Loyola to take loyalty oath to the people of the 2nd District
By JR Hoeft | Thursday, June 3rd, 2010 | PoliticsThis Saturday at 7 p.m. at the Virginia Beach Town Center Fountain, Ben Loyola is going to publicly take the following pledge:
“If you, the voters of the Second Congressional District are willing to place your faith in me to serve and represent you in the House of Representatives, these are my words of honor to you.”
I pledge to…
• Vote against any tax or fee increases
• Support the elimination of the estate tax (Death Tax).
• Introduce and support legislation to eliminate all subsidies.
• Support legislation to repeal the Obama health care initiative.
• Support legislation opposing the Cap and Trade initiative.
• Introduce and support legislation to eliminate corporate taxes.
• Introduce and support legislation to eliminate the Income Tax.
• Introduce and support legislation for a mandatory balanced budget.
• Introduce and support legislation to eliminate the Department of Education.
• Only support a military invasion of another sovereign nation by a Declaration of War.
• Support legislation to counter provisions established by the Supreme Court’s ruling on eminent domain and private property rights. Private property should never be condemned for economic development purposes benefiting third parties or developers.
• Only support new spending initiatives that are matched by a two-to-one reduction in areas of non-defense, discretionary spending.
• Fully support the enforcement of laws that protect the United States from the invasion of illegal aliens. There is but one way to become a citizen in this country and that is by following the law.~ Resign from office if any of these promises are broken ~
I now will sign this contract between me, Ben Loyola, and you, the American people.
A notarized copy of this pledge will be placed in the office of the Clerk of Court in Virginia Beach, Virginia, as a document of public record.
Stunt? Good politics? Will it matter?
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Conservative to the core; liberal with his opinion! J.R. has been involved in politics for over a decade and has worked on several campaigns in Hampton Roads. He has served on the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Chesapeake and the Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia. He is also the director of “Blogs United” in Virginia. E-mail J.R.. Follow J.R. on Twitter.
Comments
35 Responses to "Loyola to take loyalty oath to the people of the 2nd District"
A loyalty oath by this man means nothing to me. Stealing the works of others! Running for congress in violation of the DoD Directive on political activities: 4.3.2. Members included in subparagraph 4.3.1. may NOT, in campaign literature (including Web sites, videos, television, and conventional print advertisements):
4.3.2.1. Use or allow the use of photographs, drawings, and other similar media formats of themselves in uniform as the primary graphic representation in any campaign media, such as a billboard, brochure, flyer, Web site, or television commercial. For the purposes of this policy, “photographs” include video images, drawings, and all other similar formats of representational media.
JR I think you still have time to endorse Ben as well!
Loyola was already embroiled in a plagiarism scandal during this campaign and now we are to take this pledge seriously? Crass political stunt.
…and not a single item in there to protect life.
*sigh*
Hey, Shaun. Didn’t K6 read Ben’s website?
“Ben is also unabashedly Pro-Life. Life begins at conception and life must be protected.”
Stupidest thing I’ve heard of in a long time. This man has no credibility and no honor. I hope that Ed Maulbeck shows up to grill him again about plagiarizing Rigell’s document (which is nothing compared to what the Democrats will do). If Loyola had any honor, he would have withdrawn.
Will he pledge to honor the same code he followed as a Naval Academy graduate and not plagiarize people’s work?
Forget the pledge..it’s political theater.
The first question asked of any candidate: can you raise the money to get your message out? No, he can not. He’s proven he can’t do it over three reporting periods.
He could be the second coming of Pericles, but without the ability to get the message out it’s pointless.
Not to mention… an oath by a plagiarist is really no oath at all.
The document supposedly plagiarized was
on the net for use by any candidate of any party. The link was posted in a comment
here long ago.
I’m not commenting on the issue mentioned here either way, but nice Pericles reference Richard.
Robert,
You are referring to the Freshman 50 proposal, which only has 6 points to it. Rigell’s proposal’s include some of these as well as others. The Taylor/Loyola proposal matches the numbering sequence, the heading and proposal of Rigell’s…coincidence?
FRESHMAN 50
1. Apply the Law Equally: All laws that apply to all citizens also apply to Congress.
2. Limit Terms in Office: Amend the Constitution to limit Congressmen and Senators to no more than 12 years, respectively.
3. Enforce Congressional Ethics
a. Mandatory, yearly tax and expense audits of every member to be made fully available to the general public each Oct 1, until the federal tax code is reformed (see item #5)
b. No member of Congress, or Congressional staff member, can ever be hired as a lobbyist, paid or otherwise, to Congress
c. Unleash the ethics committee: require only 50% of an ethics committee to approve an investigation
4. Read the Bill: Prior to final vote, the bill to be voted upon must be read out loud, by one or more of its sponsors, in its entirety, on the floor of the House. Should amendments be required, they must also be read in the same manner. A member may not vote on the bill unless he or she was present for the entire reading, including applicable amendments.
5. Reform the Federal Tax Code: Repeal the 16th Amendment and replace the current federal tax code with a clear, simple, and fair tax code which includes the following principles:
a. Tax only once
b. Tax at one rate
c. A Constitutional amendment requiring a two-thirds majority for any new tax or tax hike
6. Balance the Budget: Amend the Constitution to require a balanced budget, unless sanctioned by a three-fifths majority in each house of Congress.
RIGELL VS TAYLOR/LOYOLA
Rigell, reform 1: “No Campaigning at Taxpayers’ Expense: Only two direct mail pieces will be sent each year, and no closer than 3 months prior to an election, standardized in form and content, one page only, using recycled paper and black and white ink.”
Taylor/Loyola, reform 1: “No Taxpayer Propaganda Act: In this age of free, electronic communications, television, radio, telephone and texting, the most outdated expense of Congress is the Frank, where taxpayers get expensive, multi-color mailpieces from politicians and taxpayers pay for every last one of them.”
Rigell, reform 2: “Eliminate Congressional Retirement ‘Perks’/Congressional Pension Reform Act: Reduce the incentive to stay in Congress by replacing the congressional retirement system in its entirety with a modest 403(b) match program similar to what is commonly offered by American employers. Benefits earned by current members of congress and retirees would be honored.”
Taylor/Loyola, reform 2: “End Congressional Pensions: It’s completely unfair to tax citizens who don’t have wealthy pension plans to pay their Members of Congress to have them. Representatives serve by the will of the people, and rich retirement benefits defeats the purpose of a citizen legislature as designed by the Founders…. Members of Congress must live under the same types of retirement plans like 401(k)/403(b) that are regularly found in the private sector.”
Rigell, reform 3: “Understand and Follow the Constitution/Constitutional Authority Act: Require that any bill presented for consideration include in its first article the constitutional reference and rationale that would make the bill, if passed, constitutional.”
Taylor/Loyola, reform 3: “Constitutional Supremacy: America is the only country where power exists with the people, and through the Constitution the people loan this power to government to accomplish certain tasks. Too often bills pass in Congress with no basis in any reading of the Constitution. Any initiative in Washington should plainly show its Constitutional basis and justification.”
Rigell, reform 4: “Term Limits Initiative: Pledge to serve no more than 18 years in Congress. Pledge to lead a movement to lawfully amend our United States Constitution to create term limits for members of Congress.”
Taylor/Loyola, reform 4: “The Dozen before Dirty: Incumbents rarely lose. Incumbents who serve more than six years almost never lose. Committees are controlled by incumbents in districts where they will never be replaced in an election. It breeds corruption….A dozen years is enough for any representative. No Member of Congress should serve more than 12 years….Pledge to propose a Constitutional Amendment to limit terms to 12 years and personally pledge not to serve more than 12 years.
Rigell, reform 5: “Stop the Pork – Stop the Earmarks: Prohibit the introduction of all non-defense, non-national security related earmarks into any piece of federal legislation. Earmarks will only be allowed for defense-related funding and only when specifically identified and requested by the Department of Defense or Department of Homeland Security.”
Taylor/Loyola, reform 5: “A Pork-Free Diet: In these days of trillions of dollars of extreme debt and budget deficits that are routinely ignored by Congress, the earmark process must be reformed. Defense-related spending has a firm Constitutional basis, but earmarks for special projects that are beyond the purview of government that are simply used for political patronage and to “bring home bacon” for a district must end….Pledge to introduce no earmarks and work for a ban on non-defense earmarks”
Rigell, reform 6: “Budget Accountability/No Appropriation-No Pay Act: Require that each day that a budget is not passed on time by the United States Congress, members will have their income reduced to zero until such legislation passes its respective chambers. Thus, if a require appropriate bill is ten days overdue in its approval, the members will work effectively ten days without pay until it is passed.”
Taylor/Loyola, reform 6: “No Pay for Overtime: When was the last time Congress passed a budget on time? We don’t know either. Instead, they pass “continuing resolutions” and “supplemental appropriations” that reward their inaction and usually get loaded up with perks and special interest favors….Members of Congress should reimburse the Treasury for every working day the budget is not passed on time….Sponsor reforms where Members of Congress must reduce their salary for each day the budget is not passed on time.”
Rigell, reform 7: “Congressional Accountability / Congressional Deficit Accountability Act: For every fiscal year that Congress fails to pass a balanced budget, Members will take a 20% reduction in salary (2010 is equal to $174,000 or roughly a $35,000 pay cut). A variation of this legislation is to allow members to voluntarily choose the salary reduction until the budget is balanced.”
Taylor/Loyola, reform 7: “End Deficit Spending: The federal government has been operating on deficit spending for decades, except for the few years during the Republican Revolution in the 90s. Today’s deficits are unconscionable. Government can live within its means. It just doesn’t want to….We’ve got to stop excusing this deficit spending. No quarter should be asked or given. And Members of Congress should forfeit a quarter of their salary each year the budget is not in balance….Pledge to propose a Constitutional Amendment to require a balanced federal budget.
Rigell, reform 8: “Congressional Health Care Accountability: Any health care legislation, specifically any legislation which includes a “public option” shall force members of Congress to enroll in that public option and forgo any participation in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). Thus, members of Congress will lose their current health care benefits and instead participate in the same health care ”reform” forced upon the American people.”
Taylor/Loyola, reform 8: “Public Option for Public Servants: The worst kind of representation is the kind that forces citizens into systems that legislators would never accept. Any health care “public option” plan should require that each elected official be made to take the same option that they are prescribing for the people they represent….Require Members of Congress to forgo participation in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program if Congress passes a “public option” health care plan. They will have to enroll in the same public option they force upon citizens.
Rigell, reform 9: “Read the Bills: Each bill, and every amendment, must be read in its entirety before a quorum in both the House and the Senate. Every member of the House and Senate must sign a sworn affidavit, under penalty of perjury, that he or she has attentively either personally read, or heard read, the complete bill to be voted on. Every law coming up for renewal under the sunset provisions must also be read according to the same rules that apply to new bills. Every bill to be voted on must be published on the Internet at least 7 days before a vote, and Congress must give public notice of the date when a vote will be held on that bill. Passage of a bill that does not abide by these provisions will render the measure null and void, and establish grounds for the law to be challenged in court.
Taylor/Loyola, reform 9: ““Read Before You Vote: You can’t effectively represent the voters who sent you to Washington to vote on legislation when you haven’t read it, but Congress does it all the time. Bills that are thousands of pages and amendments with pages in the hundreds can’t possibly be read before it’s time to vote…Motions to waive reading of legislation pass with consistent success and Members of Congress pass omnibus bills and don’t have a clue what’s in them…That’s wrong…Each bill should be read aloud before a quorum of each chamber, the House of Representatives and the Senate, and each member should swear that they’ve read each bill they vote on. Each bill should be online in sufficient time for interested Americans to read as well…Pledge to read every bill they vote on and will listen to constituents who have comments, concerns and suggestions about legislation.
Richard, “political theater” because Rigell won’t be at Town Center taking the pledge? Sounds like the Rigell Posse has got their panties in a bunch and are whining again because they are finally getting whacked by the truth. Oh, and there still isn’t anything on Rigell’s site claiming his “9 Point Reform Plan”… but Loyola’s “Contract on Congress” has been up on his site for months.
Did Rigell abandon these points because he turned the “9 point Reform Plan” into a political stunt?
To reclaim ownership of his “9 Point Reform Plan”, here is a suggestion…. Scott can set up a big tent with a stage in the Freedom Ford parking lot. He can invite all the people who endorsed him to attend, along with a special offer of a free oil change for all of his C4C customers.
Scott could also raise some money by charging admission to tour the trailer which he and Teri used to move here.
On Saturday at high noon, the same time that Loyola is taking his oath to the people of the 2nd District, Scott and all of his political supporters can take an oath to follow the “9 Point Reform Plan”. Scott can then in good conscience, post the “Reform Plan” on his web page, or provide a link to Loyola’s “Contract on Congress” without being embarrassed and humiliated by being accused of plagiarism.
For refreshments on Saturday, Scott can serve cookies and Kool-Aid and who knows… he could probably even turn part of this event into a business tax write off by selling some new or used Fords to those attending.
Jeff-the Rigell campaign has the emails and has spoken to most of the people involved. It has been confirmed that Taylor/Loyola received the document a few days prior to the Taylor/Loyola initiative.
I looked square in Taylor’s eyes and asked him if he took it from Rigell after the Tea Party debate (overwhelmingly filled with Rigell supporters). He refused to answer.
Loyola when asked at the VB GOP breakfast two times also refused to answer. It was embarrassing listening to it. I felt bad for him as he floundered on the stage.
They took the documents rearranged some words. Put it in the same exact order and presented it as their own. When asked directly if they took it. They refuse to answer. Instead they opt to say things like,”those same ideas can be found in countless place on the web” or “Scott Rigell has no patent on these ideas.”
It’s a yes or no question. They can’t answer it truthfully.
The answer is yes they plagiarized the document and continue to obfuscate as they draw closer to the election. It’s a joke if you buy into their rationalism and a mistake of the Tea Party’s board to endorse. Their members are smarter than to blindly follow a board-that’s why they affiliate with the Tea Party.
Brian –
No – surprised ReagansGOP or Marty Williams allowed Loyola to take such a principled stand. Or maybe Rourke PR overlooked that when they drafted this release for them?
Richard,
Yes, I know, I was being rhetorical.
Tim J-
There must be a source of your bitterness. Why do you hate successful businesspeople, especially car dealers. Do you hate Rick Hendrick (Hendrick motor sports-NASCAR-he owns over 60 dealerships)? Maybe it’s a Chevy-Ford thing. I don’t understand it.
What if Scott and Teri started a ship building business back in 1991(most ship yards would die without govt contracts-do you hate that industry too?). Or what if they founded a firm that lobbied the government for technology contracts? What if they hired lobbyists to secure earmarks? Would they still be unfit for Congress in your eyes? Probably not because that is what Loyola’s firm does-for the record I don’t hold it against him one bit. I hope he wins every contract he bids on and secures the most Federally outsourced money available-but apparently C4C (a one time govt program) is the unforgivable sin as opposed to a business model that relies on the Federal Government for all of its sales. You guys are unbelievable!
Why would Scott Rigell attend a Loyola event? That’s almost as stupid as jointly presenting a reform plan for Congress with one of your opponents that you stole from another opponent. Well not quite as stupid. In fact, on second thought, not nearly as stupid.
Shaun, good thing you don’t need to pass a spelling test to be elected to the Board of Supervisors. You wouldn’t have stood a chance after that comment.
Is that all you have? Being that I’ve hardly ever seen you write here on Bearing Drift, and suddenly a few paychecks and you’re Mr. Keyboard, I feel I should buy you a beer sometime – that is if you ever visit the Second District sometime.
At least I can say with integrity I’ve never taken a dime to write a post…
Can you?
Richard, so is Rigell going to win the primary by accusing some competitors of plagiarism based on accusations that keep coming from his campaign?
Again, where is Rigell’s “9 Point Reform Plan” which is still being strung along by you and others as part of a campaign stunt?
All we see are you R-bots plagiarizing Bearing Drift and Virginian Pilot newspaper articles saying he has a “9 Point Reform Plan”.
Voters do see Loyola’s “Contract on Congress” which is up on Loyola’s campaign website but nothing of Rigell’s “9 Point Reform Plan” other than what can be found in trolling on Google through newspaper articles and blog posts about whining and allegations from the Rigell campaign.
Bottom Line on the “9 Point Reform Plan”… Rigell doesn’t have one, his campaign doesn’t have one, you don’t have one, and the voters don’t see one.
Sorry Jeff-
The blog melee is less predictable than politics.
Nice to se a mailer went out for Scott. Moving to the next thread….
Tim J-
The battle for the base of the GOP primary was won weeks ago if not months.
The current political wrangling is for the undecided republicans and independents. That is why it’s ridiculous to have yet another forum/debate with people polling under 10%. It’s pointless. I hope you can see this even from an expedient point of view at the very least. It’s a poor strategy.
Politics is also about separation. Since Taylor/Loyola plagiarized the document it took the reform platform off the table as an issue for Rigell in the primary. So in a way it worked for Taylor/Loyola. It would only raise questions for the undecided voters. What if you went to their three web sites and saw virtually the same thing. What would you think? You would think they were affiliated. That is bad for any candidate-not Rigell. ANY CANDIDATE should separate themselves-if they were smart. So you ask where it went. I would tell you it was purposely taken off the table to separate Rigell form Taylor/Loyola. Rigell wants nothing to do with their political dirty trick. This is all a guess. Once again I do not advise or work on the campaign outside of volunteering.
Yes. I’ve never taken a dime to post.
I’ve also never sold endorsements for $3,000.
Tim J – If you haven’t submitted your thesis yet, does that mean it doesn’t exist? You are fighting a losing battle here. JR Hoeft already went through the whole sordid tale of how Rigell’s document was plagiarized by Loyola and Taylor. There is absolutely no question of that. You can read all about it on Bearing Drift in JR’s previous posts. Just because Rigell hasn’t publicized his plan yet doesn’t mean that he isn’t going to…maybe after the primary when it would be less likely to embarrass Loyola and Taylor. Unlike the other candidates in the race, Rigell has class and remembers that we’re all Republicans.
What is coming out now by the supposely more conservative candidates sounds like Demorats attack adds! What happened to the issues and why are supposely conservative candidates not addressing the issues and instead trying to make a non-issue into a issue? Seems some people are offended by the free market enterprise system and freedom of speech! Rigell has donated his hard earned money $199,000.00 to Republicans and $1,000. to a demorat and that is a issue. It is quite oblivious were his loyalties lay and look at all those well recognized conservatives who have endorsed Rigell. I made a small contribution back in 2008 to Obama so there would be a candidate to cause Clinton problems and thus exhaust her resources which would help McCain. But who knew at that time that Obama would win and turn into what he turned into? No one we were just trying to help McCain who unfortunately was a dud. Loyala radio commerical complains that Rigell took advantage of cash for clunkers! Well was Rigell suppose to go out of business and tell customers to go else where that they could not take advantage of the Federal program at his dealership! Thank goodness for the sake of all those who work at Freedom Ford he allowed his customers to take advantage of the program. This is all disenginious and sour grapes. Individual could not compete on the issues now the make up stupid stuff and they call themeselves Repubicans!!!!!!!!!
LC, “snow job”, and the fact that the Rigell campaign turned the incident into a political stunt. I was an avid poster during the event, where the predominance of the information concerning the allegations was provided by the Rigell campaign. One of my posts asked if there were “damages” incurred by the Rigell campaign. If the campaign was taking it seriously, why didn’t Rigell sue Taylor and Loyola so we could get some “discovery” and “due process” factual information about the incident? It eventually turned in to a political lynching attempt on two other competitive campaigns to take them out of contention.
JR is running a blog, not a courtroom, and until any information is obtained through depositions under oath, it is clear that the Rigell campaign exploited those who don’t know any better with political theater. The Rigell campaign and the R-bots were the judge, jury and executioner in “JR’s kangaroo courtroom”, feasting on circumstantial evidence from one source, the Rigell campaign. It saved Rigell money for newspaper advertising, created buzz, cast dispersions on other campaigns, attempted to manipulate voters with “I am a victim” for a “sympathy” vote, and remains as a “campaign issue” of Rigell operatives, but doesn’t do a damn thing about the issues facing the 2nd District.
So again, the Bottom Line is “9 Point Reform Plan”… Rigell doesn’t have one, his campaign doesn’t have one, you don’t have one, and the voters don’t see one.
I’m curious-does anyone have a count on how many people attended his pledge today?
From Karen Hurd’s blog:
“He signed it tonight. I’ll (karen) will be putting up the scanned copy on our website later.”
“Loyola’s Dad came up to me and said, “I’ve voted in every election since I became a citizen. I have never, never seen a politician do what Ben did tonight”.
“He’s right. Powerful stuff.”
Tim J,
your foul language speaks volumes of your intelligence. You know full well the Rigell reform plan was poached by the Loyola/Taylor syndicate. You speak as though your a litigator. If that’s so, you of all people should know how circumstantial evidence (which this was not) is often the deciding factor in any case. I just hope Capt Loyola can sleep at night with a clear conscious.
Chris, tsk, tsk… “foul language”? You are one of those with a Rigell Campaign spoon in your mouth and who continues to lap at this drivel as you whine and spew about this stunt. Your feelings are being hurt while Scott is being tag teamed and pummeled by Big Bad Ben and Big Bad Bert. It will continue to be a stunt and a side show until Rigell takes legal action with real lawyers that he pays for to protect his “9 Point Reform Plan” under copyright infringement or some other legal theory.
Again, where’s Scott’s “9 Point Reform Plan”… did the dog eat it?… did someone accidently put it in the bottom of the bird cage?… or he just doesn’t believe in it enough to fight for it?
So, take your pick of what you want to play… judge, jury, jailer or executioner and you can sit in your little “kangaroo court” and play with your spoon while the rest of us watch the Rigell campaign smackdown by the “Triple B” tag team.
So you are also hurt and upset since Loyola, as requested by the Tea Party and the VBTA, took an oath to the people because Rigell couldn’t bring himself to do so. Maybe it’s because Rigell doesn’t have any allegiance to anyone other than himself and his business and is now running away from his mythical “9 Point Reform Plan”? … “mythical” because it only exists in a cloud of allegations and rumor which are buried on the pages of blogs and an opinion piece in a newspaper? Oh, and allegations about Scott Weldon… wasn’t that E-mail sent to the Taylor campaign?…. nothing about Loyola even knowing Weldon or being a recipient of anything relative to the stunt.
Ed Maulback… he also called Loyola a “Liar” on a radio show, and is now campaigning to be the 2nd District “Alan Grayson” or the replacement for Jerry Springer as he also posted an audio of another rant on his site when he attacked Rigell.
So Kirwin commented… it seems that he does do that every once in a while, but in reviewing his comments, there were no steamy confessions. And since you made a connection between Kirwin and the myth, I suggest that you call Kirwin and ask him, and make sure you record it so we can hear him reduce you to a quivering mass of jello.
Rigell fell into the trap laid by Loyola during the “Cash for Clunkers”, only C4C was independently documented and true, but Loyola didn’t do the same when Rigell attacked because there’s nothing independently documented to back it up.
Where’s Rigell’s “9 Point Reform Plan”? It’s turned into an urban myth that has arisen in the blogosphere that doesn’t exist except in your own mind, and is starting to manifest itself as an obsessive/compulsive mental disorder which you should talk to a professional about.
how many people showed up?
does anyone know?
Including DJ and the Glenn Nye staff?
Not including me, my appearance was for 5 minutes after I snuck out the back door at work
One minor quibble, Tim, the VBTA did not request Loyola take the pledge, since they have not endorsed and will not be endorsing anyone. Individuals from the VBTA may have; the event last night was ‘sponsored’ by Robert Dean as well as the HRTP.
I am a working man not on any staff nor into this crap of social networking . I have read these comments and frankly think many of them read like a social soap opera. I’m voting for Ed Maulbeck because as an active tea party member who goes to the rallies and D.C. marches and pays his own way for it all while working as a maint. supervisor . How many of you get out from behind these screens to go to D.C.? We do not need more millionaire politians in Washington who owe favors to all their a-list buddies and elitist friends. Ed Maulbeck is the real deal I totally disagree with the H.R.Teaparty on Mr. Loyola and the way he was vetted . I have posted a blog telling all Tea party members to vote for their own candidate based on their own research and thoughts. The blog can be read at HRTEAPARTY.com be an individual this is not some online game its your future!
DJ, your right, only Robert Dean, not the VBTA as a group requested Ben to take the pledge.
I also had a Kirwin sighting which was rare at these events, but in your “sneaking”, you didn’t stay around long enough for me to scare you by jumping from behind a door with my Ed Maulback Halloween mask on.
Richard, It started off with several hundred and ended up being packed at the end of the event. I talked to Josh Clark from the Loyola campaign and he said they had over 500 yard signs for people to take, and all had been taken well before the event ended.
Both Ben and Ben’s Dad were mobbed after the Oath, and hearing Ben’s Dad relate some more details of about their escape from Cuba to America after Castro took over was amazing.
At first, I didn’t understand why anyone running for office would take that oath, but after hearing Ben’s Dad talk about Patriotism and his love for this country, Ben is a “chip of the old block”.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.