January Issue Re-cap, and Letters to the Editor

2017 – January

Here are some of the articles featured in our January 2017 Printed edition

Featured articles in our print edition (order for $3 plus shipping back editions):

  • TRIPP:  U.S.A. Strong  – Donald Trump’s Leadership Team: Getting to Know the Leaders Chosen to Make America Strong
  • PRUNIER: What’s the Massachusetts Republican Party Chair Race Really About? Not What You Think! And why every Republican and Independent should care
  • TRIPP: Republican Governor Charlie Baker Nominates Third Staff member From Dem. Attorney General Maura Healy’s Anti-2nd Amendment Office for a Judgeship
  • COULTER: Happy Kwanzaa! The [fake] Holiday Brought to you by the FBI
  • KENNEDY:  Merrimac Street [MassGOP] is Another Swamp That Needs Draining
  • BRENNAN:  No Heavy Lifting by Judge Robert A. Scandurra [Barnstable Family and Probate] – Copies Father’s Lawyer’s Recommendations Nearly Word-for-Word, Reject’s Mother’s Request to Speak to Her Daughters, Praises DCF
    The Judgement: 1,821 Words; 1,810 Written by Father’s Attorney!
  • TRIPP: Massachusetts Democrat Mulls Legislation to Limit Presidential Candidates on State Ballot
  • BRENNAN: Scott Brown Reaches Out of His Political Coffin to Endorse Kirsten Hughes for MassGOP Chair
  • DAXLAND: Time for a Trump-Supporting Mass. Republican Party Chair
  • KUHNER: The Left’s New McCarthyism
  • TRIPP: Heritage Foundation Rates Massachusetts Congressional Delegation for 2016 – Elizabeth Warren Stands Out
  • NETANYAHU: Netanyahu Takes Action Against the U.N. – Lashes Out at President Obama
  • MINEAU: Republican Rep. Lyons Brings Joy to the State House
  • DUGGAN: Respecting Our Nation, Our National Flag – Veterans, Patriots Turn Out to Overwhelm Hampshire College
  • BUCHANAN: Barack Backhands Bibi
  • MALKIN: Michelle Obama’s Christmas Lump of Coal
  • GREENFIELD: American Uprising Everything is about to change
  • Ultra-Liberal Congressman Seth Moulton (D-6th District) Holds “Non-Partisan” Event to Counter Election of Donald Trump
  • Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform (MCIR) Holds Second Annual Meeting –
    Estimates $1.9 Billion Spent Annually on Illegals in Mass.

Maybe Baker Needs
to Go

To the Editor,

It is hard being a Republican in Massachusetts. And it’s getting tougher. President Donald Trump is not to blame.

There has always been a major divide within the Party over social issues. Many social conservatives have put their values aside for Republican candidates because often those candidates were the lesser of two evils and that those candidates were fiscally conservative. 

When it comes to Governor Charlie Baker, they have taken a beating on not only the social issues, but now on the fiscal issues.

Baker signed into law the Bathroom Bill. He did not push for the simplest reforms such as stopping convicted sexual offenders from being able to get into the bathrooms under false pretenses.

This is liberal Massachusetts, so Baker had to do it. That’s what the moderates in the party will tell you. Maybe that is the case. However, the explanation doesn’t work on the fiscal issues.

Last year, Baker signed the Uber law. Within that bill were new taxes. Many faithful Republicans kept their mouth shut still believing that this is better than a Democrat, even while Baker was bashing our presidential nominee.

Earlier this month Baker announced that he is closing the “tax loophole” for Airbnb. Loophole is Democrat code for a new tax. Not only does this hurt people in the gig economy trying to make a few extra bucks, but it opens the door to taxing people with rental properties. 

Following the Airbnb tax announcement, Baker slams small business owners with a $2000 per employee tax, or as he calls it, an assessment. He has learned the Bacon Hill terminology way too fast. A $2000 per employee per year tax will be crippling to our economy, whether a Republican or Democrat proposes it.

The Republican nightmare doesn’t end with new taxes. Baker released his budget with a 4.3 percent increase, breaking the $40 billion mark.

So what’s the difference between Republicans and Democrats if Baker fails to hold the line on spending and taxes? What’s the platform for GOP candidates moving forward?

Maybe Governor Baker might get re-elected, but in the process he is destroying our brand in Massachusetts. If voters cannot count on a Republican to hold the line against taxes and spending, why ever vote Republican. 

Maybe Baker needs to go so we can save our Party.

Elizabeth (Last name withheld by request)
Newton, MA

A Huge Reason
Kirsten Hughes is
Unfit for Re-Election

Editor’s Note: This letter was received too late for printing in our January edition.

 To the Editor:

 I strongly urge you to fully re-consider your vote for Kirsten Hughes for MassGOP chair on January 25th, 2016. I am a long-time Quincy resident, and a life-long Republican. For years I have been a Republican activist, involved in state and local politics, collecting signatures for ballot initiatives, and working on the campaigns of local, state, and national Republican candidates. I was a delegate to the 2014 Republican State Convention in support of Charlie Baker for governor, and in 2016 I ran for a seat on the Republican State Committee. As a member of the Quincy Republican City Committee (QRCC) for many years, and now the elected chairman of my ward, I have personally witnessed disturbing events that definitely make Kirsten Hughes unfit for reelection.

 This is not only about the fact that many Republican votes were lost state-wide because Kirsten Hughes did not publicly censure State Committeeman Matthew Sisk for publicly disgracing the Republican Party, when he illegally used state resources for a private party held on July 3rd at the home of National Committeeman Ron Kaufman (for which Matthew Sisk lost his state job at the DCR). It is also not only about manipulation of the 2014 State Convention race to deny Mark Fisher his 15% of the vote (which I personally witnessed, having been charged with tallying the votes on the floor of the convention for my State Senate district). This is also about Kirsten Hughes’ unethical manipulation of the QRCC, specifically the election of the QRCC chair.

 Kirsten Hughes’ involvement in the QRCC chair election started during the April meeting to form the QRCC, after the March election and the formation of the wards. A nomination for Norman Tuttle (Ward 1 chairman and previous QRCC treasurer) for QRCC chairman had been made and seconded. A nomination for Christine Cedrone for QRCC chairwoman was then made, and a point of order was called that the QRCC bylaws did not allow her to run for a third term. State Committeeman Matthew Sisk made a suggestion to suspend the QRCC bylaws, and he asked Kirsten Hughes to verify. Kirsten gave it a once-over and agreed that this was legal; and a motion was then made to suspend the bylaws. The bylaws were voted to be suspended and Christine Cedrone’s nomination stood, for which she was subsequently reelected to a third term as QRCC chairwoman.

 Well, the QRCC bylaws were rechecked during the following month and it was revealed that proper notice had not been given for suspension of the QRCC bylaws, as required by the bylaws, so the suspension of the bylaws was illegal, making Christine Cedrone’s election illegitimate.  Christine Cedrone “resigned” as chairwoman in light of this fact, and to say the next month’s QRCC meeting on May 11th was in complete chaos would be an understatement, with a final decision passed in a vote by the majority remaining to postpone the election of the new QRCC chair for one month. Kirsten Hughes then used her authority to force an emergency meeting of the QRCC to elect a QRCC chair to take place with less than the 10-day QRCC bylaw legal notice on May 18th.

 Meanwhile, quite a number of us were supporting Norman Tuttle for QRCC chair. On May 17th, three Quincy ward chairmen (Norman Tuttle of Ward 1, Gerry Marquis of Ward 6, and myself of Ward 4), Kathleen Sullivan-Moran, along with Donald Trump RNC Convention delegate Lou Murray, had a meeting to decide on how to proceed. Lou Murray had informed us that Kirsten Hughes had threatened to strip the Massachusetts Trump delegates of their credentials, if Norman Tuttle did not step down in his bid for QRCC chairman. Lou Murray then put Massachusetts Trump Campaign Chairman Vincent DeVito on speaker phone.

 For the next twenty or so minutes, Vince DeVito made his case. In the meantime, I was surreptitiously texting Chanel Prunier, then National Committeewoman for the Massachusetts Republican Party, with details of the meeting on my cell phone. Chanel Prunier suggested Kirsten Hughes was making a completely empty threat. Norman Tuttle was apprehensive, despite my covertly showing him the texts between Chanel and me, and in a quid pro quo deal for Vince DeVito’s future help with the election and ward membership that later did not materialize, Norman decided to step down. At the emergency May 18th QRCC meeting the next day, John Iredale (who is on the record for having given money to Democratic candidates) was elected as the QRCC chairman, unopposed.

 This shows that Kirsten Hughes is not above the use of Democratic Party thuggery to get her own way. I urge you to not vote for Kirsten Hughes for MassGOP chair on January 25th, 2016, or you will be condoning the actions of someone who’s demonstrated that she’s unfit to hold the position of chairman, and your actions will adversely affect the Republican Party and the people for years to come. Kirsten Hughes has definitely shown to me that the current leadership is only there for show, and her “good olde boy’s network” would rather sit back and let the Democrats continue to implement their anti-American U.N. policy state-wide. Please, be The Republicans you were elected by the people to be, and unseat Kirsten Hughes. Thank you, and God Bless.


Steve Tougas

Quincy Massachusetts Republican Ward 4 Chairman

2016 Massachusetts Norfolk-Plymouth Republican State Committee Candidate

Letter to the Editor (Response to Congressman McGovern)

To the Editor:

For those desiring to read the ramblings of a Pernicious Partisan Socialist Twit, I recommend highly Congressman James McGovern’s January 25, 2017 missive in the Sterling Meetinghouse News. Among McGovern’s pearls of Lefty wisdom were these:

“It is important that we make clear to President Trump that we will not acquiesce in the face of policies we deplore. Politics is not about rolling over, politics is about standing up and fighting for what you believe in.”

This from one who, over his many years in Congress, made countless “junkets,” at taxpayer expense, to repressive Communist Cuba, ruled with iron fists by the murderous Castro brothers, Fidel and Raul, thereby rendering aid and comfort to an enemy regime entirely antithetical to our moral and political values and principles. Precise numbers are unavailable, but it is estimated that the Castro brothers, by firing squad and other methods, murdered between 2000 and 4000 political opponents during their decades of illegitimate rule. Beatings and imprisonment are meted out by Raul Castro to political opponents still. Check out Cuba on the Human Rights Watch website.

Fidel Castro died in 2016 and, one presumes, is now experiencing his reward in Hell, where Congressman McGovern may meet yet again his fellow socialist traveler sometime after his Trump travails are over.

McGovern “stood up and fought” proudly for the scandalous Hillary Clinton, who, thanks to the tireless efforts of Judicial Watch and other watchdog organizations compelled to pursue federal court actions to enforce their FOIA requests, was exposed as having committed more than 100 felony violations of 18 United States Code, Section 793(f), by mishandling classified documents — doubtless hacked and obtained by our prime enemies, Russia under the murderous thug Putin, and Commie China.

Thanks to the partisan Democrat hacks Obama selected to head the Justice Department, first Eric Holder, the only U.S. Attorney General ever held in contempt of Congress, and next Loretta Lynch, who, wink, wink, met, just coincidentally, Ms. Clinton’s scandalous husband, “Slick Willie” himself, June 27, 2016, on the sly, in her aircraft at Phoenix Sky Harbor, just one week before FBI Director James Comey, the 6’ 8” Political Gummy Worm, announced that Ms. Clinton would not be prosecuted for her “extreme carelessness” in mishandling those classified documents, Ms. Clinton skated on to the Democrat Party nomination. All that surely sent a righteous tingle up McGovern’s Left leg.

Oh yeah, did anyone see Congressman McGovern “stand up and fight” for the rule of law while multiple scandals roiled the Obama Administration from its beginning to merciful end (see “The Scandals that Valerie Jarrett Overlooked,” Washington Times on-line, January 4, 2017)? Me neither. Perhaps he was down there toasting the Castro Brothers.

The best that Congressman McGovern can do for us now is to help stop partisan global whining. So here’s my advice to him: Just Shut The Frig Up And Go Back To Cuba.

James F. Gettens, Sterling, MA

Democracy vs. Constitutional Republic

I hear a great deal about eliminating the Electoral College because it is not democratic, and the winner of the popular vote should win the election. This idea is particularly prominent among the young or millennials, probably because they no longer study the United States government in our school systems.

First of all, we need to understand that this country is a constitutional republic, not a democracy. Our founders rejected the idea of a true democratic government because it was “mob rule.” In a democracy, the majority rules and the minority does not have a voice. The founders at the Constitutional Convention were, almost to a man, against a large state or large fraction speaking for the union. They wanted to give all areas of the union a fair representation. At the time of the founding, the population was concentrated on the Atlantic coast. They realized the new states joining the union would have small populations and they deserved a voice in the government.

Think about it, do we want one or two states with the highest population electing the president? The Electoral College prevents a heavily populated urban area from dominating the presidential election. If only the popular vote were counted, one state could make the difference. In this last election, Clinton won the popular vote by 2.8 million; she won 1.6 million more votes than Trump in LA alone. In fact, it was only four cities/counties in Calif. that made the difference for Clinton. If you eliminate California, Trump won the popular vote by 1.4 million votes. In this election, if there were no Electoral College the presidential campaign would have been concentrated in California, the candidates would have no need to try to convince the rest of the country to vote for them. With the Electoral College, the less populated states (the minority) needed to be considered in the campaign.

The millennials, and others, who make a point of standing up for the minorities (states and individuals) should be thankful for the Electoral College. Just think if all of one religion, sect, or other group moved to one state and had the highest population (like California): they would dictate the presidential election.

I recently heard a good example that brings the issue down to an individual level. Say you had a family of six, mother, father, and four children. Suppose money was tight and one in the family proposed that to save money only four in the family would eat. In a true democratic vote only four would need to vote for the proposal and the other two would starve. Do we want a true democracy or a constitutional republic? You choose.

Check out the following YouTube video for a good explanation of the Electoral College:

Vincent Picarello, Hudson, MA



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *