Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login | What's Hot
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Roger Schlesinger :: Townhall.com Columnist
Who Knew?
by Roger Schlesinger
Forward Print Share Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Sometimes I get the feeling that the world has turned upside down. Especially lately.

I feel that either I don't get it or maybe bad is good and good is bad. When I first found something that was peculiar, I thought maybe I had misunderstood what I heard, and let it pass. The second time I found the world a bit out of sorts, I chalked it up to global warming, even though I was shoveling the snow at my house by a lake where it never snows in the month of March, or hardly ever. The third time it happened, I knew it wasn't me. Something was up!

The world is in turmoil from the financial downturn, but our nation is in disarray because it appears to have lost its Judeo Christian roots, resulting in the moral and ethical compass pointing due north while facing south. There are countless examples of what I am talking about but I will concentrate on three major categories: the mortgage arena, the business atmosphere and the basic way we conduct our governmental rules and procedures. If this doesn't move to unnerve you then it must be that my bearings are off.

Who knew that after a major financial setback, our government would be concerned with those who, for the most part, were part of the problem and literally throw only crumbs to those who were steadfastly trying to do the right thing. Unimaginable, but true!

Those who got into trouble because they over reached, cheated, or simply took the expedient way out when it came to the mortgage on their house, are being lead by the hand to the promise land of a new beginning. May I note here that not everyone who has lost their house through foreclosure, or is in serious trouble with their mortgage, falls into the above categories. Many were hit with another catastrophe, the loss of their job, an accident or illness, that made it impossible to hold on.

When the current administration came out with their mortgage bailout plan, it detailed the plans for those facing foreclosure and those drastically behind in their payments over a number of pages, while outlining the details of a plan to help those not behind in their payments, but were simply unable to refinance because of the real estate market actions, in three or four paragraphs. Those who are behind can have their mortgage reduced, their interest rate reduced and the term of their mortgage extended as long as they are holders of conforming loans. It doesn't matter how much over the current value of the house these borrowers owe because the government will pay off the mortgage to reach certain levels. Not so for those who stayed and paid. 105% of the value of the house is the limit that the government will help with refinancing the mortgage. The sentiment of the populace who did the right thing is "why did we do it? We would have been better off to not make the payments!" Is this the lesson we learned from the history of our beloved country that we wish to pass on? Who came up with these plans?

When it comes to the general business of the country, we are now directed to the notion that the employer, the risk taker, is the villain, and the employee deserves not only the credit for the enterprise, but also the cash. We are to learn to love the workers and cast a weary eye at the employers. Can you possibly build the nation's business by impeding the employer while applauding the employee? May I again state that not every employer is great, benevolent, forward seeing and the type of person we all have admired over the years, nor is every employee or even the vast majority of employees slackers and uninterested in the welfare of the enterprise. What bothers me most is the underlying disdain I am hearing about capitalism. I turned on one of the financial stations last week and heard my own congressman talking about the possible end of capitalism in America. I, for one, believe we could not be where we are today without the capitalistic business model.

This takes me to the government of our great country. When did it become fashionable in the Congress and Senate to simply pass laws and ratify budgets that were unread by the members of these great institutions and voted on because they were either instructed or coerced to pass said laws and/or budgets. After passing these instruments without knowledge or concern, these esteemed bodies banded together and attacked businesses and business leaders who were the recipients of these budgets. All of a sudden the politicos were concerned with nickel and dimes after the dollars escaped by the billions. Why the outrage at this time: political expediency? They were going to show their constituents they had their eye on the ball. The fact, as it turned out, that they had gone after the wrong players in the AIG fiasco was irrelevant. The real relevant point is why were they doing this at all?

How can you err by omission and commission at the same time? Who could have known?

We are considering, as a nation, to change the rules in the middle of the game as we have done before in the mortgage market and the financial markets. We have made it nearly impossible for self employed people to get mortgage loans. These are the very people who have always been able to qualify for loans, but not after the rules changed in December of last year. We changed the up tick rule for short selling, which did unbelievable damage to the markets at the worst possible time, for reasons that are still unknown. Now we are considering changing the secret ballot, a cornerstone of our democracy, in all elections to decide whether employees wish to have a union in businesses with 10 employees or more. Why? Did the secret ballot fail us over the years? Is our nation less than it could be because we steadfastly stuck with the secret ballot? I have my feeling about this change and I am sure you have yours. The big question is why would we do this and do we stop with just this type of election?

It is certainly time for everyone to wake up and find out what is happening in this country.

Are you aware of all that is happening in front of the cameras and behind them? Now is the time to figure out which direction this nation is heading and whether you believe it is the way you would like to go. If we don't try to ascertain what is going on now, then one day we might all be saying "who knew?"

Share:
Forward Print Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Roger Schlesinger's Mortgage Minute is heard on hundreds of radio stations and daily on the Hugh Hewitt radio show and Michael Medved shows. Roger interacts with his hosts and explores the complicated financial markets in order to enlighten his listeners and direct them along their own unique road to financial freedom.

Be the first to read Roger Schlesinger's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Join The Debate!

Post Your Comment
(34 comments so Far)
View in ascending order     View in descending order
Reply # 1
Date: Mar 28, 2009 - 12:41 AM EST
John is one of the losers
Who never reads anything about Ron Paul nailing the problem at least 10 years ago and is ignored by clowns like John.
We can thank the people like John for the idiot Obama and the crushing financial distress.
THEY ARE TOO STUPID TO READ ANYTHING ABOUT IT BEFORE THEY ATTACK THEIR BETTERS LIKE THE MAN RON PAUL.
Who is head and shoulders above you John, you loser
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 2
Date: Mar 28, 2009 - 12:37 AM EST
John writes:
Thanks, in part, to you and your kind we now have the most leftist President in our history
===========================
I voted for Sarah Palin and the worthless McCain was on the same ticket.
Blame McCain for the loss, he acted like Obama's hired campaign manager while acting like he wanted to be president, you clown
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 3
Date: Mar 28, 2009 - 12:35 AM EST
You see whats not there
John Writes
Talent Scout
I see you're one of those losers who wasted your vote on Ron Paul.
====================
I did not vote for Ron Paul.
I voted for Sarah Palin.

This thread is about money not the Presidency anyway.

You must be one of those losers who have never read anything about the financial markets and what Ron Paul has said about them for 25 years, but speak evil of a better man than you or McCain will ever be.
You clown
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 4
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 11:31 PM EST
Talent Scout
I see you're one of those losers who wasted your vote on Ron Paul. Thanks, in part, to you and your kind we now have the most leftist President in our history. What good does it do this country to vote for third party, losertarian, parties? I guess it makes you feel good about yourself, maybe it strokes your ego to tell people how "I knew it all along and I tried to tell you". Seriously, if you really want to make an impact you should work within a legitamate party, preferably Republican, to make the change that is needed in this country. This is and always will be a 2 party system.
If you are a conspiracy theorist only, and not interested in having an impact on the American political system, then by all means continue to vote for losertarians or the constipation party or whoever and let the adults decide the outcomes of elections.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 5
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 7:03 PM EST
Who knew?
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 6
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 5:37 PM EST
After Bernanake
Claimed in this account
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dv6rQ0U01Yc


in an open air meeting and discussion with Ron Paul about Monetizing the Debt, denying he would do that, look what he is saying today.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123750959910890623.html





In case there was any residual doubt, the Bernanke Fed threw itself all in this week to unlock financial markets and spur the economy. With its announced plan to make a mammoth purchase of Treasury securities, the Fed essentially said that the considerable risks of future inflation and permanent damage to the Fed's political independence are details that can be put off, or cleaned up, at a later date. Whatever else people will say about his chairmanship, Ben Bernanke does not want deflation or Depression on his resume.

It's important to understand the historic nature of what the Fed is doing. In buying $300 billion worth of long-end Treasurys, it is directly monetizing U.S. government debt.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 7
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 5:27 PM EST
Ron Paul schools Bernanke
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dv6rQ0U01Yc
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 8
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 5:20 PM EST
Who Knew?
Ron Paul knew
The Austrian School of Economics knew.
Litterally millions of ordinary Americans knew who have listened to such as Ron Paul and the Austrians
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 9
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 5:16 PM EST
February 2001
PAUL: Mr. Chairman, you’re getting a lot of suggestions these days about what to do with interest rates. That’s likely to continue because I suspect we’re moving into – you don’t call it a “recession,” but a “retrenchment.”

In many ways we have an unmanageable system, and that is the key to what is happening in our economy.

You are continuously asked to lower interest rates. Let me remind my colleagues that when somebody says “lower the interest rates” they’re saying “inflate the money supply.”

If we concentrate on prices and find that the Producer Price Index is satisfactory, for example, we neglect the fact that the money supply is surging and causing a lot of mischief.

In your testimony today you talked about “excesses” and “imbalances” and the need for “retrenchment.” In 1996 you were justifiably concerned with “irrational exuberance in the stock market.” Since then the money supply as measured by M3 has gone up $2.25 trillion. The stock market has soared. I see the imbalances as a consequence of excessive credit.

I don’t believe you or anyone can know what the proper rate of interest is. Only the market can dictate that. I don’t think you know what the proper money supply is. You admit you don’t even have a good proxy for measuring the money supply, yet that is your job.

Now you’re talking about monetizing other securities like state bonds and foreign bonds. Isn’t it ironic that with a $5.7 trillion debt we’re running out of things to buy?

GREENSPAN: But of that $5.7 trillion a large part is held in trust funds of the U.S. government. The net debt is really $3.5 trillion, of which the Fed owns more than $500 billion.

When we look at State and local securities to buy, we’re looking to maintain the same degree of risk we have when we buy federal government securities.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 10
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 5:09 PM EST
February 2000
PAUL: Good morning, Mr. Greenspan. I see you have stayed on the job in spite of my friendly advice last fall. At least you remember the days of sound money, even if it’s only nostalgia, so I’m pleased to have you here.

We have talked a lot about prices today, but for the sound money economist the money supply is the critical issue. If you increase the supply, you create inflation.

If we aim at a stable price level, we’re making a mistake. Technology and other factors can keep prices contained, but if you’re increasing the money supply we still have malinvestment, excessive debt and borrowing.

Someone mentioned that the Fed might be too tight with money. I disagree. The last quarter of 1999 might be historic highs for an increase in Fed credit. Over the last three years the Fed has not once been in the target range for M3. You went over it, in fact, by $690 billion. Everyone likes it now because the bubble is still growing. But what happens when it bursts? Can you reassure me it won’t? Will M3 shrink?

GREENSPAN: Let me assure you we believe in sound money. We believe if you have a debased currency you will have a debased economy. As I’ve said earlier, the difficulty is defining what money truly is. We have been unable to define a monetary aggregate that will give us a reliable forecast for the economy. Until we find a reliable “M” we will go light on the use of monetary aggregates for monetary policy purposes.

PAUL: So it’s hard to manage something you can’t define.

GREENSPAN: It’s impossible to manage something you cannot define.

[ME: When there’s no real money in the system, it’s hard to find real money. But it does seem to let the ones in charge of creating fiat money off the hook.]
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 11
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 5:05 PM EST
July 1999

PAUL: Mr. Chairman, in your opening statement you said we should be especially alert to inflation risks. You admitted today as you have done in the past that the business cycle of booms followed by busts is not dead.

Since you took office in 1987, the money supply as measured by M3 has shot up $2.5 trillion. The Consumer Price Index has gone up 44 percent. Capitalization in the stock market has gone from $3.5 trillion to $14 trillion.

It’s not a matter of anticipating that a problem might arise – we’ve already created one, and we’re going to have to deal with it. How are you going to handle it? In 1979 and 1980, under similar circumstances, the Fed raised interest rates as high as 21 percent to save the dollar.

And why on earth would you want to stay around for this calamity? I would think you’d want to get out while the getting is good.

GREENSPAN: Dr. Paul,....blah blah blah...

http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/smith/smith4.html
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 12
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 4:59 PM EST
February 1999
PAUL: Many economists view the price of gold as an indicator of inflation. The higher the price goes, the greater the worries about inflation and the value of the dollar.

You have said that central banks, who are the major holders of gold, are willing to loan or sell gold in increasing quantities should the price rise.

Since we are no longer on a gold standard, are central banks selling gold to hold its price at a certain level?

GREENSPAN: No. They are selling gold for two reasons: one, to reduce their storage costs for gold, and two, it’s considered a poor asset to hold since gold does not yield any interest.


web site owner is the ME speaking
[ME: If it’s such a poor asset to hold and costs money to store, why not sell all of it? But if they did that they wouldn’t have any to sell when the price started to rise again.]

http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/smith/smith4.html
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 13
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 4:56 PM EST
July 1998
RON PAUL:
Mr. Greenspan, someone quoted you as saying you would welcome a downturn in the economy to compensate for the surge and modest growth we’ve experienced.

Is it not true that in a free market with sound money, you never welcome an economic downturn?

But what we’re hearing now is, when is the Fed going to intervene and turn down the economy?

Wouldn’t a free market operate a lot better than the market we use today?

GREENSPAN: When you have a fiat currency, which is what everyone in the world has—

PAUL: You don’t have a free market.

GREENSPAN: You don’t have a free market.

Central banks determine the money supply, not the market.

If you are on a gold standard, then the system works automatically.

We are not on a gold standard because leaders of the 20th and 21st centuries don’t want a market that functions in that manner. (G Edward Griffen, Creature of Jekyll Island, must read)

I personally have feelings of nostalgia for the gold standard, but as you know, I’m a very small minority among my colleagues.

PAUL: So we have to accept the downturns.

GREENSPAN: No, we don’t accept them or regard them as desirable. Our goal is maximum sustainable growth in the economy. But maximum growth in the short-run may not be sustainable in the long-run.


http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/smith/smith4.html
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 14
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 4:46 PM EST
Impeachment is part of this Republic
And has never been intended to be a democracy.

=========================

MikeR Location: PA
Reply # 5
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 3:01 PM EST
Patricia
In that case, the proper pronoun would be “our” Whitehouse. Personally, I use the phrase, “I’ll be glad when he’s out of ‘the’ Whitehouse”. My concern is the alarming tendency to reject democracy when an election produces an undesirable outcome.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 15
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 4:42 PM EST
July 1997

RON PAUL:
In the past three months we had a stock price rise of 25 percent. If that trend continued stocks would be up 100 percent in a year. Now, if that happened to commodities or the CPI you would be doing something.

I would like to suggest that we should do something. There is an awful lot of credit in the market causing malinvestment that will lead to a correction. No one has repealed the business cycle, so we’re headed that way.

Or perhaps you can reassure us otherwise. Maybe we shouldn’t concern ourselves with excess credit and malinvestment. And perhaps these stock prices are not an indicator similar to a Consumer Price Index.

GREENSPAN: We spend a lot of time looking at various economic forces, which we hope will tell us what is likely to occur in the near future. We suspect there are things going on, but we don’t know yet how important they are. But we are watching things very closely. We want to create the kind of monetary policy that will keep this expansion going on in a noninflationary way. That is what is required to keep growth going.
Who knew?
Read about who knew

http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/smith/smith4.html
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 16
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 4:38 PM EST
typo
Our founding fathers and a "man" for the type of ----------------NAME-----------------
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 17
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 4:33 PM EST
MikeR
In that case, the proper pronoun would be “our” Whitehouse. Personally, I use the phrase, “I’ll be glad when he’s out of ‘the’ Whitehouse”. My concern is the alarming tendency to reject democracy when an election produces an undesirable outcome.
............
This is not a tendency to reject democracy. Our founding fathers and a man for the type of government we are now experiencing. It's called a "Majority Faction". The intent of the electoral collage was to avoid this. They also believed that with a free press, we would be very unlikely to have one party control over government. I won't go into all the quotes about the 2nd amendment, but that was to be the peoples last resort against tyrannical government.

Obama is taking the country way beyond an "undesirable outcome". I think we are in the "Majority Faction" they tried so hard to avoid.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 18
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 4:23 PM EST
Thankful
I'm just glad I'm not the only one wondering if Bad is Good or Good is Bad...it's nice to finally read something that makes sense to me and not feel like the lone ranger here.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 19
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 3:01 PM EST
Patricia
In that case, the proper pronoun would be “our” Whitehouse. Personally, I use the phrase, “I’ll be glad when he’s out of ‘the’ Whitehouse”. My concern is the alarming tendency to reject democracy when an election produces an undesirable outcome.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 20
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 2:16 PM EST
MikeR
[quote]I didn’t realize the Whitehouse was yours. Why did you let the people vote? They all had the impression that it belonged to every citizen.[unquote]

The White House belongs to the American people, of which I am a part. So, of course it belongs to me too.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 21
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 1:55 PM EST
Patricia
I didn’t realize the Whitehouse was yours. Why did you let the people vote? They all had the impression that it belonged to every citizen.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 22
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 1:34 PM EST
Heil Obama! ???
I want these people out of my white house!
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 23
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 12:45 PM EST
J10-AR
U say "Is it too much to ask our Republican Reps" (Paraphrased).. NICE THOUGHT, but in my case I don't have any.. The only Repub, Mrs Capito, is in another District.. I have a senile Sen. Byrd, MultiMillionaire, Carpetbagger Sen Rockefeller, Under Investigation Idiot Mollohan.. Hell of it is, Most people are Registered as Democrats (Union ties) put atre nearer to Repubs than I am..We have a Retired Army L/C who could be viable if he had $..Go Figger!!
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 24
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 11:45 AM EST
well now
Wow! That’s pretty good. So I guess you are saying that it was wrong of us to work for the defeat of Gore and the Dems and to make sure we had control of both houses in the coming elections. Hmm, I could have sworn that clearing our Clinton and making sure I didn’t have to hear Gore’s voice was a good thing.

But hey, I’m with you on that “Same as Nazi Germany. Scary” thing. I got that feeling the other night as I watched Obama and the Dems burn down the capital building on the news. And what with that and not being able to sleep because Obama followers are having running battles in the street with the communists, it really is the same as Nazi Germany.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 25
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 11:31 AM EST
10 years ago, I became a'conspiracy nut'
I told my family and friends what was happening and what more was going to happen.

20 million illegal aliens
'nanny laws'-'smoking bans'-'health laws'
financial disaster
'card check'
and the 'wizard of oz' oops, Obama's brown shirts

Same as Nazi Germany. Scary.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 26
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 9:53 AM EST
TBZ?
I'm still using his own initials - BHO - but I substitute the words But.. He's Omnipotent... isn't he??? (well - that's what I heard...)

When Hannity started making a stink about Big O's associations, he told us then what we were looking at - so far, he ain't been wrong!
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 27
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 9:36 AM EST
We Need To
avoid falling for the MSM's crisis tone, as well as TBZ's (the big zero). When they do that, it is intended that we focus all our attention on the crisis and, as a result, are swayed away from what TBZ is actually doing.

There is a very good reason TBZ is throwing these issues at us as fast as posssible--he doesn't want anyone to have time to think about anything. If we have time, he won't get what he wants.

TBZ has one goal, and only one--to destroy this country!
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 28
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 8:14 AM EST
J-10

I agree completely. The risk of bad press appears to be the driving force in this new wonderland through the looking glass.

Roger writes:

"It is certainly time for everyone to wake up and find out what is happening in this country. "

I agree. The problem remains - precisely WHERE does the electorate choose to go in order to "find out"?

I could make my recommendations. However, one can choose to go to places like the Huffington site or MSNBC.

It is frightening that all these years we have protected our freedom, only to choose to exercise this freedom in order to give it away.

We are free to enslave ourselves to our govt. I will support all efforts to avoid this.

Read Mark Levin's Liberty and Tyranny.

Flag as Offensive

Reply # 29
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 2:27 AM EST
Oh
Maybe I should name some of those conspiracy theorists for you and everyone.

Ron Paul
(telling this was coming for 25 years)
Aaron Russo
(telling this was coming for at least the past 5, til he died)

Many more who have been called conspiracy theorist who have told how the Federal Reserve Bank is the greatest swindle against the American people ever pulled off on any nation on this planet.

The owners have got filthy rich off theft and are in the midst of raking in more money than the next ten generations of America's children will be able to pay.

They own Obama as they did GW Bush, and they both have worked to increase the wealth of the men who run the Federal Reserve Counterfeiting operation, "legally".
Well, not legal if the US Constitution is the Law today.
Having never been abolished by the people, I am sure it is still the law of the land.

And according to that document, the bank, the Congress and the President are all in the act of crime and treason.

Pretty harsh words huh, the facts are much more brutal
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 30
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 2:15 AM EST
Roger, you ask

"Who Knew?"

Check out the past 25 years what all the "conspiracy theorists" have been telling everyone
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 31
Date: Mar 27, 2009 - 1:03 AM EST
The author
asks have secret ballots failed us all these years? The answer is of course no, but it apparently has failed the unions, which is why they are pushing so hard against them.

Save our Republic! Abolish the unions!
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 32
Date: Mar 26, 2009 - 11:46 PM EST
We expect
our soldiers, law enforcement personal and firemen to risk their lives in service to our country.


Is it to much to ask for our republican senators and representatives to risk a little bad press by saying "NO" to this insanity.

They are, along with the democrates, contemptible.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 33
Date: Mar 26, 2009 - 7:39 PM EST
Game. Set. Match.
As the saying goes, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The docile people are letting the government take over everything. The people are willfully letting their government enslave them. And, although it is Easter time, I don't see a political saviour out there.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 34
Date: Mar 26, 2009 - 5:23 PM EST
Roger
Great article! What is going on scares me, and unless some of those in power change their ways, we will lose this great country.
Flag as Offensive
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
 *
State:
 *
Zip:
 *
Phone:
       
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.