My girl friend of almost forty years has more conviction and character than most men I know. Here is an example of how she told-off Raymond Arroyo, a popular host on the Catholic Channel (EWTN), for being an establishment shill.
Jane Hargadon
to raymond@raymondarroyo.com
date Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 4:23 PM
subject Pat Buchanan
Raymond,
I can't believe you did it again! How can you continue to ignore Ron Paul? He has won the Ohio straw poll, the California straw poll and the Value Voters straw poll! The MSM did not cover that bit of news, so maybe you missed it.
I feel as if you backed Mr Buchanan into a corner. I bet if you came right out and asked him which of the GOP candidates he would support, he would have answered "Ron Paul". I feel as if you phrased your questions in such a way that he had to react to the names that you brought out.
Have you seen the FB group called Catholics for Ron Paul? Ron Paul is pro-life in every aspect of that phrase- he is against abortion, war, euthanasia and the death penalty! He is the only one who has been consistent in his views for the past thirty years. He has upheld his oath to the Constitution for the past fifty plus years! Please stop ignoring him! Thank you.
Jane Hargadon
Friday, October 28, 2011
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Hiding Behind a Pro-Life Label
Too often, politicians and talking heads play-up to the pro-life constituents to gain their socially conservative credentials, only to find them cave-in on a crucial life issue. Or, they may flip, and support an agenda or candidate that is counter to the pro-life cause, as Santorum did by supporting Spector.
How can this be? How can we be on guard against opportunistic politicians who have little if any allegiance to pro-life causes?
The answer came to me as a friend and I were producing a Pro-Life Unity radio program on Blog Talk Radio. My friend is a self professed atheist. He has been a regular on our radio program, over the past three years whenever we produced shows. As an atheist, he often disagrees with other pro-lifers on ancillary issues.
To avoid possible conflicts, he is constantly in favor of keeping abortion, as a stand alone issue. He believes that the other positions "bundled" with a pro-life position, only weaken the pro-life block. That may work well, if you could believe a simple statement of being pro-life. Because we cannot trust someone to stay the course, it behooves us to look at associated issues which may add credibility to, or provide a contradiction to, the logic of the person in question.
Those who would stand for the protection of innocent human life in the womb, might also be expected to stand in defense of all innocent human life outside of the womb. Should there be an expectation of pro-life candidates, to be appalled by unconstitutional, unjust, and undeclared wars that kill innocent people? The common response is to acknowledge the legitimate place for war, and recognize that there is collateral damage in war. The problem of course, is that our recent “wars”, have not been declared, not been constitutional, and not been just. This is especially true when our CIA has been doing the killing.
Is the innocent human life in the womb more valuable than an innocent person gunned down by government sanctioned thugs? So one might find a contradiction in a reported pro-lifer, who looks dispassionately as our military or its agents, kill innocent people.
I contend, that if we require a blind eye to other issues, to be bundled with our pro-life position as we evaluate leaders, our pro-life stance is doomed. Consistent Life Ethic!
How can this be? How can we be on guard against opportunistic politicians who have little if any allegiance to pro-life causes?
The answer came to me as a friend and I were producing a Pro-Life Unity radio program on Blog Talk Radio. My friend is a self professed atheist. He has been a regular on our radio program, over the past three years whenever we produced shows. As an atheist, he often disagrees with other pro-lifers on ancillary issues.
To avoid possible conflicts, he is constantly in favor of keeping abortion, as a stand alone issue. He believes that the other positions "bundled" with a pro-life position, only weaken the pro-life block. That may work well, if you could believe a simple statement of being pro-life. Because we cannot trust someone to stay the course, it behooves us to look at associated issues which may add credibility to, or provide a contradiction to, the logic of the person in question.
Those who would stand for the protection of innocent human life in the womb, might also be expected to stand in defense of all innocent human life outside of the womb. Should there be an expectation of pro-life candidates, to be appalled by unconstitutional, unjust, and undeclared wars that kill innocent people? The common response is to acknowledge the legitimate place for war, and recognize that there is collateral damage in war. The problem of course, is that our recent “wars”, have not been declared, not been constitutional, and not been just. This is especially true when our CIA has been doing the killing.
Is the innocent human life in the womb more valuable than an innocent person gunned down by government sanctioned thugs? So one might find a contradiction in a reported pro-lifer, who looks dispassionately as our military or its agents, kill innocent people.
I contend, that if we require a blind eye to other issues, to be bundled with our pro-life position as we evaluate leaders, our pro-life stance is doomed. Consistent Life Ethic!
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Racial Profiling For Heaven!
Having been isolated at times, by my family, due to my criticism of the deviations and creativity that is often found in our current Novus Ordo Mass, I have learned to suck it up. Realizing that some of my remarks could be overly critical, I have attempted to not comment, unless there are four infractions or obvious deviations on what I might expect as Catholic theology during a Mass. Four disputable points is kind of like a liturgical tetris: it just drops.
This Sunday, my wife, and I attended Holy Mass at the 8:00 am, at a Roman rite Catholic Church in Maryland. It was the celebration of Ascension Thursday, but they don’t do that any more in this diocese. It used to be a “Holy Day of Obligation”, but now some dioceses celebrate it on Thursday, and some on the following Sunday. My wife and I had done the readings for Ascension Thursday, on Thursday, so we were prepared. So much for the universal, "catholic", Catholic church? That’s one!
At the homily, the priest started with a joke. Don’t you love it, when the celebrant has a need to just tell a joke. It had nothing to do with his message. It was just his attempt to try out for Comedy Central. That’s two!
During his homily, he announced that anyone who came to church this morning was assured to go to Heaven. He dug up a scriptural quote to build his case based on an assurance that anyone at Mass, loved God. Not a word about our free will to sin, much less discussing that presumption, presumption that we are assured heaven, is one of the two unforgivable sins against the Holy Spirit. That’s three.
Finally, as the celebrant was preparing to conclude the Liturgy, he hesitated before giving the final blessing. The Pastor came forward to address those in attendance. He instructed the ushers to give out papers and pencils, and requested that we write down how many people in our group attended the service, and what our racial classification would be. Luckily my wife grabbed the paper, before I could get a hold of it. That’s four, and that’s Liturgical Tetris
It certainly was not the Catholic Mass I was raised on, but at least they are getting an idea on the racial make-up of heaven.
This Sunday, my wife, and I attended Holy Mass at the 8:00 am, at a Roman rite Catholic Church in Maryland. It was the celebration of Ascension Thursday, but they don’t do that any more in this diocese. It used to be a “Holy Day of Obligation”, but now some dioceses celebrate it on Thursday, and some on the following Sunday. My wife and I had done the readings for Ascension Thursday, on Thursday, so we were prepared. So much for the universal, "catholic", Catholic church? That’s one!
At the homily, the priest started with a joke. Don’t you love it, when the celebrant has a need to just tell a joke. It had nothing to do with his message. It was just his attempt to try out for Comedy Central. That’s two!
During his homily, he announced that anyone who came to church this morning was assured to go to Heaven. He dug up a scriptural quote to build his case based on an assurance that anyone at Mass, loved God. Not a word about our free will to sin, much less discussing that presumption, presumption that we are assured heaven, is one of the two unforgivable sins against the Holy Spirit. That’s three.
Finally, as the celebrant was preparing to conclude the Liturgy, he hesitated before giving the final blessing. The Pastor came forward to address those in attendance. He instructed the ushers to give out papers and pencils, and requested that we write down how many people in our group attended the service, and what our racial classification would be. Luckily my wife grabbed the paper, before I could get a hold of it. That’s four, and that’s Liturgical Tetris
It certainly was not the Catholic Mass I was raised on, but at least they are getting an idea on the racial make-up of heaven.
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Have You Ever Known A Muslim?
I attended a patriot type meeting at which a lady friend, came up to discuss local politics, and what part religion might play. She was concerned about the zeal of some Christians, and how it might turn off Jews. This was her concern, but she had completely written-off Muslims. I thought she might be suffering from a bad case of Islamaphobia. I had never seen her this negative about anyone, as she regurgitated what she had been told about Muslims. So I asked her, “Have you ever known any Muslims?” Her answer was an emphatic “No!”
I explained to her that I have known about a dozen Muslims, and that I liked them all. I found them to be respectful, and easy to talk to. I realize that many people who hale from these local parts, may not know any Muslims. I also acknowledge that in any group of people, there are good and bad. The bad Muslims are being sold to the public, so I would like to introduce my Muslim friends.
The first Muslim I ever met was a dental patient who immigrated from Africa with his Peace Corps wife. He had a great sense of humor, was good natured, and deeply spiritual. He reportedly prayed five times a day, and was constantly in and out of different fasts. One day while doing his check-up, I found myself studying his living-out of his faith. I asked if he thought his God, that he called Allah, was the same as my God. His confident response sliced through our discussion, “God is unique!” “There is but one God for us to pray to. He is unique!”
My second Muslim acquaintance, was a man named Mohammad. He rented an apartment from me, for a couple of years, with his two friends, Mohammad and Mohammad. He was very soft spoken, and was never late with their rent. The Mohammads painted some of the rooms, and gave notice when they left. The apartment had never been so easy to keep.
My third association with a Muslim came in the streets of Calcutta, India. I had gone on pilgrimage with about sixteen guys to help Mother Theresa’s Missionaries of Charity. We gathered at the front of a former Jesuit school where we stayed, to make our first journey to the Mother House. A bearded man with a white head wrap approached me. He mistook me as a priest, or the person in-charge. He spoke very good English, and said he was a butcher. I informed him that we were on a spiritual pilgrimage. He smiled, and asked if I knew what was the ultimate question that every person needs to answer?
I guessed, “Do you love God?” Do you love Allah?
“No!”, he countered, and stressed his question again. “What is the question that everyone from Adam, to the two of us standing here on this street in Calcutta, need to answer?”
Absent my answer he gave it: “Who is my Master?”
Why do we do, what we do? Who do we serve? Who is my master? I was challenged in the reality of my faith in the gutter of a Calcutta street, by a Muslim. (Luke 7:9 "I tell you, not even in Israel have I found such faith.")
My fourth Muslim acquaintance came out of my favorite place for my morning coffee, 7-11. There was a short guy ,who worked the morning shift. He didn’t talk much, but was very efficient. This was about the same time when hate-Muslim e-mails began to permeate the web. These often inaccurate e-mails irritated me, and I would often voice my complaints in the office. During one of my ventings, my assistant volunteered that she recently had a flat tire in a downpour, on her way to her daughter’s school. She said that a guy stopped, and changed the tire in the pouring rain, and would not take any money. He told her that he worked at the 7-11 and was Muslim. It was my 7-11 coffee maker. (Luke 10:37 He answered, "The one who treated him with mercy". Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise.")
My wife and I attended a continuing education class for our computer system. It was an all day course and the class of about 25 decided that maybe we should send-out for pizza. I volunteered to go, and the guy who was sitting behind us bragging about his kids, offered to accompany me. We were all chipping-in, and he contributed for the lunch. When we returned, I noticed that he did not take any pizza. He told me he was Muslim, and was in the midst of a fast. I offered him his money back. He refused.
A couple years ago I gained three new patients of a husband, wife, and son who moved into the area. The son was a charming, polite kid, who loved to play soccer. In our conversation, I discovered that they were Muslim. With all the anti-Muslim hype, I cautioned the mom as she left from her last appointment, “Be careful!” Her beautiful dark eyes took-on a depth that was pure fear.
Lastly, in the most recent election that I participated in, I was invited to give a stump speech at the Baltimore Islamic Center in West Baltimore. All the politicians were well received. I was amused to see Neo-Cons, who had previously attacked me for being soft on “Islamic fascism”, because I was against Iraq and Afghan war. They were hob-nobbing with this room full of Muslims. One very distinguished doctor from the Center, spoke with clarity and directness. He said we do not want you to change your laws. He spoke with an urgency and seriousness that hinted of accusations that are unfounded. I liked him.
When I returned home from the patriot meeting I found this post on facebook. Hate Comes to Orange County.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NutFkykjmbM
If we begin attacking Muslims, who will be next?
I explained to her that I have known about a dozen Muslims, and that I liked them all. I found them to be respectful, and easy to talk to. I realize that many people who hale from these local parts, may not know any Muslims. I also acknowledge that in any group of people, there are good and bad. The bad Muslims are being sold to the public, so I would like to introduce my Muslim friends.
The first Muslim I ever met was a dental patient who immigrated from Africa with his Peace Corps wife. He had a great sense of humor, was good natured, and deeply spiritual. He reportedly prayed five times a day, and was constantly in and out of different fasts. One day while doing his check-up, I found myself studying his living-out of his faith. I asked if he thought his God, that he called Allah, was the same as my God. His confident response sliced through our discussion, “God is unique!” “There is but one God for us to pray to. He is unique!”
My second Muslim acquaintance, was a man named Mohammad. He rented an apartment from me, for a couple of years, with his two friends, Mohammad and Mohammad. He was very soft spoken, and was never late with their rent. The Mohammads painted some of the rooms, and gave notice when they left. The apartment had never been so easy to keep.
My third association with a Muslim came in the streets of Calcutta, India. I had gone on pilgrimage with about sixteen guys to help Mother Theresa’s Missionaries of Charity. We gathered at the front of a former Jesuit school where we stayed, to make our first journey to the Mother House. A bearded man with a white head wrap approached me. He mistook me as a priest, or the person in-charge. He spoke very good English, and said he was a butcher. I informed him that we were on a spiritual pilgrimage. He smiled, and asked if I knew what was the ultimate question that every person needs to answer?
I guessed, “Do you love God?” Do you love Allah?
“No!”, he countered, and stressed his question again. “What is the question that everyone from Adam, to the two of us standing here on this street in Calcutta, need to answer?”
Absent my answer he gave it: “Who is my Master?”
Why do we do, what we do? Who do we serve? Who is my master? I was challenged in the reality of my faith in the gutter of a Calcutta street, by a Muslim. (Luke 7:9 "I tell you, not even in Israel have I found such faith.")
My fourth Muslim acquaintance came out of my favorite place for my morning coffee, 7-11. There was a short guy ,who worked the morning shift. He didn’t talk much, but was very efficient. This was about the same time when hate-Muslim e-mails began to permeate the web. These often inaccurate e-mails irritated me, and I would often voice my complaints in the office. During one of my ventings, my assistant volunteered that she recently had a flat tire in a downpour, on her way to her daughter’s school. She said that a guy stopped, and changed the tire in the pouring rain, and would not take any money. He told her that he worked at the 7-11 and was Muslim. It was my 7-11 coffee maker. (Luke 10:37 He answered, "The one who treated him with mercy". Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise.")
My wife and I attended a continuing education class for our computer system. It was an all day course and the class of about 25 decided that maybe we should send-out for pizza. I volunteered to go, and the guy who was sitting behind us bragging about his kids, offered to accompany me. We were all chipping-in, and he contributed for the lunch. When we returned, I noticed that he did not take any pizza. He told me he was Muslim, and was in the midst of a fast. I offered him his money back. He refused.
A couple years ago I gained three new patients of a husband, wife, and son who moved into the area. The son was a charming, polite kid, who loved to play soccer. In our conversation, I discovered that they were Muslim. With all the anti-Muslim hype, I cautioned the mom as she left from her last appointment, “Be careful!” Her beautiful dark eyes took-on a depth that was pure fear.
Lastly, in the most recent election that I participated in, I was invited to give a stump speech at the Baltimore Islamic Center in West Baltimore. All the politicians were well received. I was amused to see Neo-Cons, who had previously attacked me for being soft on “Islamic fascism”, because I was against Iraq and Afghan war. They were hob-nobbing with this room full of Muslims. One very distinguished doctor from the Center, spoke with clarity and directness. He said we do not want you to change your laws. He spoke with an urgency and seriousness that hinted of accusations that are unfounded. I liked him.
When I returned home from the patriot meeting I found this post on facebook. Hate Comes to Orange County.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NutFkykjmbM
If we begin attacking Muslims, who will be next?
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Catholic Action Alert: You Get What You Pay For!
Being a pre-Vatican II Catholic who still treasures the teachings of the Church, I can commiserate with a sense of loss of our culture.
The Catholics in the Archdiocese of Baltimore are about to experience a new low. Senate Bill 116, which redefines marriage, has elicited an Action Alert from Maryland Catholic Conference. The Conference’s alert pleads with everyone to contact your senator, to express your concern for the principles that are the foundation of our families. They also direct people to a letter written on traditional marriage by Archbishop O’Brien, “Irresistible Promise of Happiness”. In his letter written in mid-January, the archbishop clearly articulates the benefits of traditional marriage, and goes on to state, “we can ill afford further efforts to undermine marriage”.
This failure to protect traditional marriage in SB 116 will add insult to injury to traditional Catholic culture when one considers our state’s funding of abortion and embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).
It is unfortunate that we don’t have a political party or candidates who are against state funding of abortion, and ESCR, and for protection of traditional marriage. Well, we did. The political party is the Constitution Party of Maryland, and their candidate for governor was Eric Knowles.
Maybe the Catholic Conference should have issued an action alert back in November. It could have called the attention of church members that the Constitution Party’s Eric Knowles, was the only ballot access candidate who answered the Catholic Conference’s survey in agreement with our church on all three issues. Maybe the Archbishop should have demanded that his Catholic Review (C.R.) print at least one declarative sentence in their eight page Election Supplement, to acknowledge that Knowles was the only ballot access candidate who agreed on all three: against state funding for abortion and ESCR, and for protecting traditional marriage.
I can only guess that a sentence stating this agreement in these non-negotiable issues may have been deemed to be too political. I am not sure, because the Archbishop has not responded to my written attempts to answer this. With the C.R.’s election supplement giving a full page, plus, on each of the two major candidates for governor, it calls to question the importance the hierarchy actually places on these non-negotiable principles.
Recognizing that the CR’s circulation in 2009 was noted at 120,000, some would think that a sentence stating Knowles’ agreement might go a long way to helping this third party to achieve 1% of the vote for governor, needed to maintain ballot access.
As the Constitution party scrapes to gather 10,000 signatures for ballot access, the old adage; “you get what you pay for” proves true. If you give free print and exposure to candidates who are pro-choice, pro-state funded ESCR, and, or weak on defending traditional marriage, while at the same time ignoring candidates who represent our interest, we loose.
The Catholics in the Archdiocese of Baltimore are about to experience a new low. Senate Bill 116, which redefines marriage, has elicited an Action Alert from Maryland Catholic Conference. The Conference’s alert pleads with everyone to contact your senator, to express your concern for the principles that are the foundation of our families. They also direct people to a letter written on traditional marriage by Archbishop O’Brien, “Irresistible Promise of Happiness”. In his letter written in mid-January, the archbishop clearly articulates the benefits of traditional marriage, and goes on to state, “we can ill afford further efforts to undermine marriage”.
This failure to protect traditional marriage in SB 116 will add insult to injury to traditional Catholic culture when one considers our state’s funding of abortion and embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).
It is unfortunate that we don’t have a political party or candidates who are against state funding of abortion, and ESCR, and for protection of traditional marriage. Well, we did. The political party is the Constitution Party of Maryland, and their candidate for governor was Eric Knowles.
Maybe the Catholic Conference should have issued an action alert back in November. It could have called the attention of church members that the Constitution Party’s Eric Knowles, was the only ballot access candidate who answered the Catholic Conference’s survey in agreement with our church on all three issues. Maybe the Archbishop should have demanded that his Catholic Review (C.R.) print at least one declarative sentence in their eight page Election Supplement, to acknowledge that Knowles was the only ballot access candidate who agreed on all three: against state funding for abortion and ESCR, and for protecting traditional marriage.
I can only guess that a sentence stating this agreement in these non-negotiable issues may have been deemed to be too political. I am not sure, because the Archbishop has not responded to my written attempts to answer this. With the C.R.’s election supplement giving a full page, plus, on each of the two major candidates for governor, it calls to question the importance the hierarchy actually places on these non-negotiable principles.
Recognizing that the CR’s circulation in 2009 was noted at 120,000, some would think that a sentence stating Knowles’ agreement might go a long way to helping this third party to achieve 1% of the vote for governor, needed to maintain ballot access.
As the Constitution party scrapes to gather 10,000 signatures for ballot access, the old adage; “you get what you pay for” proves true. If you give free print and exposure to candidates who are pro-choice, pro-state funded ESCR, and, or weak on defending traditional marriage, while at the same time ignoring candidates who represent our interest, we loose.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Let Jenkins Do His Job!
I love living in Frederick County! A county that has not forgotten the ultimate responsibility of the local sheriff to protect and defend his citizens from all enemies both foreign and domestic. Our republic is based on law that recognizes the ultimate authority vested in this elected officer. We expect him to even interpose his authority between state or federal government agencies, and Frederick County residents, if these agencies would violate the rights of our citizens in our county. I expect Sheriff Jenkins to: protect us from criminals, protect us from the problems with illegal immigration, and protect us from governments that would limit our constitutional rights!
We in Frederick County, are blessed with the best sheriff in Maryland, because he understands this responsibility. He was not appointed by some political lobby. Frederick County residents voted for him, as intended. Deciding who gets a permit to conceal carry, and in a more timely basis, is exactly what our sheriff should do. Make the gun permitting proposal a reality.
We in Frederick County, are blessed with the best sheriff in Maryland, because he understands this responsibility. He was not appointed by some political lobby. Frederick County residents voted for him, as intended. Deciding who gets a permit to conceal carry, and in a more timely basis, is exactly what our sheriff should do. Make the gun permitting proposal a reality.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Congressman Bartlett answers my question on TSA!!
Dear Mr. Hargadon:
Thank you for contacting my office regarding the newly enacted Transportation Security Administration (TSA) procedures for passengers at U.S. airports. I appreciate the opportunity respond.
These new TSA procedures include arguably invasive pat downs and x-ray scanner images. I understand many American's concerns that these procedures threaten our civil liberties and are inappropriate and embarrassing. Amendment IV of the U.S. Constitution states, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..." There needs to be an appropriate balance between the privacy and freedoms travelers give up and the effectiveness of the security procedures. Moreover, heightened security measures must not infringe on our constitutional liberty.
I do not believe the federal government has proven to Americans' satisfactions that the new intrusive airport screening procedures are necessary to ensure safe air travel. That is why I support Congressman Darrell Issa's (CA-49), the incoming Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, call for stronger evidence that TSA, as currently organized and administered, is competent to ensure air travel security. Furthermore, I support Congressman Issa's Blueprint for Oversight of the Executive Branch. This report details how "the vast expansion of the power and reach of the Executive Branch of government under both Republican and Democratic administrations has only increased the need for vigorous, unflinching Congressional oversight."
Thank you for contacting my office. I hope you will continue to keep me informed on federal issues that are important to you. In the meantime, I encourage you to visit my Internet website http://www.house.gov/bartlett where you can sign up to receive e-mail updates regarding my legislative activity. It is a privilege to serve you in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Sincerely, Roscoe Bartlett
Member of Congress
Thank you for contacting my office regarding the newly enacted Transportation Security Administration (TSA) procedures for passengers at U.S. airports. I appreciate the opportunity respond.
These new TSA procedures include arguably invasive pat downs and x-ray scanner images. I understand many American's concerns that these procedures threaten our civil liberties and are inappropriate and embarrassing. Amendment IV of the U.S. Constitution states, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..." There needs to be an appropriate balance between the privacy and freedoms travelers give up and the effectiveness of the security procedures. Moreover, heightened security measures must not infringe on our constitutional liberty.
I do not believe the federal government has proven to Americans' satisfactions that the new intrusive airport screening procedures are necessary to ensure safe air travel. That is why I support Congressman Darrell Issa's (CA-49), the incoming Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, call for stronger evidence that TSA, as currently organized and administered, is competent to ensure air travel security. Furthermore, I support Congressman Issa's Blueprint for Oversight of the Executive Branch. This report details how "the vast expansion of the power and reach of the Executive Branch of government under both Republican and Democratic administrations has only increased the need for vigorous, unflinching Congressional oversight."
Thank you for contacting my office. I hope you will continue to keep me informed on federal issues that are important to you. In the meantime, I encourage you to visit my Internet website http://www.house.gov/bartlett where you can sign up to receive e-mail updates regarding my legislative activity. It is a privilege to serve you in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Sincerely, Roscoe Bartlett
Member of Congress
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)