotry, everything that most people see as bad? Because lately they’ve seemed to have grown up and moderated somewhat. While Salon and the others on the New-Left, are still fighting against the establishment, American capitalism, wealth, Caucasians and everything they seem to hate. Paul Ryan and The Nation, just made the conservative case for raising the minimum wage. You could argue that it is liberal and progressive as well. But here’s the conservative case.

You want fewer people on Welfare and Unemployment, then paychecks have to be worth more than Welfare and Unemployment checks. People need to know they can make more money working than not working and still getting the benefits if not more benefits working than not working. Including the work experience, job training, etc, their kids seeing their parents with a job and not needing Food Assistance. Welfare and Unemployment, should just be an insurance policy that people collect from when they’re out-of-work and don’t have the skills needed to get a good job. But while they’re on Welfare, they’re getting those skills, but also taking an entry-level job that pays more than not working.

And I know I’m going to here that government shouldn’t set wages and let the free market do that instead. What free market? Employers, big part of the private market, but without their customers and employees, they’re out of business. The people who make that the so-called free market argument, aren’t talking about a free market, for a couple of reasons. Because they believe in business subsidies and welfare coming from taxpayers. And they don’t want the other two-thirds of the so-called free market involved in how much they should compensate their employees. They want a business management market, where they’re in complete control. No regulators and where they get bailed out by taxpayers when they screw up.

Attach today’s minimum wage to people on Welfare, but still give them their other benefits and add education, job training and requiring people to take jobs that they’re qualified for even if they don’t pay a lot while they’re still getting their public benefits. Including the childcare and education, as well as livable minimum wage, more people will be working and fewer people not working. Include a credit for small employers so they don’t get burned by it. And people will see that working is a hell of a lot better than collecting public assistance checks with all the benefits that comes with it.

Posted in Congress, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Sean Hannity: Dr. Qanta Ahmed- Here’s What Life Under Sharia Law Is Like For A Woman

Posted on December 17, 2015 by Rik Schneider

Sharia Law

Source:The New Democrat

For the life of me I don’t understand why so-called Progressives today stand up for Sharia Law, or at the very least do not speak out against it and instead label Liberals when we speak out against it and even speak the truth about as bigots. How is Sharia Law any better than the Christian-Right in America. Where in the Bible Belt can women not vote, drive a car, not be able to travel without a male chaperone, have to cover their faces and completely cover their bodies when put in public, not even allowed to swim, risk death if they’re caught committing adultery. Where in the Bible Belt can gays be put to death by their government simply for being gay? I’m not a fan of the Christian-Right obviously. At the very least they’re stuck in a world that no longer exists and are authoritarian bigots as well.

As Richard Dawkins said on Bill Maher back in October, ‘if Islamism and Sharia Law is part of the Islamists as today’s so-called Progressives have claimed, then the hell with their culture.’ What is progressive about treating women and gays like second-class citizens and even slaves. This is authoritarianism at its worst and to a certain extent even makes Marxism and Christian Conservatism, look moderate at best. At one point I didn’t think that was ever possible with how authoritarian both of those ideologies are especially when it comes to individuality and expression. Anyone who calls them self a Liberal, Progressive, or Feminist, should hate Sharia Law. Because it goes against everything that you at least say you are in favor of. Being a Liberal, Progressive, or Feminist.

Everyone on the Left especially people who are either Atheists, or my case Agnostic, should not just hate Sharia Law, but speak out against it. And stand up for minority rights, gays and women in these countries that live under Sharia Law. Like the Islāmic Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Islāmic Republic of Iran, just to use as two examples. And not call people bigots simply speaking the truth against a non-Christian religion where the members of it are overwhelmingly non-Caucasian and especially non-Anglo Saxon. In the name of political correctness, because you have some Far-Left Utopian notion that minorities including religious minorities, have some right to never be criticized and offended about anything.

Posted in New Right, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Paul Richards: The Free Speech Movement: Civil Disobedience in Berkeley (1964)

Posted on December 17, 2015 by Erik Schneider

Berkley

Source:The Daily Review

I hate as a Liberal hearing California being called a liberal state and some bastion of liberalism. And just go back to the 1960s and how they came down on students who were simply looking to express their free speech rights on campus and get involved in politics. If you go to the last ten years or so and they were one of the first states to pass a same-sex marriage ban and I believe they had at one time a ban on homosexuality, at least as it relates to sex. Ronald Reagan, was Governor of California there and served two terms from 1967-75. They recalled a moderate Democratic Governor in Gray Davis in 2003 and replaced him with a modern Republican in Arnold Schwarzenegger.

California, even with their individualistic hippie movement in the 1960s that was based in Northern California and a certain extent Southern California, was at the heart in support of the political correctness movement, but coming from the right-wing in America. Especially at the state level in the California State Government. And trying to ban students from protesting and speaking out against the political issues of the day. Now they’re reversed course and still support political correctness, but do it from the Far-Left instead of the Far-Right. And will deny right-wing speakers from speaking on their campus’s and even left-wing speakers like Bill Maher, if they don’t like what he has to say. His views on Islam in late 2014, is an excellent example of that.

What the free speech movement of the 1960s especially the mid 60s starting around 1963 and going through 64 and 65 and through the Vietnam War, was about was free speech. The right for American citizens who happen to be in college to express themselves on the issues. Protest in favor of equal and civil rights for all Americans and protest against the Vietnam War. The political correctness warriors back then, were on the Right. Who still believed it was 1956 or something and that all Americans looked at America and American culture and the world the same way and if there was anyone who didn’t share those cultural and political views. they needed to be shut up. Which is how the New-Left in America reacts when people disagree with them on cultural issues today.

The free speech movement back then and I at least believe still does today when you look at Bill Maher and Richard Dawkins, to use as examples and you have Conservative Libertarians on the Right as well, but back then at least the free speech movement came from the Left. From people who loved being Americans and America, but especially loved the rights, freedom and responsibility that came with being an American. Like Freedom of Speech and choice, the right for Americans to be themselves. And not have to either by legal, or cultural force to live life the way that the so-called establishment believes that they should. Which is what the hippie movement and the free speech movement, gay right and so-forth. The right for Americans to be Americans which are individuals. And not clones of the establishment.

Posted in Free Speech, The Daily Review | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

POLITICO Magazine: Jesse Rifkin: Paul Ryan & The Long History of Political Beards

Posted on December 16, 2015 by Derik Schneider

Paul Ryan

Source:The Daily Review

When I first saw new Speaker of The House Paul Ryan and his new beard I guess a week ago, I thought, ‘great, here’s another political faker wannabe. Someone who wants to fit in with the Millennial hipsters, or whoever else. And will follow whatever the current cool fad is.’ To be honest with you, I doubt he’s still wearing that beard a month from now. Sure! It will keep his face warm when he goes back to freezing Wisconsin and perhaps help him get through another disappointing Green Bay Packers playoff loss.

But he’s got to deal with both Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and to a certain extent House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, when she needs to him to bail him out on things like getting votes on things that the House Tea Party doesn’t believe in. Like paying for government, to use as an example. And paying our debts, which is really what the debt ceiling is about. Officially acknowledging that you have a government debt. He’s got to deal with people who are never afraid to crack a joke. Especially when they know that person can’t hurt them or fire them.

All of these leader’s all have quick-wits and sense of humors and he’s friendly with all of them. which could kill him with the Tea Party. The next handshake with President Obama, could cost Speaker Ryan his speakership. Senator Robert Bennet, who at the time at least was one of the most conservative members of Congress, lost his Senate seat in a Republican primary in 2010. Because he was caught shaking hands with Democratic Senator Ron Wyden. They’re all going to take shots at his beard, at least in private. And with Mitch McConnell, those shots might actually come from a gun. He’s from Guntucky after all.

I believe one of the things that Paul Ryan has going for him is that he comes off as real and as someone who Joe and Mary Average can relate to. He comes from an Midwestern Irish-Catholic background, who needed student loans to get through college. Whose had a government job most of his working life. This is not someone who comes off as being better than everyone else who feels he has something to prove. He’s someone who has worked very hard to get where he is, because he’s had to.

Unlike, gee I don’t know, just throwing out a name here, but try George W. Bush. Just to use as an example. And the Speaker’s beard to me as it does for a lot of guys who aren’t lumberjacks, or rednecks, or bikers, or cowboys, headbangers, football players, it just looks phony to me. And someone who looks like they want to be someone else. Paul Ryan, should be Paul Ryan. A very bright Irish-Catholic guy from Wisconsin whose gotten to the highest point in Congress by being Paul Ryan. Not by trying to convince people he’s someone other than Paul Ryan.

Posted in Congress, The Daily Review | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment