Uncategorized

Some Things Just Can’t Be Made Up

October 10, 2012 by 2 Comments

In our increasingly urbanized society people are losing their connection to the natural world. Sometimes it is so bad you don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

For example in the clip below a woman calls into a Fargo, ND radio station complaining about deer crossing signs as they, in her opinion, are encouraging the deer to cross the road there. She wants to the signs moved to lower traffic density areas because then the deer will go there to cross the road instead.

I can only hope that this call was made up and there really isn’t someone that stupid driving our highways or voting for that matter.

Uncategorized

It’s Chicago – Why Not Tax Corrupt Pols Instead?

October 9, 2012 by
 The President of the Cook County Board Toni Preckwinkle is proposing a “violence tax” to be levied on gun and ammunition sold within Chicago and the rest of Cook County. The county has a $115 million budget shortfall and is looking for ways to close the gap.

“If we were to pursue a tax on something like guns and ammo, clearly
that wouldn’t be popular with the [gun lobby] out there, and it may not
generate $50 million, but … it is consistent with our commitment to
pursuing violence reduction in the city and in the county,” Kurt
Summers, Preckwinkle’s chief of staff, said on Monday.

The tax is also a backdoor attempt at gun control which they are not shy about admitting. Summers says the idea of the “violence tax” is also to limit the number of firearms in circulation citing rising murder rates in Chicago as well as a rising number of inmates in the county jail. They are also trying to justify the tax by citing the cost of law enforcement, the court system, and trying uninsured gun shot victims in county-owned hospitals.
The idea of a “violence tax” is not sitting well with gun rights activists in Illinois.
“This is just another example of the blame game —
Chicago and Cook County has a gun violence problem, Chicago’s got a high
high school drop-out rate, they’ve got a drug problem, they’ve got a
gang problem, but they want to make legal gun owners, guys like me, the
scapegoat,” said Todd Vandermyde a National Rifle Association lobbyist
who works in Springfield.

He said this is an unfair tax on a constitutional right that will hurt the poor.
“It is another way to enact a Jim Crow law and keep people from exercising their constitutional right, he said.

“All you’re doing is jacking up the price of guns
and ammunition — for someone who can least afford it,” he said. “The
problem with something like this is that you’re hurting people who don’t
have the ability to get out of Cook County. So if you have someone in
Englewood, they have to venture out to DuPage County, to Will County? I
don’t think so.”
Board President Preckwinkle has not yet disclosed the amount of the tax. She is expected to announce her budget next week and the tax will likely be part of it.

In a later Sun-Times article, Preckwinkle defends her “violence tax” against the pushback she has received today.

Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle defended a plan to put a special tax on bullets and ammunition, saying the county has to find ways to pay for the health costs associated with gun violence and to curb such violence.


“Cook County suffers from systemic gun violence,” she told reporters at a press briefing Tuesday about the so-called violence tax, which was first reported by the Chicago Sun-Times. “The wide availability of ammunition exacerbates the problem.”

Preckwinkle has already declined to raise either property or sales taxes to fund the shortfall. When asked about a tax on sugary drinks, she responded that “gun violence” (sic) is a bigger problem than obesity. Given the years of draconian gun control laws in Chicago and Cook County, it might have been a bit more honest on her part to say that soda drinkers and manufacturers are a bigger voting bloc/lobby than gun owners and she didn’t want to cross Coke and Pepsi’s lobbyists.  To paraphrase the movie Chinatown, “It’s Chicago, Jake.”

Kurt Hofmann, the St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner, also has a column on these taxes as well as on proposals to levy such a tax on ammo statewide.

UPDATE: Sebastian at Shall Not Be Questioned notes that taxing a right for the purposes of discouraging it is unconstitutional.  He outlines the Supreme Court precedents in his post.

Thirdpower at Days of our Trailers points out the irony of Democrats objecting to voter ID laws on the basis of it disproportionately impacting the poor while doing the very same thing with the proposed “violence tax”.

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, the sister organization of the Second Amendment Foundation which successfully sued Chicago, issued a pointed rejoinder to Board President Preckwinkle:

BELLEVUE, WA – The Citizens
Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms today criticized a proposed
“violence tax” on firearms and ammunition sold in Chicago and surrounding
Cook County suburbs as a means of closing a multi-million-dollar budget
gap.

The tax proposal by Cook County Board President Toni
Preckwinkle would be designed to help close what the Chicago Sun-Times
reports is a $115 million gaping hole in the 2013 budget. The reasoning
behind this idea is that “roughly two-thirds of the budget pays for both
the county’s public health clinics and two hospitals along with the
criminal justice system that includes the courts and jail,” the newspaper
said.

“Law-abiding firearms owners in Cook County should not be
shouldering the bills for criminals,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb.
“Under Preckwinkle’s plan, honest citizens would be financially punished
for the bad behavior of a criminal element that appears to be rampant and
unchecked, considering the number of shootings and murders that have been
tallied.

“This violent crime surge,” he continued, “seems to
correlate with the election of Rahm Emanuel as Chicago’s mayor. Maybe
President Preckwinkle should send the bill to Emanuel. Of course, he might
have an empty wallet, considering the money he’s spent fighting court
battles to thwart gun rights in the city, not to mention the $399,950 he
had to finally pay to the Second Amendment Foundation this year for legal
costs because the city lost the McDonald case.”

The newspaper
quoted an aide to Preckwinkle who claimed the tax on guns and ammo would
be “consistent with our commitment to pursuing violence reduction in the
city and in the county.”

“That’s a pretty smug attitude,” Gottlieb
said, “considering the body count so far this year. In September, just in
Chicago, there were 41 slayings. That doesn’t reflect much of a commitment
to reduce violence, but this tax idea certainly suggests that Preckwinkle
– like so many other Chicago politicians – is trying to shift the blame
for her problems to someone else.

“Perhaps Preckwinkle should
consider an alternative,” he added. “How about a tax on politicians for
impairing the gun rights of law abiding citizens by preventing them from
protecting themselves, their families and their homes from the county’s
violent criminals?

“There’s a problem in Cook County, alright,”
Gottlieb concluded, “but law-abiding gun owners didn’t create it, and
should not be taking the rap for it, financially or otherwise.”

Uncategorized

Colt And Remington To Relocate?

October 9, 2012 by 5 Comments

The Firearm Blog ran a story today about the potential for Colt and Remington to relocate manufacturing out of Connecticut and New York respectively if those states adopted the flawed technology known as microstamping. The story noted as have others that many states would welcome these firearms manufacturers if they decided to leave the Northeast.

Cam Edwards of NRA News did an interview this evening with Larry Keane, General Counsel of the NSSF, on this issue. Keane repeated the NSSF’s position that the technology needs more study before it could ever be adopted. Moreover, and I didn’t know this, he said the patent holder of this technology has come around to the same position and is urging more study of microstamping.

Joe Huffman of the View From North Central Idaho has an excellent overview of the technology and its limitations on his blog here.

Uncategorized

Castle Doctrine Coming To The Land Of Castles?

October 9, 2012 by 3 Comments

It appears that at least a limited form of the castle doctrine may be coming to the United Kingdom according to a story in the Daily Mail Online.

Chris Grayling, the Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary, announced that he is changing the law that would allow home owners (or householders, in Brit-speak) to use “disproportionate force” when faced with burglars or home invaders. Currently, people in the UK are only allowed to use “reasonable” force and it was only within the last couple of years that the duty to retreat even if within the home was removed.

It will mean someone who is confronted by a burglar and has reason to fear for their safety, or their family’s safety and in the heat of the moment uses force that later seems ‘disproportionate’ will not be guilty of an offence.


This could include the use of lethal force. Only force which is ‘grossly’ disproportionate will not be permitted.


Mr Grayling said: ‘Being confronted by an intruder in your home is terrifying, and the public should be in no doubt that the law is on their side. That is why I am strengthening the current law.


‘Householders who act instinctively and honestly in self-defence are crime victims and should be treated that way.


‘We need to dispel doubts in this area once and for all, and I am very pleased to be delivering on the pledge that we made in Opposition.’

It is good to see that the United Kingdom is coming to its senses on this. Many may remember the story of farmer Tony Martin who served more time in prison for killing a burglar in his house than did the burglar’s accomplices. Martin was originally convicted of murder and eventually had his conviction reduced to manslaughter on appeal. He still had to serve a five year sentence.

UPDATE: The British paper The Daily Telegraph has more on the changes as proposed by the Justice Secretary Chris Grayling. They note such a “law-and-order” policy is quite popular with the Conservative Party’s base.

Uncategorized

Great New Hire At SAF/CCRKBA

October 9, 2012 by 7 Comments

Brandon Combs of the CalGuns Foundation and Cal-FFL was just appointed Director of Programs and Outreach for SAF and Director of Advocacy and Coalitions for CCRKBA. I have corresponded with Brandon many times and this is a great appointment. He’ll bring a new vibrancy to both organizations’ outreach and advocacy efforts. Having cut his gun rights teeth in the notoriously gun unfriendly state of California where innovative tactics are a must to get noticed, I hope he’ll bring that same verve to SAF and CCRKBA.

There is a lot of innovative advocacy going on at the state level ranging from the guerrilla tactics of CalGuns to the outreach technology that Maryland Carry used to shut down the Maryland State Capital that need to be shared with other gun rights groups. I’m glad to see that the SAF and CCRKBA has recognized this need. For example, I would love to see the outreach technology of Maryland Carry used by Grass Roots North Carolina when we push for restaurant carry (again) in the next session of the General Assembly.

From the e-mail announcement:

SAN CARLOS, CA & BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment
Foundation announced today that Brandon Combs, a veteran California gun
rights advocate, has joined the Second Amendment Foundation as its
director of Programs and Outreach.  He will also serve as director of
Advocacy and Coalitions at Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and
Bear Arms.

In addition to his roles at SAF and CCRKBA, Combs will
continue working with The Calguns Foundation (CGF) and California
Association of Federal Firearms Licensees (Cal-FFL) as Secretary and
President, respectively, and as an elected member of the board of
directors for the California Rifle & Pistol Association, the Golden
State’s NRA affiliate organization.

“Developing relationships and effective programs are key to
really being successful in the long term,” explained SAF founder and
Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb.  “When you can add a creative,
experienced leader like Brandon to your arsenal, you do it.  I’m very
excited for the future and delighted he is here with us.”

“I’m excited for Brandon and thrilled that we have an
opportunity not only to export some of our gun advocacy culture and
concepts nationally, but also to develop a much closer relationship with
the larger network of gun rights organizations,” said Calguns
Foundation chairman Gene Hoffman.

“It’s an honor and a privilege to have this opportunity to
serve SAF’s and CCRKBA’s members and work to advance our fundamental
rights,” said Combs.  “I’m looking forward to building the next
generation of gun rights advocacy and the new gun rights culture with
supporters and fellow advocates from organizations across the United
States.”

The Second Amendment Foundation (saf.org) is the nation’s
oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal
action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to
privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has
grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many
programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of
gun control.

The Calguns Foundation (calgunsfoundation.org) is a 501(c)3
non-profit organization which serves its members by providing Second
Amendment-related education, strategic litigation, and the defense of
innocent California gun owners from improper or malicious prosecution.
The Calguns Foundation seeks to inform government and protect the rights
of individuals to acquire, own, and lawfully use firearms in
California.

Uncategorized

What I Did This Morning

October 8, 2012 by 12 Comments

Grass Roots North Carolina, the state’s more aggressive gun rights organization, usually has a booth at all the major gun shows across the state. These booths – like the organization itself – are staffed by volunteers. Knowing the election was coming up and with the Complementary Spouse out of town taking care of family matters, I thought helping out at the Asheville Gun & Knife Show would be an ideal way to spend a few hours.

Our job was to introduce people to GRNC, hand out voter guides, and hopefully sign up new members. While the show opened at 10am, it took a while for people to start showing up. I’m guessing a lot of folks either went on Saturday or they were at church.

John Hammond, who coordinates these efforts in the mountains for GRNC, told me that he had handed out over 300 voter guides on Saturday. He also told me that the Republican nominee for the 11th Congressional District, Mark Meadows, had visited the booth yesterday along with Rep. Joe “You Lie!” Wilson (R-SC) and the 2010 Republican nominee Jeff Miller of Hendersonville.

In the three hours that I worked the booth, I’d estimate we spoke with 50-75 people. Some were already members, some had never heard of GRNC, and some were interested in joining in the future. After running into 3-4 people who said they were not registered to vote, we started asking people if they were registered to vote before giving out a voter guide. Those that were registered were genuinely interested in the voter guide. I stressed that we were non-partisan and that in some cases the Democrat actually was ranked better than the Republican.

I have to admit that I was somewhat dumbfounded that we ran into that many unregistered voters. I guess I shouldn’t be but with the ease of registration nowadays it makes it hard to say you didn’t have an opportunity. We never pressed it as we thought the deadline for registration was this past Friday (30 day before the election). However, checking the State Board of Elections website, I found that the deadline will actually be this Friday, October 12th. Given this, it would have been a good idea for GRNC, the NRA, or another gun rights organization to have had a voter registrar available to register these potential voters.

All in all, I had a good time. Of course, since I was already at the show, I had to do a little shopping. I came home with some Greek 30-06 ammo in en bloc clips, a couple of AK magazines, and a smattering of other stuff but no new guns.

Uncategorized

Grass Roots North Carolina Candidate Evaluations

October 6, 2012 by

Grass Roots North Carolina has released their candidate evaluations for their “Remember in November” project. The full list can be found here and includes national, statewide, congressional, and NC House and Senate races.

The GRNC Political Victory Fund endorsements will be released on October 15th.

The GRNC candidate evaluations for statewide offices and congressional races can be seen below. To make them more readable, I have taken the liberty of reformatting the GRNC report.

Candidate Party Survey Vote Other Evaluation
Statewide
Races
Governor
Howe L 98 ****
McCrory R 86 ***
Dalton D NR 53 90 *
Lt Gov Forest R 96 ****
Coleman D NR 67 65 *
US House
1st Holloman L 98 ****
Butterfield D NR 50 0
Dilauro R NR 0
2nd Irving L 98 ****
Ellmers R 87 100 100 ****
Wilkins D NR 0
3rd Jones R 100 97 98 ****
Anderson D NR 0
4th D’Annunzio R 100 ****
Price D NR 0 28 0
5th Foxx R 100 100 98 ****
Motsinger D NR 0
6th Coble R 90 100 98 ****
Foriest D NR 80 ***
7th Rouzer R NR 100 100 ****
McIntyre D NR 74 90 **
8th Hudson R 100 ****
Kissell D NR 33 100 0
9th Pittenger R 91 100 95 ****
Campbell L NR 0
Roberts D NR 0
10th McHenry R 100 100 98 ****
Keever D NR 0 0
11th Meadows R 100 ****
Rogers D NR 0
12th Brosch R NR 0
Watt D NR 19 46 0
13th Holding R 95 ****
Malone D NR 0

From GRNC’s explanation of how to read their evaluations:

GRNC’s “Remember in November” project estimates candidates’ views on “assault weapons,” concealed handguns, gun storage laws, gun rationing, and the Second Amendment. THE EVALUATIONS HEREIN ARE NOT ENDORSEMENTS. We issued surveys first to a control group of gun owners and then to candidates. Next, we measured how closely each candidate’s views and voting record (if available) agree with the control group.  Pay more attention to voting records than survey results unless, of course, you believe politicians never lie.


“SURVEY”: The percentages listed depict agreement between a given candidate and our control group (e.g. an “80” under the “Survey” section means 80% of the candidate’s answers agreed with the Conservative Gun Owners). “NR” means the candidate failed to return the survey.


“VOTE”: Votes are more accurate than surveys and should be given more attention in determining candidate stance. Where available, this column indicates how often candidates’ votes agree with the control group of gun owners (e.g. a “90” under “Voting Record” indicates candidate’s voting record agrees 90% of the time with what was desired by control group).


“OTHER”: Derived from evaluations by other gun groups, bill sponsorship, etc.


“EVAL”: The evaluation is not a rating. It estimates percentage of time candidate is expected to agree with the Conservative Gun Owners. The maximum **** candidate tends to agree with conservative gun owners at least 90% of the time.


**** Expected to agree with conservative gun owners on at least 90% of gun issues
*** Expected to agree with conservative gun owners on at least 80% of gun issues
** Expected to agree with conservative gun owners on at least 70% of gun issues
* Expected to agree with conservative gun owners on at least 60% of gun issues

0 Expected to agree with conservative gun owners on less than 60% of gun issues or else candidate failed to return survey & insufficient information exists to make evaluation. Is he / she hiding something?

Uncategorized

GOA Grades For North Carolina

October 6, 2012 by

Because different gun rights organizations place different emphasis on things, I thought it would be useful to also provide the Gun Owners of America rankings for the North Carolina congressional races. It is also a response to one of the comments from yesterday’s post of the NRA-PVF endorsements/grades.

Here are the GOA-PVF grades for the North Carolina congressional races. One thing to notice is that they include all candidates on the ballot including Libertarians and known write-in candidates. Checking the list of GOA-PVF endorsements, at this time they have no endorsed candidates running in North Carolina.

U.S. HOUSE
DISTRICT
NAME
PARTY
RATING
1
Butterfield
D
F
1
DiLauro
R
NR
1
Holloman
L
A
2
Ellmers
R
A
2
Irving
L
A
2
Wilkins
D
NR
3
Anderson
D
NR
3
Jones
R
B
4
D’Annunzio
R
A
4
Price
D
F-
5
Foxx
R
A
5
Motsinger
D
F
6
Coble
R
A
6
Foriest
D
D
7
McIntyre
D
B
7
Rouzer
R
A
8
Foreman
WI
NR
8
Hill
L
NR
8
Hudson
R
A
8
Kissell
D
C-
9
Campbell
L
NR
9
Pittenger
R
A
9
Roberts
D
NR
10
Keever
D
F
10
McHenry
R
A
11
Meadows
R
A
11
Rogers
D
NR
12
Brosch
R
A
12
Watt
D
F
13
Holding
R
A
13
Malone
D
NR
Uncategorized

NRA Endorsements For North Carolina

October 5, 2012 by 5 Comments

The National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund released its endorsements as well as grades for candidates in North Carolina a few days ago.

For statewide races:

Statewide Elections

Governor
Pat McCrory (R)
Grade: A
Status: Candidate

Walter H. Dalton (D)
Grade: A
Status: Candidate
Lieutenant Governor
Dan Forest (R)
Grade: AQ Contact
Status: Candidate

Linda D. Coleman (D)
Grade: C-
Status: Candidate
Attorney General
*Roy Cooper (D)
Grade: A Contact
Status: Incumbent
Agriculture Commissioner
*Steven Troxler (R)
Grade: A Contact
Status: Incumbent

Walter Smith (D)
Grade: ?

For Congressional races:

District 1
Pete DiLauro (R)
Grade: AQ
    Status: Candidate    
*G.K. Butterfield (D)
Grade: D
    Status: Incumbent    
District 2
*Renee Ellmers (R)
Grade: A Contact
  Status: Incumbent    
Steve Wilkins (D)
Grade: ?
    Status: Candidate    
District 3
*Walter Jones (R)
Grade: A Contact
  Status: Incumbent    
Erik Anderson (D)
Grade: ?
    Status: Candidate    
District 4
Tim D’Annunzio (R)
Grade: AQ
    Status: Candidate    
*David Price (D)
Grade: F
    Status: Incumbent    
District 5
*Virginia Foxx (R)
Grade: A Contact
  Status: Incumbent    
Elizabeth Motsinger (D)
Grade: ?
    Status: Candidate    
District 6
*Howard Coble (R)
Grade: A Contact
  Status: Incumbent    
Tony Foriest (D)
Grade: D
    Status: Candidate    
District 7
David Rouzer (R)
Grade: A
    Status: Candidate    
*Mike McIntyre (D)
Grade: A Contact
  Status: Incumbent    
District 8
Richard Hudson (R)
Grade: A
    Status: Candidate    
*Larry Kissell (D)
Grade: A Contact
  Status: Incumbent    
District 9
Robert Pittenger (R)
Grade: A Contact
  Status: Candidate    
Jennifer Roberts (D)
Grade: ?
    Status: Candidate    
District 10
*Patrick McHenry (R)
Grade: A Contact
  Status: Incumbent    
Patsy Keever (D)
Grade: D
    Status: Candidate    
District 11
Mark Meadows (R)
Grade: AQ
    Status: Candidate    
Hayden Rogers (D)
Grade: A
    Status: Candidate    
District 12
Jack Brosch (R)
Grade: ?
    Status: Candidate    
*Melvin Watt (D)
Grade: F
    Status: Incumbent    
District 13
George Holding (R)
Grade: AQ Contact
  Status: Candidate    
Charles Malone (D)
Grade: ?
    Status: Candidate    

The NRA-PVF has included explanations on why they endorsed Rep. Larry Kissell (D-8) and Rep. Mike McIntyre (D-7). You can see that on the NRA-PVF webpage from the link above.

The one quibble I have with these grades is in the 11th Congressional District which just so happens to be my district. I don’t disagree with no endorsement nor do I disagree with the grade of AQ for Republican Mark Meadows. I do disagree with the grade of A for Democrat Hayden Rogers given that he has never held elective office. It is my opinion that it should be an AQ just like Mark Meadows. Rogers had served as Chief of Staff to Rep. Heath Shuler (D-11) and I’m guessing that is the basis for the grade.

An explanation of the grades:

What the Grades Mean:

The NRA-PVF is non-partisan in issuing its candidate grades and endorsements. We do not base our decisions on a candidate’s party affiliation, but rather on his or her record on Second Amendment issues. The NRA is a single issue organization. The only issues on which we evaluate candidates seeking elected office are gun-related issues.
A+ A legislator with not only an excellent voting record on all critical NRA issues, but who has also made a vigorous effort to promote and defend the Second Amendment.
A Solidly pro-gun candidate. A candidate who has supported NRA positions on key votes in elective office or a candidate with a demonstrated record of support on Second Amendment issues.
AQ A pro-gun candidate whose rating is based solely on the candidate’s responses to the NRA-PVF Candidate Questionnaire and who does not have a voting record on Second Amendment issues.
B A generally pro-gun candidate. However, a “B” candidate may have opposed some pro-gun reform or supported some restrictive legislation in the past.
C Not necessarily a passing grade. A candidate with a mixed record or positions on gun related issues, who may oppose some pro-gun positions or support some restrictive legislation.
D An anti-gun candidate who usually supports restrictive gun control legislation and opposes pro-gun reforms. Regardless of public statements, can usually be counted on to vote wrong on key issues.
F True enemy of gun owners’ rights. A consistent anti-gun candidate who always opposes gun owners’ rights and/or actively leads anti-gun legislative efforts, or sponsors anti-gun legislation.
? Refused to answer the NRA-PVF Candidate Questionnaire, often an indication of indifference, if not outright hostility, to gun owners’ and sportsmen’s rights.
endorsedBadge Indicates an NRA Endorsed Candidate
* indicates an incumbent running for re-election
Uncategorized

Romney Campaign On NRA Endorsement

October 5, 2012 by 2 Comments

Along with the NRA-PVF announcement of their endorsement of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan comes the Romney-Ryan campaign’s announcement of it.

Mitt Romney today announced the endorsement of the National Rifle Association.

“As the Supreme Court has recently reaffirmed, the Second Amendment
protects a basic and fundamental individual right—the right to bear
arms,” said Mitt Romney. “And it is the NRA that protects the Second
Amendment. I am proud to have their support for my candidacy, and when I
am president, I will do all in my power to defend and protect the right
of all law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms.”

“As a lifelong hunter, I am a strong supporter of Second Amendment
rights,” said Paul Ryan. “The Second Amendment is essential to the
functioning of a free society. Not only do millions of Americans own
firearms, but recreational hunting and shooting adds billions to our
economy every year and supports thousands of jobs. The NRA is committed
to protecting our Second Amendment rights. Mitt Romney and I will have
that same commitment when we are in the White House.”

“Since 1871, the NRA has protected the right of men and women across
our country to keep and bear arms,” said Chairman of the NRA Political
Victory Fund Chris Cox. “This right is enshrined in our Constitution
through the Second Amendment. It’s the right that makes all of our other
constitutional rights possible. Americans deserve to have a friend of
our Second Amendment freedoms and hunting heritage in the White House.
That’s why we are proud to endorse Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan for
President and Vice President of the United States. Mitt and Paul will
defend all of our constitutional freedoms from those who would seek to
limit or deny them. We encourage every freedom-loving American to vote
for the Romney-Ryan ticket on November 6.”