Monday, September 14, 2009

And Da Academy Award Goes To --- Queen Michelle Roth!!!

One - She owns her own public relations company. Two - She knows how to skilfully play to an audience. Three - She must have cornered da market on crocodile tears, and she knows how to use them.

Two weeks ago, she was faced down by a myriad of townspeople, all irate over her actions against highly decorated and immensely respected Manalapan Police Chief Stuart Brown. One by one, people came up and demanded to know why she was taking this highly unusual action of suspending Chief Brown, for calling her of all things, "lady." One by one they spoke, and through it all she never looked up. Roth could have been doodling or doing crossword puzzles for all we know.

Now comes da first September Township Committee meeting, and again people speak and she says nothing -- that is -- until two hours pass. Then, in an extraordinary moment, Roth asks to speak - and boy does she.

In a slow, deliberate, and tense speaking voice, almost sounding as if she was under duress or scared for her life, Roth began to speak about da alleged actions of Chief Brown not just toward her --- but all women e--- verywhere!

In one instance, she spins a tale about an alleged meeting, where a supposedly irate Brown ordered four of his officers out of a room in such an intimidating fashion one officer's gun got caught on his chair as he got up. Roth claims in that meeting he said to her, "I don’t report to you, lady," and then walked toward her and shoved one of his big male fingers in her face, saying "I don’t answer to you, lady," and "Why don’t you crawl back under your rock, lady."

Of course, before she spun this particular tale, Roth not only lowered da boom on Chief Brown, making such outrageous claims about his character you'd have to wonder how any woman would live in da same town as he does.

Roth said, "Sexual harassment, verbal abuse and abuse of power by Manalapan Police Chief Stuart Brown are a big problem. Bringing this problem public creates a safer working environment for all the women of town hall and protects our residents and our township. The public need to know that Chief Brown has a history of verbally assaulting and threatening women. Chief Brown’s attack last September on me was not the first time he was threatening to a female employee of Manalapan … It is this governing body’s responsibility to make sure that this despicable behavior stops and that no other woman becomes a victim of Chief Brown’s rage."

She continued, "Those who came forward to defend the chief at the last meeting were probably not aware of the full scope of the serious issues we face with Chief Brown and his repetitive abusive behavior toward women. I say this because I cannot fathom anyone, male or female, who would support and defend someone who is abusive to women. Defending individual rights and keeping people free from harassment and intimidation, especially by a police chief who has sworn to uphold the law, is the responsibility of every elected official. I will continue to protect all the women employed by Manalapan against Chief Brown’s abuse, his demeaning language and threatening behavior. I do not want any other women to be victims of Chief Brown’s rage.”

"Sexual harassment, verbal abuse and abuse of power by Manalapan Police Chief Stuart Brown..."

"Chief Brown has a history of verbally assaulting and threatening women."

"Chief Brown’s attack last September on me..."

"Chief Brown’s rage."

"Chief Brown and his repetitive abusive behavior toward women."

"His demeaning language and threatening behavior."

"I do not want any other women to be victims of Chief Brown’s rage
."


It's obvious to any TruthTeller that each of her words were chosen both carefully and calculated. There's only four minor itsy, bitsy problems with her nearly 7 minute speech in public and on TV.

1. She has zero evidence she presented - except for that of Township administrator Tara Tiara - meaning unless there's an audio tape of da event it's "she claims he said."

2. Since this is a legal case, why is it that they did not allow any discussion whatsoever about da Mosked Man law case, but this one is an open book, albeit a trashy novel, for all to read and hear?

3. It could potentially open da door to a defamation case, which would unfortunately, and any half-good lawyer would do this - sue da township since it was one of their paid agents (Roth) who made da claims.

4. Since it's ana election year, and there's less than 60 days before da levers are pulled, she can claim Chief Brown is a space alien and get away with it - as long as she can swing a vote or two to her side.

Now, if da Queen is accurate in any way, then one would think that they'd be digging up Chief Brown's backyard to search for Jimmy Hoffa?

Will Manalapan's Township Committee demand they search his office for clues to da Lindbergh baby kidnapping?

Will a blue-ribbon committee be formed to uncover da whereabouts of Chief Brown when da Hindenburg was landing in Lakewood to see if he was out of his jurisdiction?

Will Commiteeman Andy Boy & Roth use taxpayer dollars to hire BaconHead Award-winning reporter Kathy Barratta to follow da Chief to restaurants to see if he tips waitresses below 15%?

Should Manalapan hire a private investigator to see if Chief Brown ever dipped any girl's curls in ink wells as a child?

Is Chief Brown really a space alien from da planet "Womenhater?"

Will they try to subpoena da Chief's internet service provider (using taxpayer money of course) to see if he is daTruthSquad?

DaTruth is, what we all witnessed in Town Hall that night was a calculated and desperate hatchet job by da Queen, calculated because she wants to turn da tide of resentment against her - and calculated, because as a career politician and current candidate for da state's 12th District, she appears to be looking for sympathy votes from women, a major voting block.

Let's face reality, police for years are looked at with some scorn now and then. There's da "Blue Wall of Silence," and so many cases of abuse against cops, many of which are usually questioned for lack of evidence.

In this case, it appears at least for now on da surface this is a "she said - he said" -- and -- she can get away with making any outlandish claim she desires, because even if da Chief files a defamation lawsuit - da lawsuit itself would never be heard before election day in a court of law!

Now ask yourself this --- da big money question -- if da Chief's actions were as dire and scary as Roth claimed, why then would an independent person simply say he only deserved a one-day "token" suspension? Wouldn't da county and state and US Attorney be investigating da Chief if it was really as bad as Roth claimed? Wouldn't he have been removed as Chief pending a serious investigation? Why did this independent person bypass Roth's outlandish claim that "The public need to know that Chief Brown has a history of verbally assaulting and threatening women?" If someone has a "history" of this type of action, and it "wasn't da first time," why only give da Chief a one-day token suspension?????

Oh - and one more question - did da Queen or Tara Tiara even bother to tell da independent person about da Chief's alleged "history of verbally assaulting and threatening women?" If so, where's da investigation? If not - WHY WITHHOLD DA INFORMATION???? Was that hearing too far from election day? Did da "history of verbally assaulting and threatening women" just slip both their minds? Why not discuss this when three weeks ago, most of Manalapan showed up in support of da Chief?

And, if da Queen is right - then wasn't she putting Manalapan's women at risk by not mentioning this to da investigator? Wash't she and Tara Tiara then putting Manalapan's women at risk by not mentioning this for two weeks after da August meeting??

Questions - indeed?

Ironically, it was highly qualified reporter Mark Rosman who made da statement of da whole report in da local Snoozepaper.

Rosman asked Brown's attorney, da Mosked Man himself, about Roth's statements and he said, "Mrs. Roth’s comments regarding the chief in open session at the (Sept. 9) Township Committee meeting continued the pattern that has marked her tenure in office of reckless, defamatory and false statements attacking her ever-increasing list of perceived enemies. They also continue the pattern of harassment against the chief in her continued effort to force him to retire and to replace him with a chief of her own personal choice."

However, da Mosked Man also hit a home run by challenging da current township attorney's approval of Roth actions and statement, saying - and this is important - "It is unfortunate that the township attorney, who so often has cautioned the Township Committee members not to discuss litigation in open session, inexplicably refused to advise Mrs. Roth that she is not above the rules."

Rosman then called Manalapan Township Attorney CooCooCucchiaro, who "said it was the opinion of attorneys that the age discrimination lawsuit filed by Brown contained statements and/or information relating to matters at town hall that gave municipal officials the right to respond and to discuss the issue of the police chief’s behavior in public session."

However, Rosman, who obviously here has no agenda, except that of a reporter reporting on a sensational story and gathering da facts and not da fiction, wrote "Matters of ongoing litigation are generally discussed in executive session, out of view of the public."

Wow, a reporter without an agenda. Refreshing, isn't it.

And, daTruth is, Rosman is dead-on 200% right. Why is it that when questions week after week and month after month for 25 months were brought by townspeople to da Township Committee about da Mosked Man case, such as how much was being spent, why it was even being done, da answer every time was tht they could not discuss ongoing litigation. If that is da case, then one can speculate that you cannot discuss ongoing litigation, unless that is, you're running for State Senate as a candidate?

By da way - if you have any doubts about da Queen and her truly awe-inspiring acting skills - watch the video from Town Hall for yourself on YouTube!

DaTruth is this -- If Chief Brown, as State Senate political candidate Michelle Roth claimed, "has a history of verbally assaulting and threatening women," and it "wasn't da first time," then why did da Queen and Tara Tiana potentially put thousands of Manalapan women at risk for potential harm, if their claims are accurate? Why wait until 50 days before her election to let da world know this? Why discuss an ongoing legal case in public, when da public and members of da Township committee were chastized for da very same thing in da Mosked Man case?

Questions - indeed --- and that's daTruth!

42 comments:

Anonymous said...

Great point Squad. Why did she wait so long? Why didn't she tell the investigater that info? Was it not important then?

IMHO, Michelle Roth has put Manalapan women in grave danger if she only decided last week that this info she alleges about the Chief is true. That is, if what Roth even says is true. Which I seriously doubt.

Anonymous said...

The fact is, it is Michelle Roth who has put women in great danger. By abusing her position to falsely claim sexual harassment against one of the most respected men in the County, she has seriously cheapened the charge of sexual harassment. That means when women who actually are the victims of sexual harassment come forward, what will be in the back of people's minds is the question, "Is just more nonsense like we heard from Michelle Roth." Michelle is personally responsible for anyone thinking less of a legitimate sexual harassment claim. Because of that, any woman who has a legitimate claim that isn't taken seriously can thank Michelle Roth. Michelle has done more damage to the women of Monmouth County than perhaps anyone who's ever held public office in this County. Anyone voting to send her to Trenton where she can infest the state government the way she has local government, shouldn't be voting or at least should be tested for drugs.

Anonymous said...

Just so you know . . . KB asserted on her forum that Cohen didn't comment on Roth's speech because she (Cohen) needs to be coached first. Cohen, who was present at the confrontation, has said that she has a different take on it.

Does she mean "coached" like writing a prepared and rehearsed speech beforehand and then springing it on everyone at the meeting?

Cohen was obviously hesitant about speaking because she has been told over and over that ongoing legal cases should not be discussed in a public forum. If I were her, I would not have taken the off-hand legal interpretation by the lawyer at the meeting -- I would have made sure that it was indeed allowable.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the previus posting. If someone now claims sexual harrassment in the workplace, you would have to immediately ask if they can be taken seriously or if it is a rehearsed statement.

Thanks BTW for the YouTub clip. I wouldn't have believed it if I didn't see it. You're right about the acting job, but apparantly the TV adds 10 or 100 pounds to the person.

KB said...

If I were Chief Brown, I'd demand the state come in and order an ethics probe of Roth and Klauber's actions during the last two lawsuits. Klauber's as guilty as Roth for the Moskovitz lawsuit going on as long as it did.

As for the charade that she did the other night, that travesty of justice cannot be ignored. I think all Chief Brown supporters should go to the Monmouth County Prosecutor's Office with copies of that tape, and demand an ethics probe and demand that a criminal investigation proceed against Roth.

Anonymous said...

Hey KB, Exactly right, it was a carefully written well-planned speech by Roth. Just like she does for a living, what a surprise! Susan Cohen doesn't need to be coached, she needs to go into the next meeting and B**ch slap this piece of crap senseless. And by the way, KB, you too.

IpaytaxesandIvote said...

It's totally acceptable for a council member to go into details about an alleged sexual harassment claim from the dias, but heaven forbid someone asks how much the lawyers are being paid on a suit and they clam up to the poiretent they almost stop breathing.

Anonymous said...

If Roth sat on the chief's "history of threats and assaults," that is a criminal issue. It calls for considering impeachment and, possibly, prosecution, if she was in the position of a superior who let a subordinate be threatened or assaulted without taking action.

BTW, the Hindenburg was trying to land in Lakehurst, not Lakewood.

Anonymous said...

It's obvious to me that she used this platform she created to try to score political points. But I think both the blog and prior message bring up a very good point not considered.

Let's say for the sake of argument that Chief Brown is as guilty as Roth claims. Then by Roth sitting on the info for months (or longer) as she must have since she knows of all these prior events as she claims, then she is quite guilty of putting Manalapan women who work for the town and all women at grave risk. That would be reprehensible on her part, and grounds for demands for her resignation, and possible criminal charges too.

I think there's no choice now, the Monmouth County Prosecutor's Office must get involved before Roth's inaction gets anyone hurt.

Anonymous said...

Now I've heard it all. Roth's inaction needs to be investigated? I can see them going to the prosecutors office with this. "Quick, we must act quickly! Michelle Roth is doing nothing. We got her now! We can put her away for 10 years. We have all the evidence in tape. See, there she is doing nothing."

Anonymous said...

whichever democratic whackjob thought it was funny that Michelle would be under investigation for doing nothing has a short memory. It was Michelle Roth's first running mate, Beth Ward, who turned Mary Cozzolino into the prosecutor for exactly that, doing nothing when Vuola offered her a bribe. In fact, that's how Michelle got to be Beth's running mate. Vuola went to prison. Mary, who had brushed aside Vuola without even taking the bribe seriously was still pressured to resign. Michelle, on the other hand, has claimed that there were "serious" illegal activities by the chief and has done nothing about it. So if she is right -- and we all understand Michelle rarely tells the truth -- she needs to resign as well. At the very least, there needs to be a criminal investigation as to whether Michelle was covering up illegal activity.

Glad I live in Colts Neck said...

Three things -

1. Thank God I live in Colts Neck and not in Manalapan.

2. Even as a Democrat, and a proud one, I will not vote for Michele Roth or her running mate.

3. If the police officer in question is as bad as Mrs. Roth claims, she should have turned him in to the proper authorities sooner, or issued a complaint sooner. Inaction is just as bad as the action itself, and to wait until its close to election day is reprehensible at the least, and I would think could be criminal too for withholding the information.

But that should be left up to the proper authorities.

Anonymous said...

Looks like another satisfied voter for Roth.

Anonymous said...

This was a great posting on nj.com, which I'm sure the anti-First Amendment squad will have deleted.

4503. There is very little difference
by trevanian, 9/15/09 14:31 ET
between the Mayor of Marlboro and the wicked witch of Manalapan, Michelle Roth. This was posted at moremonmouthmusings.com. It says it all:Hornik is an active supporter of Michelle "Don't call me a Lady" Roth, who has cost the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars on her personal vendettas against people who wouldn't kiss her ring, and has cost the taxpayers literally millions of dollars protecting John Lynch's real estate interests. Hornik and Roth are both tools of the Monmouth County Democratic Party. If the residents of either of these towns think they are being managed by local politicians, they're sadly mistaken. It's time the residents of both of these towns put an end to the carpetbaggers costing them millions for the personal agendas of out of area politicians. Need more proof? How about the sewer authority's hiring of the Burlington County puppet of George Norcross as its "spokesman." Is there any reason our sewers need a public relations person? And Chairman Eric Abraham's "shock" to learn that Meyers was a political hack is reminiscent of the "shock" by Louis in Casablanca that there was gambling going on.

KB said...

And who else supports Manalapan's Queen of Mean Michelle Roth???

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/33-8639.pdf

Anonymous said...

I'm voting for her. Mostly because of you folks.

You asked for it said...

1. A recall petition demanding the removal of a township committee person must be signed by 25% of the registered voters of the municipality, and has to be filed with the municipal clerk. The procedure can’t start until fifty days before the end of the first year of the official’s term. It must also be done early enough so that the recall election takes place prior to the last six months of the person’s term.

2. Assuming all of the petitions submitted to the clerk add up to 25% of the registered voters (as of the date of the last general election), the clerk must examine the petitions within ten days of receipt and certify if there are sufficient legitimate signers.

3. Prior to collecting signatures, the recall committee has to notify the clerk with an official notice of intention. If the notice of intention complies with the requirements of the law, the clerk must stamp it as approved and return a certified copy of it within three business days of receipt.

4. Within 5 business days of receipt from the clerk, the committee must notify the official to be recalled, publicize it in the newspaper, etc.

5. Within 5 business days of receipt of notice from the recall committee, the elected official may file an answer to the clerk, but only if the recall notice contained a statement of the reason for the recall, which it doesn’t have to do.

6. The petition needs to be in a format as set forth by law.

7. The recall committee has 160 days in which to file the petition.

8. The clerk must review the petition within 10 business days.

9. After the clerk notifies the office holder that the petition is valid, the official has five days to resign. If not, the clerk must order and fix the holding of a recall election in accordance with the Notice of Intention. The Notice of Intention could ask that the election be held at the next general election or at a special election. If a special election was requested and there is no resignation within five days, the clerk must order and fix a date for holding the recall election approximately two months later.

10. At the same election in which the voters decide whether to recall the politician, they also choose the successor. Nominees are placed on the ballot the same way as if it were a regular general election.

11. If the voters decide by a simple majority to recall the politician, they are done. The person winning the ballot at the same election then takes over.

Anonymous said...

By my calendar that means we can start one week after election day. Let's git er done

Anonymous said...

TIME TO ORGANIZE AND RECALL ROTH.

Anonymous said...

I'd like to know who is advising Roth. Whoever her handlers are who tell herwhat to do are doing a terrible job advising her. She supports a public relations person at taxpayer expense to be the mouthpiece for a sewer authority? She has made a definite claim that the chief of the Manalapan police is basically a habitual harrasser of women? She sits on this info for months until its election time? Whoever it is that is pulling her strings is hurting her career rather than helping it.

Anonymous said...

Does the News Transcript hate Manalapan? I ask this question because they continue to allow Bean to write his derogatory columns about our town. And why is it that ex-employees of the News Transcript can't write an article or a post WITHOUT calling someone a name (ie: nincompoop, chuckleheads)? Bean doesn't live here, does he? KB doesn't live here, does she?

Also, I have never seen a Township committee cause such discourse and animosity in a town as this one has.

Anonymous said...

Bean is right. If you want to blame someone, blame the handful of idiots in this town with vendettas against sitting township committee people. They, through their actions are making Manalapan a laughing stock.

Real republicans cringe over these cretins.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Larry. We'll keep that in mind.

KB said...

It seems that Susan Cohen has come out and said that Roth (no surprise here) withheld key information in her very prepared and practiced statement regarding Chief Brown. I almost can't wait for the very next Truth Squad. My guess is the people who are pulling Roth's strings will be working overtime to combat this.

Anonymous said...

Larry Roth and his team of "real truth tellers" are trying in vain to spin Michelle Roth in a positive light. Her stunt has backfired miserably. She has outraged so many people that she will feel their wrath in November.
Roth's own high ranking
politicos from her Democratic party
have reached out to say they had nothing to do with Michelle Roth's actions. Ouch! Her own so called friends are speaking out against her behind her back. I fully expect Larry Roth and his spinners to dipute this but thats fine. It just reveals how foolish the Roths and their spinners are to believe that everyone is on board with what Michelle Roth has done to Chief Brown. Those political friends are clearly more savvy that the Roth's, They realize that attacking and accusing an innocent man of sexual harassment is political suicide and very expensive for the taxpayers of Manalapan. When the Chief wins his defamation suit against Michelle Roth and the township it will make headlines around the state as the largest settlement ever! Michelle Roth will forever be known in history as the woman who single handedly cost the Manalapan taxpayers millions. What a legacy.

W.A.R. Woman Against Roth support Chief Stuart Brown.

Anonymous said...

Sexual harassment? I'm confused. When I hear sexual harassment, I think of someone making inappropriate "sexual" advances on someone of the opposite sex. Is this what she is accusing him of doing? (A very serious charge)

Or is she using the term "sexual harassment" to mean that he was being mean to her because she is a woman? (In which case - I wouldn't think the term sexual harassment applies.)

Cecil said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

I'm looking forward to seeing Michelle Roth on the campaign trail. Nothing will be better than seeing police officers and their families protesting her treatment of Chief Brown. Of course, by that time here hate bloggers on her friends Manalapan hate site will be blaming Moskovitz for that too.

Anonymous said...

Everyone should wear a t-shirt with the letters W.A.R. on it to the next township committee meeting.

Zachary J. Tesla said...

shana tova.

Anonymous said...

There will be plenty of W.A.R.- Women Against Roth supporters at the next TC meeting to show their belief and support of Chief Stuart Brown!
They will also show their distain for Michelle Roth the 12th District Assembly Candidate.

W.A.R. Is the word in Manalapan and throughout the 12th district.

W.A.R. WOMEN AGAINST ROTH!

Anonymous said...

Mr. Roth -- you claim a "revelation" on your holiday -- but then you destroy your credibility by commenting on the lawyer (that you hate) and what you "perceive" to be his PERSONAL problems on a public forum.

Shame on you!

You gossip like an old woman.

Anonymous said...

I read Larry Roth's "revelation" too, on his hate filled site.

What a disgrace and an embarassment you are Larry Roth!

You spew your hatred and make assumptions over a mans family because they did not attend services with him and you post this after you profess a "revelation" while sitting in temple? Shame on you!

Did you know he celebrated the holiday with his children and his wife! I guess we could all ask where was Michelle's parents or yours when your wife was sworn in as Mayor in 2008! Should we say we had a revelation too?!

Anonymous said...

Actually, those of us who were there saw him sitting both with his wife and two of his daughters (his third daughter was out of town for the holiday). It would have been bad enough for Larry to have made such horrid statements were they true. Hopefully he will pay the price the prayer book says he will pay for using the high holidays themselves to spread such lies. Even Fred recognized a higher authority. Larry is as depraved as it gets. He and Michelle make the perfect couple. And remember, this isn't the first time Larry has violated the high holidays. Remember the year he brought fake political literature into the synagogue and blamed the same lawyer? Let's see what book he gets written into this year. No wonder Larry and Michelle are so universally hated in that synagogue.

Anonymous said...

Don't think there aren't repercussions for abusing the high holidays like Larry does each year to spew hatred. As many people know, Larry and Michelle are close to losing their business (I wonder who will support apartheid when they are out of business). They were forced to close their office and work out of their house (in violation of zoning laws, of course). Let's see what Larry's latest bout of dishonesty and violation of the high holidays does for him this year.

Anonymous said...

the best part is that the Roths proved they have no religious or moral beliefs by posting such disgusting filth DURING THE MOST IMPORTANT religous holiday of the year, a complete violation of Jewish law. This man is a totally depraved immoral slug. And he proves it day after day. They need to be run out of politics permanently. Now you know why a certain lawyer keeps pointing certain democratic party contributors and supporters to that site to read what Larry and other Roth supporters have written.

Anonymous said...

Wow. I just read Larry Roth's comments on the hate site. I'm not saying wow because they're so vile, false or hateful. That's Larry. That's not a surprise. I'm saying wow because almost the identical false statements were posted on NJ.COM against Fred Stone by someone pretending to be Stu. In all likelihood, Larry told Fred it was. We all remember what Larry did several years ago in bringing republican literature he had reprinted into the synagogue on Rosh Hashana and blaming Stu for it. The problem for Larry is that Stu happened to have been with the president of the synagogue and the cantor for one hour before services began, and, since it was the president Larry was speaking to when he blamed Stu, everyone knew immediately what kind of person Larry and his wife were. That's why they are hated in the synagogue. But, getting back to his post (on Rosh Hashanah, no less) I think we know what's been going on on NJ.COM and who has actually been attacking Fred there. I say again. Wow. Looks like Larry exposed himself.

Zachary J. Tesla said...

"Shame on you!

"You gossip like an old woman."

thank god no one associated with your fine blog ever comments on other people's "perceived" personal issues, such as whether they actually sleep with their wife as opposed to their mother, or whether they molest young boys. More power to DTS and its service to the community as a towering model of propriety and integrity!!

Anonymous said...

The lawyer on the "real truth" forum posted another "joke" about those of us who dislike Obama and his radical agenda.

I have a book recommendation for him that explains why it is ridiculous for those of the Jewish faith to still be liberals (and therefore Obama supporters.) Try "Why Jews are Liberals" by Norman Podhoretz.

Anonymous said...

Interesting how on the Roth company website, their business address is now missing. Only a phone number and email address remain.

Why do they not let people know where to send mail?

Do they still have an office?

Anonymous said...

To the poster who said, "Wow." I remember seeing those posts. They claimed Fred spent father's day alone without his family, yada, yada, yada. The comments were almost identical to the ones Larry posted against Stu and just as false and revolting. The only difference is that Larry posted the comments about Fred on a week day, and he posted the comments about Stu right on Rosh Hashana itself, after supposedly spending the day in Temple "atoning" for his sins. I don't think that "atonement" is going to be worth very much given what Larry wrote on the very same day. But I also don't expect Larry cares much. Does anyone really think that with how he earns his living and how he spends his days attacking people that he really believes in a higher authority?

Anonymous said...

I just saw a sign posted in town from klauber that read"vote for common sense".......

dont you worry Richie.

WE WILL!!!!!!!!!!!