Scott to Replace Demint in the Senate as Hawaii Seeks to Replace Inouye

Senator-elect Tim Scott

After two weeks of speculation about who will replace Jim DeMint in the U.S. Senate, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley made it official and appointed second term Congressman Tim Scott to fill out the remainder of Senator DeMint’s term. (See video below)

In an overwhelming show of unity and support for her decision, the appointment was made by Governor Haley during a late Monday morning press conference where she, Tim Scott, and Jim DeMint were joined by several Republican members of the South Carolina Republican congressional delegation, and senior South Carolina Senator Lindsay Graham.

With praise from all, the decision to have Tim Scott fill out the remaining two years of DeMint’s term was celebrated as one which help ensure that South Carolinians continue to be represented by the same type of conservative values championed by Jim DeMint, who has been considered the most conservative member of both houses of Congress. But filling DeMint’s shoes will not be much of a challenge for Tim Scott who in less than two, already established himself a strong conservative voice. In his first term, Scott turned heads as one of the staunchest supporters of South Carolina’s free-rider-anti-union laws and as South Carolina’s Club for Growth’s scorecard gave Scott a B and a score of 80 out of 100, he is praised by the South Carolina Association of Taxpayers, for his “diligent, principled and courageous stands against higher taxes. It well earned praise for his tireless advocacy for smaller government, lower taxes, and restoring fiscal responsibility in Washington.

After winning the general election in 2010, Tim acted upon his desires to regain fiscal sanity in the federal government and to limit its size and scope by acting on such issues with immediately and with urgency. The first bill he authored would defund and deauthorize the President’s health care reform package. e was also named to the influential House Rules Committee, asked to serve as a Deputy Whip and sits as one of two freshmen on the Elected Leadership Committee. Then he confronted our nation’s outdated and cumbersome tax code by sponsoring the Rising Tides Act. That initiative would lower burdensome corporate tax rates that discourage job growth and allow for the permanent repatriation of overseas profits. The latter would encourage American companies to bring home more than $1 trillion dollars that can be used for investment and job creation.

In general, Tim Scott is a consistent voice for significant cuts in federal spending, and staunch opponent of measures he believes do not go far enough. Tim was an original cosponsor of the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act, which would do just as it says – cut spending, cap our spending moving forward based on how much we bring in, and add a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. He also cosponsored two stand-alone bills that would create a Balanced Budget Amendment, and voted against raising our nation’s debt limit.

While Rick Scott is not the only member of Congress who holds such positions, he, like his soon to be predecessor in the Senate, he is one of the few who has been so consistent in those positions. However, while Tim may not be the only member of either house to hold those positions, he is the only African-American in the United States Senate and that distinction will make him a leading voice in the Party, within the conservative movement, and in the nation.

Hiram Revels

Being African-American, Scott will have an incomparable ability to respond to and discount the left’s persistent attempts to paint those who hold his beliefs and political ideology as anti-black. And for a Party that needs desperately to attract Hispanic and African-American voters, the ability to convincingly contradict such mischaracterizations is invaluable. Meanwhile, Scott takes his place in history as only the seventh African-American to serve in the Senate.

Coming before him were Hiram Revels and Blanche K. Bruce, who briefly represented Mississippi during Reconstruction.

Blanche K. Bruce

The The first African American elected to the Senate by popular vote was Edward Brooke of Massachusetts. Brooke served two full terms during which he championed the causes of low-income housing, an increase in minimum wages, and promoted commuter rail and mass transit systems. He also worked tirelessly to promote racial equality in the South.

Following Brooke in the Senate were Carol Mosley Braun and Barack Obama who were both elected from Illinois. Braun was elected in 1992, a year that saw more women than ever before elected to political office. For Braun the distinction was and is that she became the first and only African-American woman ever to serve as U.S. Senator.

Edward Brooke

In 2006, Illinois elected Barack Obama to the Senate and in 2009, after becoming President of the United States, another African-American, Roland Burris was appointed to fill out the remainder of his term.

Scott is expected to be officially sworn in to the Senate on January 3rd, 2013 and he has already committed himself to run for election to a full term in the Senate. That race will take place in 2014.

Another Seat Opens as Daniel Inouye Passes Away

Senator Daniel Inouye

On the same day that one replacement is named to the Senate, another seat became vacant as Democrat Daniel Inouye, the U.S. Senate’s most senior member and a Medal of Honor recipient for his bravery during World War II, died at age 88.

First elected to the Senate in 1962, Inouye’s tenure is second only to Democrat Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who died in 2010.

Under Hawaii law, it is required that the appointee be of the same Party as the person they are replacing. As such the state’s Governor, Neil Abercrombie, a Democrat, will appoint a Democrats successor to Inouye until a special election can be held. State law also requires that the Governor base his decision on a field of three candidates provided by the state Party. The appointee will then serve until 2014, at which point a special election will determine who serves the final two years of Inouye’s term.

Rep. Colleen Hanabusa

Some of the names being considered for submission to Abercrombie by the Hawaii State Democrat Party include U.S. Rep. Colleen Hanabusa, 61, who was just re-elected to her second term the House in, and Lt. Gov. Brian Schatz. Other names include Rep.-elect Tulsi Gabbar, the first Hindu-American elected to Congress and who is set to take office in Januar. Also on the list are former Hawaii governors, Ben Cayetano, 73, and John D. Waihee, 66. Odds are though that Hanabusa will get the nod. She is said to have been Inouye’s preferred candidate to take his place one day, and news reports following Inouye’s death have indicated that the Senator informed Abercrombie that Hanabusa should get his job.

Liberal Class Warfare Rhetoric…And Then There’s The Truth

Bookmark and Share

In what is sure to be a tough fought election full of scathing rhetoric, none has been more apparent in the last year then the class warfare being perpetrated for the most part by those on the left.

“Republican’s represent the rich. Republican’s support the rich. Evil millionaires and billionaires the lot of them.”
“Democrat’s represent the little guy. Democrat’s support the poor and downtrodden. Democrat’s are ‘one of you'”.

Basic political rhetoric that most often comes from those on the left. Especially when their fiscal record is as bad as it appears it will be heading in to the 2012 elections. They sure can’t run on the record but what they can do, and do effectively, is pit American’s against each other as they head to the ballot box using the ‘evil rich Republican’ vs. the ‘poor and middle class Democrat’ argument. An argument which I am about to prove false.

Using 2009 data from the 2010 Census, out of the top 20 states in median household income 14 of those states are Blue (Democrat), 2 are considered Purple (Center) and 4 are Red (Republican). The bottom 20 states in median household income are the exact polar opposite. Out of the states at the bottom of the income data 14 are Red, 2 are Purple and 4 are Blue. Median household income data by state

So, if the Republican’s support the rich and Democrats support the poor why is it that the richest states vote Democrat and the poorest vote Republican?

Because that’s what false data and rhetoric does. It attempts to paint a picture that isn’t always a fair and accurate one. Some politicians believe that if you repeat a lie enough it becomes the truth. That appears to be the case in regards to the class warfare being perpetrated as we head into November. The problem is as long as this false information has been perpetrated it apparently hasn’t weighed on the opinions of the classes who are supposed to be ‘at war’. The poorest states still vote Republican and the richest states still vote Democrat.

Don’t tell anyone. We don’t want the Democrats to have to change the perception they believe they have built over decades. We will simply just hope that they don’t notice the rich and poor aren’t listening.

Bookmark and Share

3 things Romney needs to get Right, and so far he only has 1 of them.

Romney Looks the Part, but does he have the ideas in place yet?

 

To win in November, Mitt Romney has to get three things right. First, he has to be a positive physical presence, showing Americans what an optimistic American face looks like. Second, he needs to show how the American Mind works to solve problems. Third, he must win over the undecideds and the Blue Dog Democrats.

He achieves the first with some ease. He does look like a president, and although a little stiff and awkward at times, he has a smile and positive outlook that is very American. Unlike his dour and aloof opponent, Governor Romney shows hope in his physical presence which America badly needs in its leader.

Why? Because the one thing that all nations need right now, not just America, is a positive and can-do Capitalist attitude to lift us out of this recession. Back in 2007, at this time, candidate Obama was painting the economy in apocalyptic terms, because he was going to arrive on wings, lifted by adulation, to solve the nation’s, and the world’s, woes. Don’t just take my word for it, even Hilary Clinton was saying as much.

Also back in 2007, the economy was in a punishing mood. We were living in a bubble that was only amazing in the sense that it took so long to burst. Living off too much debt and leverage, which are not bad things in themselves when used wisely, the spirit was a “can’t do” attitude. The basics of economic life were consigned to the trash, and individuals, companies and government contrived to live as if the economy can’t fail and we can’t be bothered to work to produce real wealth.

Hence, the misery that followed. Hence, the big disappointment that became President Barack Obama. Hence, the constant concern on the president’s face, disguising a man out of his depth. So, we need a can-do president, who believes there is enough of the American dream to fuel a new era of economic growth; which brings me to the second thing.

Rooted in the American dream, Romney needs ideas that get the people energized. At a time when Capitalism is under stress, the battle of ideas has to be won. Folks need to see what the future can look like under Capitalism, not holed up in OWS enclaves or rallying against the rich. No-one complained about the rich when the economy was going up; why pin all the blame on them when it goes down?

Unlike Europe, Capitalism has been the engine of America from the beginning. It is inseparable from the enlightenment and religious ideas which formed the nation. Capitalism is not just a theory. It is a realistic, though like humanity itself imperfect, instrument for managing the needs and wants of a people. Romney needs to go beyond trotting out the same ideas of small government and tax cuts, and all those things, because they are ideas that are not just familiar, they are falling on barren soil.

Romney needs to shape these old ideas – and bring in some new ones – to show a recession weary nation why there is reason to hope. This is not the hope that was on the way for John Edwards, nor the hollowed hope of the Obama presidency. It is not even a hope in a Romney administration. It has to be a hope in Capitalism and a hope in the nation itself, in other words a hope in America.

So, the third thing falls into place if the first two are achieved. If Romney can capture the imagination, rooted in a realistic vision about the nation’s economic needs and other policy options, then he will reach out to those he needs to win over to become Romney 45. He needs to show a picture of the future that is not about government filling gas tanks or paying mortgages, but hard working Americans taking care of their own business.

The Obama bubble burst a long time ago, even for many of his supporters, and especially for those independents, youth and Blue Dog Democrats who believed he offered a new hope. Romney has only a little time to raise up new thinking in his campaign, and show why the economic bubble burst under the Republicans and George W. Bush, and why the economic solution bubble burst under the Democrats and Barack Obama.

Romney has one of the things he needs, the physical presence, but he needs the second thing of right thinking if he is to get the third thing which will sweep him into the White House. It’s over to you Governor….

Democrat Primary Voter Tells Poll Worker That “Obama Can Go To Hell”

 Bookmark and Share  Today is New Jersey’s primary election day.  It’s not exactly one of the most intense primaries on the statewide level that we have ever seen though.

On the presidential side, New Jersey’s nearly last place in the primary lineup essentially made the contest meaningless in the selection of a Republican presidential nominee from the get-go.  But to make it even more meaningless, Mitt Romney is the only Republican candidate still actively running for the nomination.  However, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul were still on the ballot.

So given the largely symbolic nature of the New Jersey presidential primary, as a former regional coordinator for Newt Gingrich, I chose to cast a symbolic vote.  I voted for Newt Gingrich as my choice for President, but I voted for the Romney slate of delegates to the national convention.  I did so because even though I prefer Gingrich, I am confident in Mitt Romney.  He was my first choice for President in the 2008 primaries and I believe that if given the job, he will be an exceptional President.  My favoring Gingrich in this now symbolic primary came from my belief that Newt is more reform minded than Mitt and I like that.  But with Newt out, I am solidly behind Mitt Romney and if Mitt wins the presidency, I believe he will at least deliver a degree of reform.  The type of reform that would be defined by his change in the direction we are headed in under President Obama, ad at the moment, that’s good enough for me.  But my symbolic presidential primary ballot was cast the way it was to send a message  that will probably not be heard.  That message was that I want to see Romney buck the establishment more and be more open to enacting reforms of government and our tax code.

In the other statewide races, New Jersey Republicans got to pick a nominee to oppose incumbent, liberal U.S. Senator Bob Menendez.  That race has barely been a contest.  It has pitted unknown Republicans David Douglas Brown, Bader G. Qarmout, and Joe “Rudy” Rullo, against long time State Senator and former Republican State Committee Chairman Joe Kyrillos.

The sad fact is that most New Jerseyans didn’t even know there was a primary for U.S. Senate, and the media nationally as well as locally has barely acknowledged that there was a primary because it has been projected from the start, that Kyrillos would be the nominee.  Kyrillos has the support of Governor Chrisite and the entire Republican establishment, including Mitt Romney, whose 2008 presidential campaign featured Kyrillos as its State Chairman.   Between that lock on the state G.O.P., access to significant fundraising and the combination of all his opponent’s lack of name ID and their own financial resources, made this hardly a race.

I will be supporting Kyrillos over the lesser of two evils, Bob Menendez, in the general election, but I won’t say which of the 4 U.S. Senate Republican primary candidates I voted for today.  That was another symbolic vote.

My vote for a Republican nominee for the House of Representatives was however anything but symbolic.

Here I cast my vote against a candidate much more than for the other.

The 4th District congressional primary was much like the statewide U.S. Senate race.  It wasn’t much of a race at all.  It received no attention because 18 term incumbent Republican Congressman Chris Smith was running for a 19th term and there was no reason to assume that he would not be able to win it the same way he won each of his previous elections.  But as for myself, even though it can be said that Chris Smith is a conservative, he is not the best that conservatives could or should offer.

Over the  years, Smith has became naturally complacent and on several recent occasions he has voted for such things as federal Cap-and-Trade policies and other liberal oriented schemes.  But more than that, after 32 years in the same office, Chris Smith has lost all prominence as a conservative leader.  The type of leader who is in the forefront of creating conservative solutions and advancing the conservative ideology.  He lacks innovation and has become a fixture of Washington, D.C.,  just another notch in the belt of Beltway politics.  If any T.E.A. movement sentiments ever existed, it needed to exist in this race.  But it didn’t and as a result the virtual unknown and under-financed candidacy of Terrence McGowan had no chance.  So come November when the ballot will offer me a choice between Republican Chris Smith and the Democrat’s sacrificial lamb, Brian Froelich, I will cast a write-in vote for a conservative Republican.  Maybe Terrence McGowan.

At the bottom of the ticket I supported the unopposed Republican incumbents for County Sheriff and Board of Chosen Freeholders who are almost certain to win reelection in my heavily Republican vote rich Ocean County.

All this made for a very blasé voting experience that left me feeling quite unproductive.  I knew that each of my votes were not imperative and would not determine who the inevitable nominees would ultimately be.  But that does not mean my voting experience lacked any excitement.

As I stepped toward my voting booth, an elderly woman had exited it and she was arguing with the poll workers who did not know what to do with the voting machine because even though the machine was set for her to cast her ballot, she refused to vote.  For the befuddled poll workers, this created a problem.  If she did not press the button to cast her ballot, they would have to reset the machine and fill out a complex series of forms and file a cabinet filled with red tape to account for the uncast ballot.

While the wayward voter discussed the matter with one of the poll workers who stood aside the voting booth, she stated from behind me, “I’m not voting for Obama.  He can go to hell”.

The elderly voter was a registered Democrat.  She came out to vote against President Obama.  But what she did not understand was that in her Party’s primary, President Obama was unopposed.  So when she stepped in to the voting booth, she was offended and refused to vote.

After I cast my own ballot, the voter was still airing her grievance  with the poll workers and so I interjected and explained that as a Democrat, she was being given the opportunity to nominate the people she wanted to represent her Party.  I further explained that if she was a Republican, she could join me in nominating who we wanted to represent us in the Republican Party and to replace the President with.

We soon took our conversation outside of the polling place where in the parking lot I explained the process to her further and also made her aware of the fact that even though President Obama was unopposed for the nomination, she could have written in a name, a fact that she found much more appealing than just walking away.  But she was still quite frustrated and went on to tell me that we have to get rid of Obama.

As we parted ways, I realized that I was much more pleased by my voting experience than I expected.  I had unethusiastically set out to cast a bunch of symbolic and protests votes that I knew would ultimately do more to make me feel good than make an actual difference.  But in the end what I walked away with was an optimistic feeling about at least the future results in the presidential general election because you know it’s not good for Democrats when a lifelong Democrat voter stands behind you at the ballot box and declares that their Party’s nominee should go to hell.

And if that wasn’t pleasing enough for me, as my partner and I got in our car to leave the polling place, he told me how he voted  It turns out that despite any prior discussion about how we would vote, he cast his ballot the same exact way that I did, and for the same reasons.  So who knows?  Maybe there are more people out there who took the time to cast similar symbolic and protest votes?  I know at least a few Democrats did.

Bookmark and Share

Examining Democrat Spin On Mourdock Win

Upon witnessing their voting ally, Richard Lugar, go down in flames Tuesday, Democrats wasted little time before issuing statements that implied that conservatives, by unceremoniously dumping Lugar, were actually hurting themselves.

In an email circulated Tuesday afternoon, DCCC spokesman Matt Canter wrote, “By defeating Dick Lugar and nominating Richard Mourdock, the Tea Party is poised to hand another strong pick-up opportunity for Democrats”.

Meanwhile, Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist said, “If the Senate race turns out to be a moderate Democrat and an out-of-step Republican, moderate voters who regret that they can’t vote for Lugar will help Donnelly.”

Others got into the act as well. Wednesday, Laura Litvan, for Bloomberg.com, wrote, “Yesterday’s victory by Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock in the Republican race improves Democrats’ odds of gaining the Senate seat in November.” She offered no evidence, mind you. In fact, she immediately jumped subjects.

And that’s the point. These double-reverse psychology assertions aren’t built on any evidence, they are just hollow statements based upon the assumption that there is a mass of Democrats waiting to rough up Mourdock in November. If the assumption is wrong, the statements are wrong. Of course, there may be a hoard of Democrats and moderates drooling at the thought of stopping Mourdock’s senate career before it starts. The problem is there is no evidence showing this is the case.

There are two polls in existence pitting Mourdock versus Democrat Joe Donnelly. One, prepared by Wenzel Strategies, shows Mourdock at 44% and Donnelly at 39%. The problem with this poll is that it was paid for by Mourdock fans. So, toss it out. The other poll, a bit more objective, has the race as a tie. But it was taken in March so it’s a little dated.

Interestingly, in my search for polling evidence, I did stumble on Jim Geraghty with The National Review, who quoted Gallop, “latest surveys in Indiana show President Obama’s job approval at 40.1 percent and disapproval at 52.2 percent; 44 percent of the state identifying as Republican (up from 39.6 percent in 2009), 39 percent of the state identifying as Democrat (down from 46 in 2009).”

Here’s something else to consider. Depending on who you ask, Democrats have numerous (anywhere from five to seven) critical elections they need to tend to this year — Bill Nelson, Florida, Jon Tester, Montana, Claire McCaskill, Missouri, and the Brown versus Pocahontas thing up in Massachusetts — to name a few. The reality is Indiana was never on the to-do list. So if things get dicey elsewhere, Donnelly will be among the first to have his funding cut.

So, we have a poll that shows Indiana’s population is surging Republican and it has high dissatisfaction with Obama. The conservative grass-roots element, because of the Mourdock primary, is already well entrenched in the state. If necessary, Democrats will sacrifice Indiana to tend to other critical elections. All this seems to add up to an advantage for Mourdock. So although Donnelly has an opportunity, to claim that it’s a quality opportunity is a stretch.

Follow I.M. Citizen at IMCitizen.net

It’s Tea Time In Indiana

Today is a good day if you’re a conservative because yesterday was a very good day. In a GOP open primary with significant symbolism, Indiana voters put it to incumbent Richard Lugar and the Republican establishment, badly. When results began trickling in last night, it became obvious early that not only was conservative candidate Richard Mourdock going to prevail, but it was going to be a rout.

A reality in politics is that it’s rare for an incumbent to get tossed aside in a primary. So rare, in fact, it seems the establishment and Lugar got caught sleeping at the wheel. Perhaps they forgot about the 2010 elections. Perhaps they felt invincible. After all, Lugar is a six-term Senator. Whatever the cause, it’s clear they only realized there was trouble brewing about a month ago. But opening the checkbook — Lugar and his buddies spent some $3 million to get their butt kicked — wasn’t enough.

The Mourdock win is all the more satisfying to conservatives when you consider the establishment solicited Democratic voters to come out and support Lugar. This sad ploy however, aside from infuriating conservatives, had no significant effect on the vote. The final result (61%-39%) is an ear-ringing slap in the face to establishment Republicans.

Listen carefully, can you hear the moans?

Follow I.M. Citizen at IMCitizen.net

Tea Party Wins Even If Mourdock Loses

Much has been made of the Richard Mourdock and Richard Lugar primary Tuesday in Indiana. But why? After all, it’s only a primary. It’s a Republican versus Republican primary to boot. And it’s Indiana. These are all correct descriptions of the GOP primary, but they tell only a small part of the story. More accurately, depending on your word preference, it is an establishment versus conservative showdown or a D.C. elites versus purists ideological fight or a Tea-party versus RINO clash. It is this that makes the Indiana primary of interest. But what happens when the final votes are counted? What happens if the conservative challenger Mourdock prevails over the establishment-supported incumbent Lugar? Well, not much, or quite a bit — it all depends on your point of view.

Interestingly, from the left’s perspective there is cause for concern. Yes, Democrats are watching this race. If you ask a Liberal or Democrat that’s on the boob tube about a Mourdock win you’ll hear the only talking point they have: if the new guy (Mourdock) wins it means Democrats have a good shot at keeping Evan Bayh’s seat in November. The statement has no substance of course, as that show-down is too far off for accurate analysis, but it is something to say that hides the reality.

And just what is that reality? The reality is the incessant whining and blubbering from the left over the loss of “moderate Republicans” or “rational conservatives” or “well-grounded Republicans” continues. You have to look a bit deeper for it — which I confess, probably isn’t worth your effort. But it is out there. And why wouldn’t it be? It’s only natural to mourn loss. When you promote a party that rewards the intentionally unproductive and you need “moderate Republicans” to justify it, if you lose those them, it hurts. When you hail praise upon a party that promotes nanny-state policies, and rely on “rational conservatives” to help your cause, watching them lose their seats is a concern. When you subscribe to a philosophy of European socialism and you’ve relied on “well-grounded Republicans” to assist you in passing these anti-capitalism and anti-American policies, you feel the pain when you watch them fall. But don’t fool yourself, Liberals and Democrats aren’t dressed in black for the fallen individual (think of Bob Inglis, Bob Bennett, Mike Castle, or the retiring Olympia Snowe). No, it is the loss of their vote that creates the pain (see The Moderate Illusion). That is the reality. And now they may lose Lugar’s vote, too.

A Mourdock win has a different meaning for the right. In fact, it has a different meaning depending on where you are on the right. For the Republican elitists, like their Democratic cousins, a Mourdock win will inflict undeniable pain. The establishment has been forced to put considerable effort into saving Lugar, a 36-year veteran. An all-star cast of Republican elitists (John McCain, Peggy Noonan, Eric Cantor, Tom Daschle, Mitch Daniels) was herded up and put on display endorsing Lugar. Super PACs and their cash got into the game. So desperate is the establishment, in fact, they resorted to soliciting Democratic voters (see Establishment Turns On Tea Party) to take part in the open GOP primary in hopes they will vote for Lugar. Will the efforts pay off? We will know Tuesday evening.

For conservatives, the real objective of getting a conservative politician seated in Congress can’t be met with a primary election. But you can’t win a war without winning your share of skirmishes and battles. The replacement of an undesirable Republican with a conservative Republican is a skirmish. However, the circumstances of facing the Republican establishment on one side and their Democratic cousins on the other, makes it a large and meaningful skirmish. A win for Mourdock Tuesday will be a valid accomplishment indeed. It will be a rich reward to those on the ground for their focus, organization, strategic thought and hard work.

It will also be another example that the grass-roots approach chosen by the conservative movement is correct and it will energize other conservative organizations across the country. Of course, it will also send a loud confirmation statement to the naysayers on both the left and the right that the conservative/tea party movement is alive and capable of significant influence. And yet, a Mourdock loss, assuming it’s not a massacre — and there is no reason to think it will be — presents little downside for conservatives.

Mourdock’s current threat to Lugar, win or lose Tuesday, just reinforces to establishment Republicans that they still have to look over their shoulders and that their chances for survival are better if they stay in the shadows. But the strong conservative efforts in Indiana have forced these Republican hypocrites out of their dark hiding places and into the sun-light. And a RINO hunt in daylight gives the advantage to the hunter.

Follow I.M. Citizen on Facebook or visit at IMCitizen.net

%d bloggers like this: