This story is going to pose problems for the Republican party in the short and long term — in a specific race, and overall:

A California Republican’s congressional campaign went into meltdown Thursday after he said a staff member was responsible for sending thousands of letters to new voters with Hispanic surnames telling them — wrongly — that it is illegal for them to vote if they are immigrants.

Tan Nguyen, the GOP candidate for California’s 47th District, said in a statement that a staff member had sent the letters without his knowledge and has since been fired. Nguyen, himself an immigrant from Vietnam, has focused his campaign on keeping illegal immigrants
out of the country, a deeply felt issue in suburban Orange County.

Honestly: this site and others are not picking on the GOP. It’s just that seldom in recent political history has there been such a seeming meltdown in key individual races and on a national scale as we’re seeing now.

The GOP’s meltdown is becoming so graphic that Al Gore may soon do a documentary about it.

The problem with this latest bit of bad news is that Republicans in California are still reeling over problems with Hispanic voters stemming from Republican Governor Pete Wilson’s term. They are disinclined to vote Republican, unless it’s for Arnold Schwarzenegger who has rapidly reconstituted the coalition that put him in office during the recall. MORE:

Tan Nguyen, who is challenging Rep. Loretta Sanchez in Orange County, said a staff member sent the letters without his knowledge

“The mailer was flawed and ill-conceived,” Nguyen’s statement said. “I will do whatever I can in the weeks before the election to encourage all citizens in this district to exercise the most important of their democratic privileges.”

The Orange County Republican Party immediately called for Nguyen to withdraw from the race. He will hold a news conference today.


Because the GOP is also reeling over the larger debate over immigration policy, a debate that has split the GOP itself. Many Hispanic voters are irked at the Republican hard liners for stressing border enforcement while saying they want to delay adjusting the status of some illegal aliens/undocumented workers (pick your phrase of choice) who are already here. They believe “delay” means never get to it.

President George Bush and his political guru Karl Rove have made no secret over the fact that one of their long range goals was to expand and solidify support for the Republican party among Hispanic voters — a goal sandbagged by conservative GOPers’ handling of the immigration issue.

If sandbags had been used so effectively in New Orleans last year, George Bush would have been hailed for his handling of Hurricane Katrina.

This bogus letter now gives ammunition to those Democrats and Hispanics (particularly Hispanic political activists) who say the Republicans can’t be trusted — even though the letter appears to be the act of one person and not part of some big conspiracy (as most people seemingly know, Karl Rove may be too busy planning his October surprise…:)

Written in Spanish, the letters advise recently registered voters that it is a crime for those in the country illegally to vote in a federal election, which is true. They also say, falsely, that immigrants may not vote and could be jailed or deported for doing so, that the federal government has a new computer system to verify voter names, and that anti-immigration organizations can access the records.

As many as 14,000 letters were sent in the district, now represented by Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D). The letterhead identified them as coming from the California Coalition for Immigration Reform.

The group denied responsibility, and California Attorney General Bill Lockyer launched an investigation into possible violations of two state laws that prohibit intimidation to suppress voting. On a radio program, Lockyer confirmed that his office was focused on a Republican congressional candidate.

Sanchez said she has called for a federal probe into possible violations of the Voting Rights Act. “We would like to find who did this and have them prosecuted,” she said.

Local Republicans have largely ignored the race, though Sanchez’s seat is not normally considered safely Democratic. The district narrowly went for President Bush in 2004.

The bottom line: a lot about this affair remains murky except that it’s clear there is not some high-level Republican party plot behind it.

Another undeniable fact: it’s a “dirty trick” of incredible stupidity that will have Democrats rubbing their hands with political glee.

Because in the end the Democrats got something priceless: a widely covered news story suggesting that someone who is a Republican wanted to lie to Hispanic voters to suppress their votes — to keep them from voting Democratic.

So just guess who many of these voters will vote for as a result of this letter?

Even worse, even though it’s the act of one person, it adds yet ANOTHER news story and ANOTHER “high concept” image of the Republican party seemingly being less about values and principles and being concerned with one goal above all else: to get and retain power at all costs.

Unfair? That’s almost irrelevant. The operative problem is this:

With three weeks to go before elections this is the kind of imagery the GOP in California and nationally doesn’t want — especially during a year when most Hispanic voters are already poised to vote for Democrats and shatter the Bush/Rove dream of adding the rapidly growing Hispanic population to the Republican coalition.

JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2006 The Moderate Voice
  • Rambie

    What is ironic is that Candidate Nguyen is himself an immigrant. Also I read this morning, “Numerous political leaders including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger have denounced it and called for the investigations.� LINK That was late last night before this latest news broke, it’s nice to see this moving quickly.

  • Tommy

    delay adjusting the status of some illegal aliens/undocumented workers (pick your phrase of choice)

    Adjusting the status? You mean amnestizing these people for breaking our immigration laws and rewarding them (and their relatives back in their home countries, ultimately) citizenship to boot? That is the most tame way of putting it I’ve ever heard.

    While I don’t approve of this stupid message, I have to say that the way Dems have courted the fradulent illegal immigrant vote over the years in California has been a far more serious concern for me than this idiotic message. I find it especially ironic that Loretta Sanchez, who beat Bob Dornan back in 1996 only with the help of fradulent illegal alien voters, is so worked up about this.

    But don’t worry, because of Bush and the neo-cons along with the liberals, this country is probably on a fast-track to Third World status soon enough. Fasten your seatbelts! In 20-30 years, the the Big Amnesty/Open Borders Bill that will be supported by this upcoming batch of Dems and signed into law by Bush will look like the one of the biggest betrayals of our nation’s history.

    For those who don’t accept that racial differences in intelligence may exist (and why we cannot wait 20 years for the definitive evidence that genetics will ultimately provide one way or another is beyond me), then at least look at the abysmal educational statistics for fourth generation Mexican-Americans and consider the consequences of allowing tens of millions of people from Latin America into the United States.

    A tad unrelated, but some of you might find this interesting:
    California, a state we generally think of as “smart,” now has a lower per capita IQ than even West Virginia. Shocking. You can thank mass Hispanic immigration for that.

  • Enna

    RYC Rambie: The important fact about Candidate Nguyen is that he is a LEGAL IMMIGRANT NOT AN ILLEGAL. That’s the most important part about him! If the DEMS take over, it will be the beginning of the end of USA. Look forward to another THIRD WORLD COUNTRY! RYC Tommy: You have made some very important observations/comments! LOW IQ, SLAVE/SERVANT LABOR, &A SOCIALISTIC/COMMUNISTIC SOCIETY! SCARY FUTURE AHEAD OF US!!

  • I don’t know why I keep reading the old prop 187 canards here, but I do.

    And, obviously, the idea that you either support something approaching open borders or risk losing the mythical “Hispanic_vote” is a false choice. Many polls and votes have shown that there are other choices, but oddly few seem able to mention them.

    And, the claim that Bush is trying to reach out to_Hispanics needs a much deeper analysis, such as a discussion of his campaign_video that includes reconquista_sentiments.

    And, it would also follow the money.

    And, it would discuss the pictures of foreign_flags that Bush used to reach out to_Hispanics on his campaign_site.

    And, it would discuss whether it’s appropriate for Karl_Rove to give legitimacy to a group that has links to and funds extremists. Should the GOP “reach out to_Hispanics” by reaching out to an organization that funds schools run by those with separatist ideologies?

    And, it would discuss the goals of the North_American_Union.

    You have to look at everything involved in this issue, not just the superficial politics.

  • Joe

    Pete Wilson was someone I admired. I worked on the San Diego Union as a reporter when he moved to the Senate and had the pleasure of interviewing him for a short report. Then when I went to Washington and took my Little Brother in the Big Brother program there as our big trip, Pete Wilson’s right hand man, advisor and former Union reporter Otto Bos met us and took us to lunch in the Senate Dining Room. Wilson briefly said hello. When Bos died (very suddenly at an early age), Wilson turned right much as Schwarzenegger turned a bit more to the right and saw his polls plummet. So I say this about Wilson not as someone who didn’t like him, but quite the opposition. If you go back and trace it, Wilson was being mentioned as Presidential material until the backlash over the propositions he supported. It isn’t a cliche; it’s a political fact that he paid a price and so did the California Republican party. Stating that is not wishful thinking or a partian statement; it is what happened. There are lots of news stories that mention the same factor. And the case could be made that if you add several factors together the national GOP could be also alienating a growing and vital voting block. It’s a separate issue whether that should be the issue at hand; but it is a fact that these voters are unlikely to be drawn to the Republican party given the debate over immigration, the shooting down of the Bush plan that essentially DID include an amnesty that was not called such, and a high profile story such as this. Also: my job on the San Diego Union as to cover the Ronald Reagan immigration program so I did a LOT of work on the amnesty stories and know this issue quite well. (What Bush was proposing was a version of an amnesty but like many things that his administration does not like to come out and say, it was couched in other language — a kind of political plausible deniability. And, again, I am not making a judgment here on whether an amnesty was needed…just saying a)Bush was proposing and amnesty and b)the fact that this part of the plan was basically axed is not going to help the GOP with many Hispanic voters)

  • Tommy

    The problem with the “Hispanic vote” argument is (a) Hispanics generally vote Democratic even when Republicans pander to them (and when Republicans do get a sizable portion of the Hispanic vote it is only because they’ve moved very far to the left on issues like social programs, thus largely defeating the purpose of voting Republican entirely) and (b) Hispanics don’t vote nearly in proportion to their numbers. As a result, turning off reliable white anti-immigration voters by pandering to Hispanics has frequently been more damaging to Republicans than alienating the small number of would-be Republican Hispanics.

    In the long-term, by failing to control Hispanic immigration, Republicans are essentially dooming themselves on empty hopes that they can somehow win Mexicans over on social issues. The reality is that Mexicans tend to go for big-government Democrats regardless of their personal stances on issues like abortion. Also, the “family values” image of Mexicans is greatly exaggerated by pro-Hispanic Republican panderers. Look at the high illegitimacy rates of Hispanics if you need evidence of that. Finally, I seriously doubt that the children of Mexican immigrants generally grow any more conservative than their parents do as they become more accustomed to American materalism and racial identity politics. Instead, it is probably the exact opposite.

    Pete Wilson doomed himself, not by alienating Hispanics as the myth is so often presented, but by failing to get white conservatives to come out for him on election day.

  • Tommy

    Boo-boo, I meant to say that Pete Wilson didn’t doom the GOP (not himself). Failing to connect to whites is what is dooming the GOP in California, not alienating the Mexicans.

  • Ryan

    I keep wondering one thing about this whole debate. How is not supporting amnesty actually going to hurt a politician with the immigrant vote? Remembering that illegal immigrants, who are the only ones who will benefit by this, can’t vote, how is a politician going to hurt him or herself by not supporting amnesty? All supporting amnesty will do politically is give you the potential of a few more votes…if/when amnesty gets passed.

    In the meantime, legal immigrants – those with the right to vote right now – may vote against you if you support amnesty. Why? Because, by supporting amnesty, you are punishing them for obeying our laws while rewarding those who broke our laws. I know several legal immigrants. I’m married to one. With one exception, a legal immigrant with a few illegal immigrant cousins, they all say that we should not be granting rights to illegal immigrants that many legal immigrants had to wait for years, even decades, and many have had to spend their life savings to obtain and some legal immigrants never are even granted the opportunity to obtain.

  • LaurenceB

    To answer your question, take a quick look at the previous comments. You will notice (racist) rants about the IQ of hispanics, accusations that hispanic immigration will lead the U.S. to become a third-world nation, etc. Now ask yourself: “Are these arguments being made in opposition to illegal immigration or to all immigration?” There’s your answer.

    The fact of the matter is that the anti-illegal-immigration folks slide pretty easily into full-blown anti-legal-immigration mode. Don’t they?

  • Ryan

    Laurence, that’s a generalization that it should be obvious to see doesn’t hold true any more than “anything other than stay the course is cut and run” based on one simple fact: many legal immigrants are anti-illegal immigration.

    The fact is that there is a very vocal minority of anti-illegal immigration people who are anti-legal immigration. However, there are a lot of anti-illegal immigration proponents who simply don’t want people who broke the law to be treated better than those who worked hard to follow the law.

  • LaurenceB

    Of course you are right that there are many anti-illegal immigration people who are not anti-legal-immigration. And of course I am right that there are many anti-illegal-immigration folks who are anti-legal immigration (or just plain racist). See the comments above for examples.

    But the fact that I am right (which you don’t dispute) explains quite clearly while legal immigrants tend to take the position they take. Which is the answer to your original question.

  • Rudi

    It’s great that VDare is now has a forum at TMV. When will the NationalVandgard get on the bloggroll?

  • Tommy


    It’s great that VDare is now has a forum at TMV. When will the NationalVandgard get on the bloggroll?

    VDARE is not National Vanguard. Please don’t be ridiculous.

  • Failing to connect to whites is what is dooming the GOP in California, not alienating the Mexicans.

    Do you have statistcs to back that up? That doesn’t jibe with my sense of the situation, which is that, outside the liberal coastal counties, the GOP gets the overwhelming majority of the white male vote in California and a smaller majority of the white female vote.

    It is well documented in California politics that hispanic registration went up dramatically in the two years after 1994, and that — except for Schwarzenegger, who is an outlier — they vote overwhelmingly for Democrats. It’s less well documented, but generally believed to be true in California political circles, that prior to 1994 hispanics were natural allies for the Republicans.

    I’ve not seen any research which supports the claim in italics at the start of this comment.

  • Tommy

    How is not supporting amnesty actually going to hurt a politician with the immigrant vote?

    For some, it isn’t just the amnesty, it is also the possibility of allowing more family from Mexico to come live in the United States. Many Mexican-American citizens may be opposed to amnesties in principle, but the issue isn’t a hot button with them either way. Those other reasons, provided for in the links from my second post, are the real reasons why Mexicans do not and will not vote Republican, even when presented with such a pro-Hispanic Republican like George Bush.

    The philosophy of limited government is simply not a very attractive one in Latin America, as populist demagogues from Juan Peron to Hugo Chavez have demonstrated time and again. Generally speaking, Hispanics will go with the party that promises to spend heavily on them in the way of social spending and other goodies, not with the party that advocates individual freedom and personal responsibility.

  • Tommy

    Do you have statistcs to back that up?

    Please read the article hyperlinked to the word “myth” in that post you refer to? It provides plenty of numerical evidence such as this fact:

    It’s often said that angry Latinos made subsequent Republican candidates pay for Wilson’s sins, but where are the numbers? According to the Census Bureau, California Hispanics cast 11.4 percent of the vote in 1994 and 13.9 percent in 1998. In both elections, the Republican gubernatorial candidate won 23 percent of the Hispanic vote, so the celebrated Latino “tidal wave of anger� accounted for less than a tenth of the Republicans’ plummet from Wilson’s 55 percent in 1994 to Lungren’s 38 percent in 1998.

  • Ryan

    But the fact that I am right (which you don’t dispute) explains quite clearly while legal immigrants tend to take the position they take.

    What position would that be? As I stated, of the several legal immigrants I know, only one supports any type of amnesty. The rest support enforcement measures without amnesty or any amnesty-like provisions.

    I know this is just anecdotal but it suggests that legal immigrants, some of whom are the only immigrants who have the right to vote now, might actually support politicians who supported enforcement measures while opposing those who support amnesty. Well, if they were single issue voters at least. Of course, I hope most people think about more than one issue when casting their vote but that’s another topic.

  • How is not supporting amnesty actually going to hurt a politician with the immigrant vote?

    Because we’ve allowed massive illegal immigration and because of the long-standing (and probably incorrect) interpretation of the 14th_Amendment leading to anchor_babies, there are many “mixed_status” families. A voter may have illegal_aliens in the family.

    And, there’s also the racial_solidarity angle which, if you actually look into this subject is quite significant and is played to by racial_demagogues. And, it’s similar to other ethnic_nationalistic movements in some ways. And, we’ve even got our own version of_Quislings.

    As for Wilson, he paid a price a) for mistakes made that didn’t have to have been made, and b) because they say he did. If you think he paid a price greater than he did, perhaps it’s because of people like Allen_Hoffenblum continually saying he paid a price.

    Two months before the vote, prop_187 had around 56% support among Hispanics. That’s not indicative of the concept of reducing illegal immigration being a loser or a mistake.

    As for the GOP’s problems, perhaps it has something to do with trying to run social conservatives in a non-social conservative state.

  • That’s a slightly odd statistic, don’t you think? How would the Census Bureau know what percentage of the vote was cast by which ethnic group? That’s usually information, in California at least, which comes from something like the Field Poll; and the Census Bureau is certainly not known for stationing people outside of polling places asking them questions.

    Field’s review of the 1996 election says that Hispanic voting percentages increased from 7% of the electorate in 1988 to 10% in 1992 to 11% in 1996 (which does suggest that there was little to no post-1994 increase).

    It also showed that Latinos voted for Clinton, 70-21-7, while Whites voted for Clinton, 46-42-8.

    In that election, 50% of eligible Latinos were registered.

    Their review of the 1998 election says that Hispanic voting percentages increased from 10% of the electorate to 13% in 1994 of the electorate in 1998, which is a *substantial* jump. The numbers aren’t presented in quite the same fashion, but it suggests that *84%* of eligible Latinos were registered.

    *Something* accounted for the shift. I remember massive voter registration drives in the mid-90s using Pete Wilson’s advertising as a spur to get Latinos to register; and it makes some sense that this would happen in the next *gubernatorial* election rather than the next *presidential* election.

    So: there’s an enormous increase in Latino registration and voter participation between 1994 and 1998. The common wisdom — which jibes with my memory of the period — is that this was a direct response to certain parts of the pro-187 campaign. What’s the evidence that that’s false?

  • Some data on the vote on Proposition 187, from The Field Poll:

    * The electorate as a whole voted 50-41.
    * Support was strongest in the North of the state (68-32) and weakest in the Bay Area (45-55)
    * White men voted for it 64-36. White women voted for it 59-41. Latinos voted against it 27-73. Blacks voted for it 52-48, as did Asians.

  • Jim S

    The Karl Rove School of Campaign Management strikes again.

  • Rambie

    Enna: Rambie: The important fact about Candidate Nguyen is that he is a LEGAL IMMIGRANT NOT AN ILLEGAL. That’s the most important part about him! If the DEMS take over, it will be the beginning of the end of USA.

    Enna, what is ironic is a LEGAL IMMIGRANT apparently authorized a message to be sent out to SUPPRESS VOTES yes, EVEN FROM OTHER LEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

    Also, don’t just assume that I support illegal immigration. I thought President Bush’s amnesty program was a terrible idea, so don’t talk to me about doom-and-gloom about the Dems when Rebuplicans are also pushing something like that joke of a bill.

  • AustinRoth

    I propose a new Law, Roth’s Law, which is a variation of Godwin’s law.

    As an online discussion of politics grows longer, the probability of a conspiracy involving Karl Rove being mentioned approaches one.

  • Tommy

    That’s a slightly odd statistic, don’t you think? How would the Census Bureau know what percentage of the vote was cast by which ethnic group?

    No, it isn’t. The Census Bureau certainly keeps stats on how many Hispanics voted in a given year versus how many didn’t. Go on over there and look around.

    The numbers he cites for that particular issue probably come from a different study. However, the number of actual voters in a given year are certainly tracked by the Census Bureau.

    You can email Sailer if you wish to find out more.

  • Tommy

    Their review of the 1998 election says that Hispanic voting percentages increased from 10% of the electorate to 13% in 1994 of the electorate in 1998, which is a *substantial* jump.

    It was a miniscule percentage of the vote that hurt Republicans, however. Again, the primary thing that hurt Republicans in California was the inability to attract white voters. That “substantial” jump accounted for less than 1/10 of the total difference between Wilson and Lungren.

    In the long-term, by continuing to do nothing to stem the tide of illegal immigration, Republicans are guaranteeing not only their own permanent minority status in California, but also permanent minority status for Republicans across large sections of the country. Furthermore, those Republicans that will be competitive in areas with large numbers of Mexicans will necessarily have to swing very far to the left to attract votes. It is a disaster that essentially spells the end of political conservatism in America and the rise of a client relationship with voters, where each party competes by stressing which big-government goodies they can bring to their constituents and where personal freedom and responsibility are downplayed. That is the very sort of relationship between voters and politicians that tends to exist in most of Latin America today. Banana Republic, here we come!

  • Enna

    RYC RAMBIE: Enna, what is ironic is a LEGAL IMMIGRANT apparently authorized a message to be sent out to SUPPRESS VOTES yes, EVEN FROM OTHER LEGAL IMMIGRANTS.


  • Enna


  • a

    I agree with Lawrence, the people who write in capital letters that they are against ILLEGAL immingration and not against immigration that is legal are just throwing a smokescreen. They are at heart xeonophopes. There is no rational reason to be so upset about someone’s documentation. Plenty of people break laws in this country — paying less taxes, drinking under age, supplying to minors, hunting without a permit, drinving uninspected vehnicles, breaking noise laws, drinving under the influence, you name it. That they single out one small detail in documentation is just an excuse to let fly at Latinos.

  • Enna

    Rowing eyes @ a! So I guess LAWLESSNESS is acceptable?! So you think so nonchalantly!! So it’s OK to break laws?? I don’t care what RACE-Latinos, Blacks, Asians, Aliens from Mars! I think people with such a low level thinking is what going brings this country down…NO MORAL AND ETHICS! It is so WRONG to justify paying less taxes, drinking underage, supplying to minors, hunting without a permit, breaking noise, and driving under the influence, etc. are ALL ILLEGAL!! THEY ALL DO COME WITH CONSEQUENCES: FINES AND JAIL TIME!!So should ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.. And it doesn’t matteR on a specific race…it just so happens that LATINOS are the predominent group who’s doing this! So making EXCUSES FOR THE LATINO RACE WHO BREAK THE LAW or any CHEATERS WHO FOR THEIR FAILURE TO FOLLOW PROPER PROCEDURES! Now that is the REAL SMOKESCREEN AND MAJOR COP-OUT! NO RESPECT! ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT, LAW BREAKERW, AND LOSER MENTALITY! ALL THE SAME!! It’s sad &fusterating to LINK UP ALL LATINIOS in this whole issue! I know for a fact that the LEGAL LATINOS who ARE TIRED OF BEING LINKED UP with THE LAWBREAKERS WHO ARE THOSE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. SO DON’T PLAY THE RACE CARD and stick to the facts!!!

  • Enna

    Let me begin by answering all the political figures, including the Chairman of the Orange County Republican Party- Scott Baugh, and their ridiculous call my withdrawal. I am innocent…and there is NO WAY IN HELL I AM QUITING THIS RACE. Mr. Scott Baugh, like many people this week, has made a rush to judgment and without all the facts. I find it incredible that he didn’t even call me, to get my side of the story, or didn’t even wait for the result of this so called investigation.


    There is no crime committed, not a hate crime, and not even a love crime. The whole hysteria and nonsense about there being a crime is just a BIG FAT LIE and those who are fueling this hysteria and nonsense should be ashamed of themselves.

    So, if there’s no crime committed, why is there an expedited criminal investigation conducted by the State Attorney General, three weeks prior to an election? What’s the rush? What’s going on?

    I have learned that the letter in question was the Spanish translation of a letter in English, urging green card holders and illegal immigrants to refrain from voting. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT? My attorney for the political campaign will address the letter, later.

    Then, you be the judge! Where is the hate crime? Where is the voter intimidation?

    There is now some debate to what the Spanish translation actually says, especially when it comes to the word “EMIGRADO.�

    I took a long walk along the beach, last night, and I met many Hispanics. I asked them about the word “EMIGRADO,� and was very surprised to find out that it either means a person with a GREEN CARD or a person here legally but does not have citizenship. This is also a term used by the United States Immigration Service Agents to ask those crossing our border, whether they are a CITIZEN OR AN EMIGRADO, a person who is here legally, but with only a green card. All of us know that a person who only has a green card can not vote.

    So, if this is the term used by the United States Government to describe green card holders, then who’s feeding this hysteria? I don’t speak Spanish, but my opponent does…why don’t you ask her what EMIGRADO really means, and why is she fueling the fire. Why is she holding rallies to add to the hysteria?

    My opponent, Ms. Sanchez, is not concerned with enforcing our immigration laws. In fact, she has introduced legislation to prevent prospective voters to show valid I.D. before voting. She has even sponsored bills to give social security pensions to illegal immigrants…in a time when we don’t even have enough money to pay our retirees. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that this would encourage more people to vote fraudulently.

    I am appalled and surprised at the amount of hysteria that has been generated.

    Ms. Sanchez, who has been unavailable to defend her bizarre voting record which includes refusing to condemn Hezbollah, the terrorist organization that killed 241 of our Marines in 1983, refusing to commend our soldiers, refusing to help our senior citizens get cheaper medicines and Long Term Care, has all of a sudden jumped on the bandwagon and made herself very available!

    Look at what this has created! There’s no crime committed. Yet, armed policemen raided my office and home, terrorizing my family and volunteers. They’ve interfered with my ability to run my campaign by taking my computers, by taking all my contacts with all the voters. They even took my campaign signs at my house. WHAT IS GOING ON HERE! I believe my constitutional rights of free speech and my ability to campaign have been violated! I have asked my attorney for the political campaign, Bill Braniff, to look into the substance of the letter. He’s a former U.S. Attorney, and he’s volunteering his services. I WILL SAY THAT THIS ELECTION IS BEING INTERFERRED WITH.