Ten Steps for the Republican Party to Rejuvenate itself.
Hey gang. Seeing as how I volunteered for the Obama campaign and am completely elated by his victory, I've decided to attack my own happiness. Because this is the topic Du Jour, I've decided to play Devil's Advocacy here and help out my former Republican Brothers and tell them what they can do to get the party back on the right track. I'm sure this being a column not bashing the Republicans, it won't get many recs but i've been surprised before.
1. Create and Champion the cause for serious immigration amnesty and reforms.
3. Pray Obama doesn't run the government as well as he ran his campaign.
5. Come up with some viable policy that can counter that of the Democrats.
6. Admit your faults and find some credibility.
7. Embrace Intellectualism Again.
8. Focus on solutions for this country and not on imperialism in other countries.
9. Create a message that says you don't want to take anyone's rights away.
10. For the second time, as unlikely as it is to happen, pray for an Obama mistake.
--------------------------------------------------
There are a few broad assumptions that I'm making. Most Hardcore partisans will be upset with some of these moves, BUT they won't vote for the other side. This is to reach to those voters in the center. The truth is we are a CENTER nation (tilting slightly to the left because of the economy). Although Republicans like to call this place a center right country, they govern from the HARD Right.
They've got to get some other age groups besides the current 65 and older voters because they'll soon die out and be replaced by the middle aged ones of today. Think of the next crop of 18 year olds, they'll be playing video games with Barack Obama advertisements in them for the next 8 years. You've got to do something to Hook their parents quick or you'll lose that entire generation too.
1. Create and Champion the cause for serious immigration amnesty and reforms.
It must expand upon The Dream Act allowing children of immigrants to get scholarships, and have a path to citizenship for those that are already here. John McCain and President Bush tried this already and the far right voted this down. Someone has to do it again so that the Republican Party can become "The Party of Latinos."2. Oppose but do not block Obama, Reid, and Pelosi Legislation.
Doing this will counter the automatic African American Voting Block that the Democrats enjoy. Also this is the fastest growing segment of the Voting Population. Alienate them and you are declaring defeat in the entire southwest and other sections of this country.
Another Bonus, Many Latinos are devout Catholics. They share many of the same social values the the Social Conservatives hold and cherish. Once you bring them into the tent you won't have to alter your core message very much.
There will have to be a couple of Republicans that are willing to jump on the grenade for the Party. The hope is that with an over reaching Democratic majority they will make some large mistakes. They will make some costly mistakes. If you allow them to over reach then you have something that you can run against. Otherwise the Republicans will be scapegoated into being the party that kept change from happening. You have to give Reid and Pelosi enough rope to allow them to hang themselves. In the short run, this will cost a couple senators BUT in the long run if they do in fact overstep their boundaries it will give the Republicans a hard Mantra to Run again.
The downside is that if they don't overreach and Democrats accomplish all they set out to and the country is happy then you're screwed. But really, isn't bottom line that what we all want, a bunch of happy American, regardless of what party they vote for.
3. Pray Obama doesn't run the government as well as he ran his campaign.
4. Recruit Better Leadership.
This will take a large collective prayer from every evangelical and some non-evangelicals. The Republicans will almost need an act of God to help them out in this regard. If Barack governs as well as I know that he can, he'll solidify those young voters and the other coalitions of voters that he's mobilized and they'll be Democrats for life.
This cannot be just the party of the South and the Northwest. There just aren't enough electoral votes to sustain that. Mitt Romney, who passed health care reforms as Governor of Massachusetts, was the closest thing that the Republicans had to someone that could appeal to independents in Non traditional Areas. John McCain ran too much as an angry partisan with no ideas. The electorate wants a solver not a fighter.
How about recruiting a moderate or slightly conservative minority candidate. Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice serve as great templates. Bobby Jindal (who maybe too conservative) Michael Steele or Mel Martinez might actually be other great possibilities. They should be Minority Candidates that do not run as minorities and don't run on minority issues. Look at Obama as the template. Alan Keyes can't be the face of diversity of the Republican Party.
5. Come up with some viable policy that can counter that of the Democrats.
Don't just say "Their Health care plans are bad!" Come up with one that addresses the needs of everyday citizens. Don't just say "Abortion is Murder." Come up with some solutions to the problem. Become the party that wants to defend the unborn through preventing abortions but by creating education that allows fewer children to be mistakenly conceived.
We don't live in the 1950s anymore. The Genie is out of the bottle. People are going to have sex. Either you can accept that and try to help those that do have it safely so they don't have unintended pregnancy which leads to less abortion, or you can stick your head in the sand.
This last thing maybe the hardest to accomplish but I'll say it anyway. If you want Roe v Wade repealed you'll need a Pro-Choice Republican that believes in States Rights in order for it to happen. Good luck with the ideologues on the Right allowing that to happen though.
6. Admit your faults and find some credibility.
It's hard to take the leaders of a party seriously when they never admit they they weren't correct in a situation. Going into Iraq was a mistake. Admit it. Wire tapping and torture were mistakes. Admit it. Sarah Palin wasn't the wisest choice for V.P. ADMIT IT!!!
This will allow you to gain the credibility that you are about governing and not just about winning. Every time you scream the sky is RED when the world is looking at a color wheel and sees it's blue you lose credibility. When ever you stand there and tell us that Sarah Palin was the most qualified person, man or woman, to be the Vice President of The United States over Romney, Pawlenty, Huckabee, Powell, Rice, Snowe, Hutchinson, you're telling us to not trust you. We saw the truth for ourselves on television. You're scaring away independent thinkers.
For that matter Acknowledge that YOUTUBE EXIST!!! We have a public and living record of pretty much everything everyone says in the media. You can't tell us one thing in one place an another in another place. There will be tapes cut of you lying all over the internet. The generation that is computer phobic will be gone in two presidential election cycles. Embrace that fact and go from there.
7. Embrace Intellectualism Again.
Faulting someone because they are smart, or they have achieved or because they went to a great school isn't a way to build a party with the best and brightest on your team. People want to know their leaders are smart. The great thing is, although you'll anger some of your Southern Base, they're not going to all of a sudden vote for "The Liberal" BUT this will allow you to capture some of the intellectual in other regions.
The best thing for the party maybe to put in place the proportional delegate system that the Democrats have. Right now the Republican with the Best Name Recognition will always win the big states. Proportional voting will allow other candidates that can appeal to several different swaths of the electorate to actually having a shot at representing the party.
8. Focus on solutions for this country and not on imperialism in other countries.
I realize this will anger the Tom Clancy Readers in the base. But you have to start creating solutions for the people at home. Too many of the right wing think tanks are focused on how to spread democracy. You must get back to focusing on how to make this democracy work.
9. Create a message that says you don't want to take anyone's rights away.
You want people to be able to decide for themselves in a state wide manner. Yeah, you'll be taking away some of people social rights, but you'll make it so that it's the people and not the party. (See Prop 8) I personally don't like this approach BUT its a way of selling social issues that Republicans Cling to. Having a Republican say that he supports gay rights in general but he wants to allow states to make that decision on their own. Will be much more appealing to independent voters. That allows the Evangelicals that are concentrated in the South to still get behind you because you don't want them to have to change their traditions BUT those that do in the North are free to.
10. For the second time, as unlikely as it is to happen, pray for an Obama mistake.
--------------------------------------------------
There are a few broad assumptions that I'm making. Most Hardcore partisans will be upset with some of these moves, BUT they won't vote for the other side. This is to reach to those voters in the center. The truth is we are a CENTER nation (tilting slightly to the left because of the economy). Although Republicans like to call this place a center right country, they govern from the HARD Right.
They've got to get some other age groups besides the current 65 and older voters because they'll soon die out and be replaced by the middle aged ones of today. Think of the next crop of 18 year olds, they'll be playing video games with Barack Obama advertisements in them for the next 8 years. You've got to do something to Hook their parents quick or you'll lose that entire generation too.
Advertisement
I think there is one more important step. First thing to do is clean house. A little self examination is in order. Start by admitting that the GOP--yeah, Grand Old Party is no longer the Grand Old Party but has been hijacked by non-conservative right wing extremists. They are nothing they claim to be and have used everyone as a tool. They have used the Republican party as a guise to claim to be conservatives. They have used Evangelicals to pretend to be Christians. They have bankrupted the country claiming to be fiscally conservative. They have ignored the constitution claiming to be patriots. You cannot reclaim the Republican Party until you become Republicans again. That means letting the right wing extremists establish a party of their own and quit letting them hide behind you and the flag, and the bible and our troups.
November 15, 2008 3:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have to agree with unkleD. We need to go back to our roots in order reclaim a message that will resonate with a modern electorate.
Ironically enough, TR's Progressive Party paradigm is exactly what republicans need to be grand again. It is a credible and sustainable conservative counterargument to issues that are more in socialist democracy mode. Those two sides of our national character working together can craft solutions that work for everyone, independent of political party.
The only way the GOP pulls this thing out is through a massive change to the organizational structure and mission that includes totally divorcing from the fringe beliefs advocated by The Reagan Right sleeping with the Rapture Right.
November 15, 2008 8:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good post, thequist, and I'm glad to hear someone talking about the Republicans on TPMCafe. I'm a political independent, but as a liberal have not been able to vote for a Republican in years. In fact, the last Republican I voted for was Chris Shays. That was back in 1992 when I was living in Connecticut. Shays, as you probably know, lost his bid for reelection this year and, in doing so, gained notoriety for being the last Republican congressman in New England. I no longer live in Shays' district, but I was somewhat saddened to hear about his loss. Were I still living in Connecticut, I'm sure I would have voted for the Democrat--but that vote would have been more a vote against the Republican party than a vote against Shays. Shays represented a wing of the Republican party that was honestly attractive to me--social liberals (near libertarian) who believed in smaller, more efficient government, but who also saw an important role for the government in protecting the poor and the environment. Unfortunately, however, Shays's views weren't the views of his party, and he was increasingly less attractive as a representative because he had no ability to lead the Republicans in his direction and instead was too often forced to follow the rest of his party in supporting extreme positions.
As I look over the election results, I think the biggest problem the Republican party faces is that it has become a party attractive primarily to white people who are uncomfortable with any sort of diversity--not just diversity of race, ethnicity, and religion, but also diversity of thought, culture, and lifestyle. Republicans seem uncomfortable with blacks, hispanics, Muslims, gays, liberals, the French, people from Massachusetts, people from larger cities, people who believe in evolution, and a host of other groups that don't live in small towns and rural counties in white ("pro-America") areas of Appalachia, the South, and the Great Plains or, if they live elsewhere, don't fervently worship either Jesus or business. This excludes an awful lot of people--and, more importantly, most of the people in demographic groups that are actually growing. Just as bad, Republicans seem to see all these groups as threatening to them in some way. They define them as evil, anti-American, etc. Essentially, they not only open their arms to a realatively narrow group of people--they actively alienate everyone else. This was, in fact, Karl Rove's wedge strategy. Divide the country and get just enough votes to win. Unfortunately for the Republicans, the group Rove targeted, while still the largest group in the country, may no longer be a majority. To win again, Republicans are going to have to find a way to increase their appeal, and this will require a major change in party attitude which completely reverses the "with us or against us" attitude the party has actively cultivated since the 1994 Republican "revolution". The "against us" group is now larger and more powerful than the "with us" group. So Republicans will have to get their "with us" crowd to become more comfortable with diversity (good luck with that!) and to make that "with us" crowd actually welcome and accomodate the views of those who they have long reviled as "against us". That seems like a tall order to me, but I sincerely hope the Republicans succeed, because, honestly, I think it's good for the country to actually have two parties one can seriously consider voting for. Quite simply, a viable Chris Shays would be a good thing for America.
November 15, 2008 9:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
On topic, I recommend this recent NYT guest op-ed on how the Tories did it. Though it's ahort and a generalization, he uses some interesting comparisons to U.S. figures that were thought-provoking.
You know, there's been a lot of yammering in the liberal blogosphere the last few years how "moving to the middle" is evil incaranate and is the reason for losing. But you never see actual examples of how not moving to the middle somehow in someway helps, and you do see examples of how it does, and not just in the U.S., but around the world.
November 15, 2008 9:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Also, I was so impressed with an Oct. 3 discussion thread on topic on Marc Ambinder's blog, as to how thought-provoking it was on the demographics and ideologies, that I posted a link to it here.
November 15, 2008 9:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
10 step plan for the Republican party? Stand nine steps back from a sheer cliff and move forward.
What's killing the Republicans is the base's quest for purity. Romney's Mormonism was not a pure enough form of Christianity. Ridge and Pawlenty, not pure enough in their anti-abortion views. McCain was simply the last man standing. Palin is the closest thing to purity for the base, but the thought of her in power so terrifies the moderates that the Repubs can't win with her either.
Note the differences in the two conventions and the election night speeches. The Dem convention delegation was nearly 50 percent minorities. Of 2300 Republican delegates, 36 were minorities, or 1.5 percent. McCain held his concession speech in a ritzy hotel to an invitation-only, wealthy all-white crowd. Obama gave his speech on Chicago's "front lawn," Grant Park, open to everyone who cared to attend.
The Republican party is now the White Nationalist party. They've got a lot of work to do, and I hope it takes them decades to do it.
November 15, 2008 9:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think that today's republican party is less diverse than the democratic party is missing the point.
Those who identify as "conservative" is quite a diverse group and should be encouraged to yank back control of the GOP from the extremists. It makes no sense to advocate for continued disarray in the republican party if the end result is failing at the enormous tasks Obama has laid out for us all to accomplish.
I wonder if the better argument this year for democrats is aimed at conservative moderates who feel alienated from their own party. Not in an effort to turn them democratic, but in an effort to support their reclamation of a truly conservative opposition party. It will take both liberal and conservative methods to craft the progressive solutions we need to move the country forward.
I don't think generalizations and hyperbole like "The Republican party is now the White Nationalist party." is helpful to Barack's larger goal of fixing this country. Aside from being not true, such characterizations are immaterial to accomplishing his very ambitious national agenda.
November 15, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Republicans need to face the fact that while 55% of whites voted for McCain, only 18% of non-whites (including African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians, and all other non-white groups) did. That's a huge disparity and gives some credence to the "generalization" that the Republican party looks increasingly like a White Nationalist Party. When you look at the exit polls, you see that the Republican party has little appeal to people who aren't white, though it's still strongly attractive to large segments of the white population, especially those living in more insular, less cosmopolitan regions of the country (the South, Appalachia, and the Plains).
November 15, 2008 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
There are plenty of conservatives who left the republican party or became independents because of the modern leadership.
That doesn't make them less conservative, just not supportive of the party that has moved so far away from its roots. A conservative electorate that includes nearly 20% minority vote is not the White Nationalist Party and think it is such diminishes the democratic argument.
I envision moderates moving into the power vacuum left by the shrinking Rapture Right and discredited Reagan Right to dramatically change the GOP over the next few election cycles. I also see progressive, Jimmy Carter Christians who voted for Obama not staying democratic if the party faithful have a message that is one of division, which hyperbole invariably leads to.
I think the best thing democrats can do right now is promote Barack's agenda independent of party identity and give the republicans room to sort it out on their own, leaving them room to keep moving to the center. That seems to be Obama's tactic and is paying dividends with the discussion sparked in the republican party.
He didn't set out to defeat the republicans. Barack set out to change them along with the rest of the country. The only thing that can trip that up right now are his fellow democrats.
November 15, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jason, just want to be clear here:
I am saying that the Republican party (not conservatives in general) resemble what WorkinJoe called a "White Nationalist Party." I think you and I are in substantial agreement at least on the point that the Republican Party has been dominated recently by what I might call "backward thinking" groups. These groups tend to project hostility toward people different from them, and therefore tend to make the Republican party look unwelcoming to people whose views or cultural backgrounds are different. Because of this, the Republican party has limited its attractiveness to a large, but still relatively narrow segment of American society: namely white people who are somewhat intolerant of or frightened by ideas, cultures, and lifestyles different from their own. People of color, people with a more cosmopolitan outlook, people with ideas or lifestyles outside the mainstream, people who are more broadminded and tolerant, people who are more thoughtful--all tend to feel unwelcome in the Republican party and also tend to be put off by what seems to be the backward and insular mindset of so many Republicans. Certainly, some of the people who feel unwelcome in the Republican party or who are put off by the narrowness of Republican viewpoints include many traditional, more intellectual conservatives--especially those in the Northeast. Lincoln Chaffee probably fits the profile of a conservative who is unwanted in the current Republican party and who also probably is repulsed by much of what the party now stands for. I think you are arguing for people like Lincoln Chafee to regain control of the party--to make it more progressive, more sophisticated, more intellectual, more moderate. If this is indeed what you are arguing for, then I think you are right that this would help the Republicans have broader appeal. But the current Republican party has shown signs of going in the opposite direction--of embracing the idiocy of Palin. If it does that, it will condemn itself to increasing irrelevancy as it becomes ever more the White Nationalist Party that WorkinJoe so aptly labelled it.
November 15, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then we agree about the destination just not the party's likely next steps. I don't see Palin being much more than a distraction on the way toward a new GOP that will indeed seek to modernize its message based on a 21st century American Renaissance. I suspect they will get behind many of Obama's initiatives this first term and find a way to contribute conservative solutions to those broad national goals. This wouldn't be the first time a party has reinvented itself. If they can't, then you are right. This is likely the end of the GOP.
November 15, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those who identify as "conservative" is quite a diverse group and should be encouraged to yank back control of the GOP from the extremists.
It's worth pointing out as well, that according to the exit polls only 34% of the electorate now identify as conservative. I suspect a very large percentage of this 34% is white and not all that diverse, though I'd be interested in seeing any data that provides evidence of greater diversity. It may be that there are diverse opinions among this 34%, but the demographics of the 34% are probably not diverse and winning will require a larger, more diverse coalition than just conservatives.
November 15, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I should also add, that the Republicans already have 78% of the 34% who identify as conservatives. They aren't losing too many conservatives. It's moderates they need to begin to appeal to. They won only 39% of moderate voters, and moderates were 44% of the electorate.
November 15, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
The electorate is roughly split into thirds.
Of the independents who make up the final third, half are more conservative and half are more liberal. If you must continue with broad generalizations at least get the math right. Moderates went for Barack because he is a centrist, not because he is a progressive. Don't count on a plurality of moderate independents or moderate republicans to continue to support his agenda if the democratic party becomes the far left equal of the mess we just voted out of office.
Further, of the third you cite as republicans, 10 to 15 percent of them voted for Barack. Many more stayed home because they can't support their party but would never become dems. The republican party is in the process of defining what it will be for the 21st Century and you seem intent on rubbing salt in their wounds while they sort it all out.
That seems counter to Barack's tactics so far.
Things are a lot more complicated than citing exit polls can account for. Your suspicions aside, there is no empirical evidence to back your assertions and the electorate is in such a state of flux that none of the old definitions are really helpful to moving the discussion forward.
In other words, continued divisiveness doesn't lead to progress, which is what Barack was elected to achieve and would hope democrats are willing to support.
November 15, 2008 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
In other words, continued divisiveness doesn't lead to progress . . .
Exactly, Jason. But it has been the Republicans who have been the party of divisiveness in recent years. Rove's whole strategy was to use wedge issues to divide the electorate and win just enough to get an electoral college victory in red states (i.e., states with large white populations and few or no large cosmopolitan cities). In doing so, he helped make the Republican Party a party that appeals primarily to what I would call "insular white voters" and less appealing (even assertively unwelcoming) to all other groups of voters (cosmopolitan whites and all other ethinc/racial groups). The Republican Party needs to reevaluate the Rovian strategy and start trying to appeal to more cosmopolitan whites and to nonwhites. It can do that by focusing less on wedge issues and emphasizing instead moderate center-right issues of fiscal responsibility and efficient government. Obama and the Democrats won because they were less divisive and more moderate than the Republicans. The Republicans need to follow the lead of the Democrats--move to the center, be more inclusive and tolerant of diverse viewpoints and cultures, and in general look more progressive, modern, and optimistic, and less backward, angry, and threatened by the world beyond their noses.
November 15, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also, I should say that I'm not interested at all in rubbing salt in Republican wounds. As I said in my first post in this thread, I'd like to have Republican candidates I'd want to vote for. But I think Republicans who deny that the party has become an insular white party and who simply think the solution to their political problems is to be more conservative are missing the point. Chris Shays didn't lose his seat because he wasn't conservative enough. He lost because his party wasn't addressing in a serious, mature way the real issues that people are concerned with. Part of the Republican Party's problem is that it focuses too much on issues that matter only to its base (like abortion). The remainder of the Republican Party's problem is that, when it does focus on important issues, it tends to do so by repeating simplistic conservative slogans (government is the problem, taxes need to be cut) rather than by proposing real, workable solutions that take into account the complexity of our society and our problems.
Serious conservative solutions might have some appeal. But the kind of simplistic sloganeering that characterizes today's Republican conservatism is simply juvenile. Sarah Palin was the perfect representative of the modern Republican Party: uniniformed, vacuous, and full of trite, simplistic cliches that were not grounded in evidence or analysis and that provided no realistic solution to the serious problems the country faces.
November 15, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that continuing to speak of issues in strictly partisan terms will not help moderate conservatives regain control of their party.
I think we are seeing the end of the republicans extreme rightward journey and would like to see democrats more in the business of pushing forward with Barack's agenda than categorizing the many ways in which the republican party is has been betrayed by its leadership. I don't anticipate a lot of mea culpas on behalf of republicans, which is what democrats seem to need in order to move on.
Left to its own devices, I suspect self preservation instincts to kick-in for the GOP and republican moderates regaining control over the next few election cycles. It is quite clear that this nation is moving toward strong, progressive solutions for what ails us and republicans, like democrats, will want to be seen as the agents of that change and not an obstacle.
November 15, 2008 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some thoughts on the problems with Republican ideas:
1. The family-values wedge issues (abortion and gay marriage) help the Republicans with about a third of the population, but they don't help the Republicans with the rest of the electorate and probably contribute to the perception among those of us in more cosmopolitan parts of the country that the Republicans are extreme and backward.
2. Creationism is a disaster for the Republican party. It makes them look especially backward. They may as well start arguing that the earth is flat (and not in Tom Friedman's figurative sense).
3. Opposition to stem cell research combines the negatives of the issues listed in 1 and 2 above into a single position that makes the Republicans look about as progressive as the Taliban to many Americans.
4. Americans aren't as anti-government as the Republicans think. Americans want effective, cost-efficient government, not no government. Americans like to be able to rely on the government for health and retirement security, consumer and environmental safety, defense, and disaster recovery. Competent government is important and the Republicans, with their disdain for government, have failed to deliver.
5. Americans do hate high taxes, but not to the point that they are willing to sacrifice effective government in the areas where they believe government is important. Republicans need to re-consider the role of government and start recognizing where and when it's important and develop plans for running it more efficiently rather than simply trying to destroy it.
6. Progressive taxation is not seen as socialism except by extremists in the Republican party. Interestingly, Obama won the votes of people earning more than $200,000, the people most like to be affected negatively by progressive taxation.
7. Most Americans, while not anti-business, aren't quite as pro-business as the Republican party thinks. Americans like to know their government can curb some of the excesses of business without stifiling entrepreneurship.
8. Americans are really worried about job security, health care, and financial issues in general. They are looking for the government to do something to help them there. Taking a laissez faire approach won't win a lot of votes as anxiety increases.
9. Americans like a strong military and will fight to protect ourselves and our allies, but long slogs in obscure foreign countries to advance vague objectives will never be popular with Americans. Neoconservative ideas about changing the world through the application of American military force have been thoroughly rejected by the American public. The Republican party would be wise to reject them too.
10. Any time Bill Kristol (who was apparently behind both Iraq and the nomination of Sarah Palin) makes a suggestion, the Republicans should run in the opposite direction as quickly as possible.
November 15, 2008 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
thequis,
If I may speak as a partisan for moment, I don't want to see people helping Republicans pull away from the brink they thought was always for other people to trip over. Let there be gnashing of teeth and wringing of togas.
I shake my pom-poms for Brad DeLong who has called for the destruction of the Republican Party so that a new opposition party may come from the ashes.
I hope the end of the Bush years will see the administration buried with the rhetoric that allowed it to come into existence.
November 15, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink