America's Party News - - Committees of Correspondence
  • America's Founding Principles
  •   Home  |  About  |  Platform  |  Affiliate  |  No donations  |  National Committee  |  Be a LeaderSearch  |  Inbox  |  My Settings  |  Log-in  

    'America's Summit  –  Restore the Republic'

    Every Tues. & Thurs. night  –  9 pm EST
    712-432-3566  –  passcode 340794#

    Archive  –  Listen on the web

    Contact Posting Guidelines

    Ann Coulter melts down in Steve Deace interview - gross compromise in defense of Mitt Romney
       Other Endorsed Independent Projects -> Real Republicans

    The respect that I once had for Ann Coulter disappeared while listening to this interview and her insulting, inaccurate, patronizing, and hysterical portrayal of the constitutional, legal and political facts surrounding Mitt Romney and his record.

    She accuses those who oppose Romney of religious bigotry, and compares those who care about whether Barack Obama is actually a natural born citizen and therefore qualified to be President to 9-11 truthers.

    And more importantly, she completely misrepresents the facts about Romney's institution of gay marriage in Massachusetts, and even compares Romney's signing into law of $50 co-pay abortions to the compromises that the founders of this country made when they signed the Constitution. Unbelievable.


    Click here to download and listen.


    Posted 2009-02-26 11:55 PM (#8246) By: EternalVigilance

    Wow!  Challenge Romney and Coulter goes ballistic. 

    Coulter threatens to leave the interview if Deace continues asking
    about Romney ... Coulter is usually high-strung ... but hysterical
    might not be too strong a word, in this instance.


    Posted 2009-02-27 12:52 AM (#8250 - in reply to #8246) By: Savvy

    Personally, I think she needs a sabbatical.
    Posted 2009-02-27 1:22 AM (#8253 - in reply to #8250) By: EternalVigilance

    Steve Deace

    Below is an email that I just sent to Steven Holman of Shirley & Bannister Public Affairs, the public relations firm that was our program's contact to obtain an interview with Ann Coulter.


    Thank you very much for suggesting and lining up our interview with Ann Coulter, who was very gracious with her time!  It was, as she always is, quite fascinating.  As a follow-up, I was wondering if you could assist me in passing along a message to Ann on behalf of our audience in the first in the nation caucus state?

    During the interview, I asked Ann about charges from some conservatives that Mitt Romney, the man she endorsed for president in the last election, was actually responsible for homosexual marriage in Massachusetts and not the state Supreme Court. 

    In reply to my question, Coulter asserted that all those who said Romney was actually responsible for homosexual marriage were "kooks" and just "hated Romney because he was Mormon."

    Below is a list of those "kooks" that Ann was referring to, and one of them just sent me the below material after hearing Ann on her show because he was concerned he was being called a "kook" and a "tower 7 conspiracy nut" from someone he believed to be on his own side.  

    Knowing that Ann has a zeal for the truth, I will assume that she will eagerly seek out the counsel and wisdom of the below individuals, many of whom would share her conservative convictions, in order to reconcile the vast chasm that exists between her version of events and theirs on such a critical issue for our culture. 

    God bless, and I look forward to working with you to the benefit of our audience in the future.

    Joint Letter to Governor Mitt Romney
    from Pro-Family Leaders

    December 22, 2006
    The Honorable W. Mitt Romney
    Governor, Commonwealth of Massachusetts
    The State House
    Boston, MA  02133 

    Dear Governor Romney: You have a few weeks left in your term to take action on the issue of marriage.

    Contrary to opinions offered up by liberal commentators, liberal legal authorities, and perhaps even your own staff, you have the authority as Governor to reverse the damage that has been done to the sacred institution of marriage. The signatories below urge you to declare immediately that homosexual “marriage” licenses issued in violation of the law are illegal and to issue an order to all state and local officials to cease violating the law.
     As is increasingly well known, the Massachusetts Constitution denies the Judicial Branch any role in marriage policy: 

    "All causes of marriage…shall be heard and determined by the governor and council, until the legislature shall, by law, make other provision." (PART THE SECOND, Ch. III, Article V.) 

    In hearing the Goodridge case and issuing an opinion, four of the seven judges violated the Supreme Law of Massachusetts. Massachusetts courts have admitted, on other occasions, that neither they nor legislators, nor the governor are authorized to violate the Constitution: 

    “[The words of the Constitution] are mandatory and not simply directory.  They are highly important. There must be compliance with them.”  (Town of Mount Washington v. Cook, 288 Mass. 67 

    Nevertheless, after these judges issued an illegal opinion, you told the citizens of Massachusetts and all of America that you had no choice but to "execute the law." Oddly, you were not referring to a law, but to the judges’ opinion. 

    Your oath to uphold the Constitution requires treating an unconstitutional opinion as void (as President Thomas Jefferson did in Marbury v. Madison). You failed to do this. Nor did you treat it as an illegal ruling that affected only the specific plaintiffs (as Abraham Lincoln did, refusing to accept the Dred Scott ruling as law, pointing out that judges do not make law). 

    Instead, you asserted that the court’s opinion was a “law" and thus binding. Though the Legislature never revoked the actual law, you issued – with no legal authority -- the first “homosexual marriage” licenses in American history. The Massachusetts Constitution does not confirm either your statements or your actions:   

    "[T]he people of this commonwealth are not controllable by any other laws than those to which their constitutional representative body have given their consent." (PART THE FIRST, Article X.) 

    The Constitution also disproves your assertion to the nation that the marriage statute (M.G.L. Chapter 207) was somehow suspended or nullified by the four judges: 

    "The power of suspending the laws, or the execution of the laws, ought never to be exercised but by the legislature, or by authority derived from it, to be exercised in such particular cases only as the legislature shall expressly provide for."  (PART THE FIRST, Article XX.) 

    In light of both your actions and your explanations, it comes as a great surprise to many of us to learn that, under the Massachusetts Constitution, judges cannot suspend or alter statutes.  This principle is clearly fundamental to Massachusetts' system of government and is restated in multiple ways.    

    "The judicial shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them: to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men." (PART THE FIRST, Article XXX.) 


    We note that the Massachusetts Constitution so completely protects citizens from the rule of judges that even laws passed in the Colonial period before the Constitution itself was ratified cannot be suspended by judges:    

    "All the laws which have heretofore been adopted, used and approved … shall still remain and be in full force, until altered or repealed by the legislature…" (PART THE SECOND, Article VI.) 

    We note, Governor, that in all of your justifications to the nation, there was no mention of these parts of the Constitution which you swore to defend. Why?  Even this same court is forced to admit: "The Constitution as framed is the only guide. To change its terms is within the power of the people alone."  (Opinion of the Justices, 220 Mass. 613, 618) 

    We note Massachusetts Chief Justice Hutchison's words in 1767: "laws should be established, else Judges and Juries must go according to their Reason, that is, their Will" and "[T]he Judge should never be the Legislator: Because, then the Will of the Judge would be the Law
    : and this tends to a State of Slavery.'"  

    As Judge Swift put it in 1795, courts "ought never to be allowed to depart from the well known boundaries of express law, into the wide fields of discretion."

    As for your claims about the authority of Goodridge and its illegal 180-day instruction to the Legislature, the same court had admitted in 1992 that they cannot issue an order to the legislature or the governor:  

    "The courts [instructing] when and how to perform...constitutional duties" (mandamus) "is not available against the Legislature [or] against the Governor)." "The...principles expressed in...the Massachusetts for the judiciary to refrain from intruding into the power and function of another branch of government." (LIMITS v. President of the Senate, 414 Mass. 31, 31 n.3, 35 (1992) 

    We also note this ruling in 1969: "an unconstitutional overreaching by the judiciary is an act that is “not only not warranted but, indeed, [is] precluded.” (Commonwealth v. Leis) We note that even the Goodridge majority said they were not suspending the marriage statute:  “Here, no one argues that striking down the marriage laws is an appropriate form of relief."  

    In fact, they admitted that under the statute, Chapter 207 of the Massachusetts General Laws, homosexual marriage is illegal: “We conclude, as did the judge, that M.G.L. c. 207 may not be construed to permit same-sex couples to marry.” 

    Moreover, we note that nothing in the Goodridge ruling asked or pretended to authorize the governor to violate the statute in the event that the Legislature would not repeal it.
     We also note that the statute remains in the Massachusetts General Laws, and has never been stricken, suspended or nullified. The court itself has previously clarified your obligation:

    "But the statute, so long as it stands, imposes upon both branches [of the Legislature] uniformity of procedure so far as concerns this particular matter. One branch cannot ignore it without a repeal of the statute. A repeal can be accomplished only by affirmative vote of both branches and approval by the governor." (Dinan v. Swig, 223 Mass. 516, 519 (1916)

    Nevertheless, with no legal authorizion, you ordered [changes in] the words on marriage licenses from "husband" and "wife," to "Partner A" and "Partner B."  Stunningly, you later admitted that without enabling legislation you cannot change birth certificates in a similar way.

    We note that, despite the court's admission that the statute prohibits “homosexual marriage,” and the Constitution's statement that only the Legislature can suspend laws, you ordered officials to perform homosexual marriages and thus violate the statute (a crime under c. 207 §48) and the oath of office. Those who refused, you ordered to resign. 

    This emboldened other local officials, including the mayor of Boston, to boast publicly
    that they would break the law by "marrying" out-of-state homosexual couples – also a crime under c. 207 §48.
     In summary, while the four judges asserted that Chapter 207 is unconstitutional, they did not suspend the marriage statute and were powerless to do so. The legislature has not changed or repealed it.

    1.      The marriage statute is still in effect.
         2.      The statute continues to prohibit same-sex marriages. 

    We note that you swore no oath to execute court opinions, but rather laws and the Constitution.  The same Massachusetts high court itself said in 1986: [The Executive branch] must "be faithful to the words of the statute ... as written, and an event or contingency for which no provision has been made does not justify judicial [or Executive Branch] legislation." (Amherst v. Attorney General
    , 398 Mass. 793)

    You swore an oath to uphold the Constitution against assault from the other two branches.  You swore on a Holy Bible, and said, "So help me, God."  Your oath itself declares that it is violated on penalty of perjury, a felony.
     Like much of America, many of us accepted as sincere your explanations of your role in this social and constitutional crisis that is fundamentally altering the moral fabric of our culture and eroding basic building block of human society. 

    We are now forced to look at your role, as constitutional sentry and a gatekeeper of our form of government, in a different light.
     We would be greatly disappointed if your principal contribution to history will be imposing homosexual marriage -- knowingly or unknowingly, willfully or negligently -- in violation of the state Constitution you swore to uphold.

    ¨      We urge you in the strongest possible way to fulfill the obligation imposed by the Constitution of Massachusetts upon the "Supreme Executive Magistrate" to uphold Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 207 the marriage statute, by declaring immediately in a formal, written executive order that the Goodridge court cannot overrule the Constitution and that homosexual marriage therefore remains against the law. 

    ¨      We urge you also to issue immediately a public memorandum from the Office of the Governor declaring members of the Legislature to be engaged in a conspiracy against the Constitution, to which the oath of office attaches the penalties of perjury -- a felony. 

    ¨      We urge you to immediately notify the legislators who openly conspired against the Constitution in denying the first marriage amendment petition a vote in 2002 that:

    ·         they violated the oath of office, a constitutional felony, and
    ·         as a citizens’ constitutional petition, that initiative remains pending until brought to one of the five final actions the Constitution requires and
    ·         therefore their crime against the Constitution is perpetual and without statute of limitations
    ·         unless they vote, you will call them into session on that original marriage petition and
    ·         will order the state police to arrest them and bring them to the chambers to vote (as the Governor of Texas ordered in May 2003 when Texas legislators refused to convene a quorum). Under conditions of repeated and systematic constitutional abuse, these steps by a governor are the minimum required to defend constitutional democracy and our republican form of government. 

    Paul Weyrich, Free Congress Foundation
    Dr. Chuck Baldwin, radio host, columnist
    *Gary Kreep, Esq., president, United States Justice Foundation
    Paul Likoudis, editor, The Wanderer
    Phil Lawler, editor, Catholic World News
    Dr. William Greene,
    Rev. Scott Lively, Esq., Defend the Family
    Rev. Stephen Bennett, Stephen Bennett Ministries
    Sandy Rios, Culture Campaign
    Robert Knight, a draftsman of the federal Defense of Marriage Act
    John Haskins, Parents’ Rights Coalition (and The Underground Journal)
    Linda Harvey, Mission America
    Randy Thomasson, Campaign for Children and Families
    David E. Smith, Illinois Family Institute
    Rev. Ted Pike, National Prayer Network
    Diane Gramley, American Family Association of Pennsylvania
    Micah Clark, American Family Association of Indiana
    Kevin McCoy, West Virginia Family Foundation
    Stephen Cable, Vermont Center for American Cultural Renewal
    Joe Glover, Family Policy Network (National)
    Terry Moffitt, Family Policy Network of North Carolina
    Marnie Deaton, Family Policy Network of Virginia
    Danny Eason, Family Policy Network of Texas
    Matt Chancey, Family Policy Network of Alabama
    Ron Shank, Family Policy Network of Tennessee
    John R. Diggs, Jr., M.D., leading expert on the medical risks of homosexuality
    Dr. Paul Cameron, Family Research Institute
    Bill Cotter, Operation Rescue Boston
    R. T. Neary, ProLife Massachusetts, former president, Massachusetts Citizens for Life
    Mike O'Neil, CPF/The Fatherhood Coalition, Massachusetts
    Peter LaBarbera, Americans for Truth
    Michael Heath, Christian Civic League of Maine
    Gary Glenn, American Family Association of Michigan
    James Hartline, The Hartline Report
    Jan Markell, Olive Tree Ministries & Radio
    Bunny S. Galladora, Woman's Christian Temperance Union
    Sonja Dalton, Real Civil Rights Illinois
    Allyson Smith, Americans for Truth/California
    John F. Russo, Marriage & Family, Massachusetts
    Stacy Harp, Active Christian Media, host, The Right View
    Brian Camenker, MassResistance
    Rena Havens, Mothers Against Pedophilia
    Rev. Michael Carl, Constitution Party of Massachusetts
    Carl Parnell, author, From Schoolhouse to Courthouse    
    Affiliations are listed for identification purposes only and do not imply a formal endorsement or commitment by those organizations. 
    *Notes he has not had an opportunity to investigate punishable criminal consequences of violating the Massachusetts oath of office. 

    The following attorneys, law professors and other holders of advanced degrees in law or constitutional theory are among the many who state here (or have previously stated in their own words) that Romney's claim that judges changed Massachusetts' marriage laws and he was "forced" or had legal authority to bypass the Legislature and violate the marriage statutes with his orders imposing homosexual "marriage" in Massachusetts, is constitutionally absurd and false.*

    Judge Ned Kirby (ret.), also former Assistant Minority Leader, Massachusetts Senate
    Atty. Edgar Kelley, former Assistant United States Attorney, Massachusetts District
    Professor Hadley Arkes, professor of jurisprudence, Amherst College (Massachusetts)
    Professor Herbert Titus, former dean, Regent U. College of Law and College of Government, Co-founder, American Center for Law and Government
    Professor Scott Fitzgibbon, professor of law, Boston College Law School (Massachusetts)
    Professor Hugh Hewitt, Chapman University**
    Professor Mary Ann Glendon, Harvard Law School, U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican**
    Justice Joseph Nolan, Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts (retired)**
    Atty. Phyllis Schlafly, President, Eagle Forum
    Dr. Scott Lively, attorney, Defend the Family International (Massachusetts)
    Atty. Gary Kreep, president, United States Justice Foundation
    Atty. Thomas Glessner, President, National Institute of Family and Life Advocates
    Atty. Jan M. LaRue, former Chief legal counsel of Concerned Women for America (CWA), currently affiliated with Brent Bozelle's Media Research Center
    Dr. Alan Keyes, Ph.D, Harvard (American constitutional theory), Reagan appointee as Ambassador to United Nations' Economic and Social Council and an Assistant Secretary of State Atty. J. Edward Pawlick, founder, Lawyer's Weekly newspapers
    Joseph Farah, founder, World Net Daily
    Pat Buchanan, former White House staff, presidential candidate
    Atty. 'Robert Paine,' author: "The Governor's New Clothes: How Mitt Romney Brought Same-Sex 'Marriage' To America", veteran attorney (pen name)
    Dr. Ted Baehr, Chairman, Christian Film and Television Commission (Juris Doctor, New York Univ. School of Law, former editor: NY Law School Newspaper)
    Atty. Larry Cirignano, former Executive Director, Catholic Vote (Massachusetts)
    Atty. Owen O'Malley, (Massachusetts)
    Atty. Chester Darling, (Massachusetts) former president, Citizens for Preservation of Constitutional Rights, won a rare unanimous decision before the U.S. Supreme Court)
    Atty. Mat Staver, President, Liberty Counsel, Dean, Liberty U. School of Law
    Atty. Matt Barber, formerly at Concerned Women for America (CWA), currently with The Liberty Counsel

    Note: Charles E. Rice, Professor Emeritus of Law, Notre Dame Law School signed a letter publicly calling Romney "dishonest" for signing in a Planned Parenthood and Hillary Clinton-approved "major expansion of taxpayer-funded abortion" (at $50 each) after he claimed to have rediscovered his "pro-life" convictions.

    *We are able to fully document the statements about Romney and his record made by all those listed above, including in many cases, private communications put in our hands by their friends and colleagues.

    **Hewitt, bizarrely enough, originally published a very forceful and sound legal argument calling on Romney to treat the Goodridge opinion as fraudulent and legally void, but then later on became one of his most ardent presidential supporters.
    Posted 2009-02-27 1:33 AM (#8255 - in reply to #8253) By: EternalVigilance

    Wasn't it only a week ago that Ann Coulter hung up on the Bob Enyart radio show over the same topic?


    Posted 2009-02-27 5:31 AM (#8257 - in reply to #8255) By: Philomena

    I find it interesting, those who did not support Obama were not seen as being compelled by principles, but were alluded to as being racial bigots. I think it is a similar situation in this case, there is no defense for Romney's actions as governor in regards to homosexual marriage and the $50 dollar abortion. Miss Coulter's response to those who challenge Romney's actions - they're Mormon bigots. So much for candor on principles supposedly held dear and calling to account those who are primarily charged with upholding these principles.
    Posted 2009-02-27 11:41 PM (#8311 - in reply to #8257) By: Little Bit

    who do I talk to about my comment being taken down!!!
    I know that it was harsh, but was it not true????
    I'm more offended by Mormons adding to the Bible (God's Holy Word) than I ever will be by a foreigner becoming president of an earthly kingdom( I do love America, but my God and Savior will always come first).
    Please repost my comment or let me edit it. I am highly upset brothers, I would expect such things to be done by Republicans, not God-fearing AIPers.
    Please email me at

    REVELATION 22:18
    For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book.
    Posted 2009-02-28 8:49 AM (#8322 - in reply to #8311) By: dmcclain57

    Conference call topic, about Dr. John R. Diggs

    This letter to Mitt Romney from pro-family leaders is a perfect explanation of how Mitt Romney brought homosexuality to Massachusetts.

    Edited by Philomena 2010-06-10 6:32 PM
    Posted 2010-06-10 6:24 PM (#39107 - in reply to #8322) By: Philomena

    Romney....yeah the way that Conservatism Inc. rallied around the guy shows how bankrupt the Republicans and their mouth pieces are...
    Posted 2010-06-11 6:27 AM (#39142 - in reply to #39107) By: KMD

    Search this forum
    Printer friendly version
    E-mail a link to this thread

    Latest Posts From All Affiliates
    An insightful column by Evan Sayet - TomK--V-USA (0 replies)

    Prodigal Nation - Part 1 [Peter Marshall] - gcsteven (6 replies)

    Well... they ASKED for it - TomK--V-USA (0 replies)

    The Sower knows, "The SEED of LIFE." - gcsteven (5 replies)

    It is simply not enough for Christians to change the laws; people’s hearts must be changed. - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Understanding Involves Responsibility - DAVID JEFFERS - gcsteven (1 replies)

    Whose responsibility is the health care of illegal immigrants? - gcsteven (1 replies)

    If you control the language... - TomK--V-USA (0 replies)

    New Political Party takes stand on social issues! - EternalVigilance (0 replies)

    Same-sex marriage fight is a lie, sez lesbian activist. Real goal: abolish marriage - Philomena (1 replies)

    The 28 fundamental beliefs of the Founding Fathers - Philomena (1 replies)

    The U.S. Constitution: Original Intent or a Living Document? - Philomena (3 replies)

    A succinct reply to the ISIS leader - TomK--V-USA (0 replies)

    The *real* problem at the VA is... - TomK--V-USA (0 replies)

    Huckabee's Speech Against Judicial Supremacy - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    A Miracle For Justina - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Jesus, Yours will be the only Name that matters to me - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Franklin Ed Shoemaker, America's Party candidate for Florida House, District 40 - Gregory (1 replies)

    This Nation's greatest Political and Economic 'Deficit'. - gcsteven (17 replies)

    Email to Massachusetts Governor Patrick On Behalf of Justina Pelletier and Her Family - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    The Scientific and Prophetic Accuracy of the Bible - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    History Repeats Itself - God Warned Israel, Now America - Deuteronomy 8 and 32 - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Significance Of This Primary Campaign To All Who With Tom Hoefling Love Our Lord Jesus Christ - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Is this a Judge? - forJustice (0 replies)

    Message from Tom Hoefling - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Message to Tom Hoefling and Franklin Ed Shoemaker - 1 John 5:4 - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Already Gone - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Global Warming: A Scientific and Biblical Expose of Climate Change - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    1854 US Congress And 1892 US Supreme Court Declared Our Nation And Its Founders To Be Christian - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Who DARES to limit God?? - TomK--V-USA (0 replies)

    What did you ask for on your 16th birthday? Hear what Justina asked for. - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Political Candidates For The Upcoming Elections Consider Your Ways - Proverbs 21 - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Uninstall Firefox - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Birth Patrol the New Sentry - Bishop Sheen, 1960 - gcsteven (2 replies)

    Christ Is Enough - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Yes, sadly, you DID read correctly - TomK--V-USA (0 replies)

    Judie Brown: The Problems Created by Pro-Lifers - Philomena (4 replies)

    This Week with True the Vote - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    A Battlecry (Psalm 119) - It is time for You to act, O LORD, for they have regarded Your law as void - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    STOP COMMON CORE IN NY - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    G. K. Chesterton: It’s Not Gay, and It’s Not Marriage - gcsteven (2 replies)

    Marijuana 'edibles' pack a wallop - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    LIVE FEED: Pro-LIFE Witness with Arrests at Notre Dame - Philomena (53 replies)

    South Dakota Gubernatorial Candidate Lora Hubbel's HCR1001 Floor Speech (how SB38 leads to abortion) - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    This Week with True the Vote - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Will a popular TV drama series DESTROY itself by...? - TomK--V-USA (1 replies)

    Supreme Court Upholds Prayer At Government Meetings - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Reminder -- V-USA is on Facebook and Twitter - TomK--V-USA (1 replies)

    UH-OH, is Hillary 'testing the waters' for 2016 run? - TomK--V-USA (0 replies)

    Are We in a “Post Christian” Era? - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Update and National Day Of Prayer Call for Justina - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Legislative Updates & Smart Voting News for April 29, 2014 - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    The Bible Is a Textbook of Science - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Justice, just a word? - gcsteven (3 replies)

    No conflict between science and our Creator, Lord and Savior Jesus Christ! - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Aborted babies burned to make electricity - Philomena (1 replies)

    The Right Tool for the Job - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Legislative Updates & Smart Voting News for April 22, 2014 - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Let us raise a standard to be strong: Part V, Fulton J. Sheen - gcsteven (3 replies)

    Tom Hoefling at Iowa GOP Lincoln Dinner 04.11.2014 - gcsteven (0 replies)

    THE SHORT VERSION -- why America's Party is so much better than the Republican Party - TomK--V-USA (0 replies)

    Legislative Updates & Smart Voting News for April 8, 2014 - SavedByGrace (0 replies)


    Knowing Your Child by Heart - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Legislative Updates & Smart Voting News for April 3, 2014 - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Parental Rights and Justina Pelletier - SavedByGrace (0 replies)

    Conference call America's Party of Florida, 8pm, Eastern, First Tuesday of month - Gregory (2 replies)