Biden’s War on Oil and Gas Production Fuels Putin

Vladimir Putin realizes what we all know, which is that a good chunk of allies in Europe are highly dependent on Russian oil and natural gas. 

Two years ago, the U.S. was the world’s largest oil and gas producer, making the U.S. self-sufficient in energy and a major exporter. Mr. Biden’s war on oil and gas production has helped enable Putin.  Putin realized that reliance on Russian petroleum and natural gas would make it difficult for the West to put economic pressure on him.  Moreover, the rising price of his major export was providing the capital to wage an invasion.  

Given Biden’s election promises and left flank push for eliminating use of fossil fuel, Biden is now caught between an angry electorate watching  oil and gas prices rise even higher after months of rising costs and the cry for cutting off Russian oil imports.  The dynamic gives Putin important leverage in his invasion of Ukraine.

Russia's invasion has sent oil prices soaring to their highest levels in more than a decade. They've also crushed hopes of a strong global rebound from the coronavirus crisis.

Ukraine and Biden – A Story of Failure and Corruption

In 2014 when Russia annexed  the Crimea and went on to back Russian separatists in the Ukraine’s east, then Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. pressed President Barack Obama to take action, and fast, to make Moscow “pay in blood and money” for its aggression.  Fortunately President Obama , a Biden aide told the New York Times, was having none of it.

Biden continued to press  to increase lethal aid, backing a push to ship FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank missiles to Kiev.  The president flatly rejected the idea and dispatched Biden to the region as an emissary, cautioning him “about not overpromising to the Ukrainian government,” Biden wrote  in a memoir.

Biden began pressing the Ukraine’s leaders to tackle the rampant corruption that made their country a risky bet for international lenders — and pushing reform of Ukraine’s cronyism-ridden energy industry. “You have to be whiter than snow, or the whole world will abandon you,” Mr. Biden told the country’s newly elected president, Petro O. Poroshenko, during an early 2014 phone call, according to a New York Times article. 

Just as these efforts were happening Biden’s son Hunter joined the board of a Ukrainian gas company that was the subject of multiple corruption investigations, a position that paid him as much as $50,000 a month which in the view of some Obama administration officials, including the ambassador to Kiev — threatened to undermine Mr. Biden’s agenda.

A look back at what the former vice president actually did in Ukraine reveals that his work in Ukraine did not accomplish much nor did it  “fundamentally change the overall institutional corruption,” said Edward C. Chow, an expert on geopolitics and energy policy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a nonpartisan Washington think tank. “And having his son doing what he did was a distraction that undermined his message.”

In 2015 Biden, while he was pushing for stronger anti-corruption moves in Ukraine, would not even discuss steps that could make all questions vanish: asking his son to quit the Burisma board, as editorial boards and Ukraine experts were suggesting. 

And this is the guy, the one who failed miserably in the region and still has his son’s suspicious involvement there in his shadow, who we have at the helm during a crisis that could push the country into a war with Russia over the Ukraine.

Democrats Now Take Aim at Voter Integrity

Because of Joe Manchin’s refusal to go along with their disastrous Build Back Better  bill, better labeled Bring us Back Broke, Democrats have shifted gears and are pushing forward with their radical election legislation.  They often scare their base by they falsely claiming that Republicans are trying to dilute the minority vote and return to an era of Jim Crow laws.  They market these election bills as “protecting voting rights.”  What they truly are our bills to protect Democrats seats in Congress and keep Democrats in power. The bill currently proposed  would exponentially degrade election security and raise the potential for fraud. 

This bill needs to take the same path as the BBB bill into the trash can of history.  We need to encourage our Governor and other elected officials to fight this.  

Good Intentions, Unintended Consequences - Leftist Policies Destroying Cities

Progressive policies by focusing on caring without accountability and by victimizing groups are destroying our cities and aiming further to destroy our country.  

Progressive policies have led to many people believing that they deserve rights without any responsibilities.  Illustrations of unchecked compassion include San Francisco streets dotted with homeless encampments, over-compensating workers for not working resulting in severe labor shortages, open borders that allow migrants to stream into our country unvented, without requirements.  

Democratic politicians use compassionate rhetoric much more often than their Republicans do.  Republicans are portrayed of as “not caring.”.  This despite of evidence of the opposite. Studies reveal that Republican give more to charity.  Using voting and IRS data for the residents of 3,000 counties across the nation, a four-professor research team found, according to the according to the New York Times that counties which are “overwhelmingly Republican” report higher charitable contributions than Democratic-dominated counties.  Arthur C. Brooks, the president of the American Enterprise Institute, published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." Brooks made a data-driven case that, even after accounting for income differences, conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than liberals do, and that residents of red states volunteer more than those of blue states do. 

Caring about people is a good thing.   Republicans fail to proclaim their own sense of caring enough.  They do care that all people should be free and afforded the opportunity to pursue their dreams.  They do care that people are given help in times of personal, local or national disasters.  But free stuff without accountability is reckless and dangerous to our civilization. Movements such as “Defund the Police” and “Black Lives Matter” are  examples  of efforts of caring without accountability. It becomes ok to loot, steal and destroy in the name of vigilante justice.  

Change has to come. Change towards freedom and caring with responsibility. 

<Theresa Murtha>

Free Speech Protected


By  Bill Abatematteo

Justice George Sutherland said, “If the provisions of the Constitution be not upheld when they pinch as well as when they comfort, they may as well be abandoned.” Punta Gorda ignored his advice and created a First Amendment controversy with its new sign ordinance. Let’s take a look why this ordinance is constitutionally flawed.

At their May 19th meeting, City Officials stated the ordinance was content neutral. However, the Supreme Court said in Reed v Gilbert, that if you have to read a sign to determine whether it is prohibited or not, then it is not content neutral, but content based, and such laws are thus unconstitutional, no matter how noble the intentions were. People have been cited after authorities read their signs and determined the words were banned. This ordinance is content based.

The Supreme Court ruled in Cohen v California (1972) that Mr. Cohen had a constitutionally protected right to wear a jacket with the words “F*** the Draft” into a crowded courthouse. The court ruled that no matter how offensive that word was or who saw it, it was constitutionally protected political speech. Absent evidence that he was trying to start a fight or incite a riot, which he wasn’t, they declared that his words couldn’t be suppressed, regulated or made illegal. But that’s exactly what Punta Gorda has done. They criminalized political speech.

Which words? You know, the “indecent ones”. What they exactly are, we don’t know. We can only imagine and guess. And this point is crucial because that is another reason courts prohibit the banning of words, because they too have asked, which ones – who decides – and where does it end?

In Cohen, the Court declared the “F-word” is not obscenity but was simply an emotional expression of protest, thus clearly distinguishing profanity from obscenity. Justice John Harlan famously said, “One man’s vulgarity is another man’s poetry”. So why were code enforcement hearing officers having discussions that a political sign containing the “F-word” was obscenity when Harlan ruled it wasn’t?

The Minnesota Supreme Court stated, “Curses, expletives, and the whole vocabulary of insults are not intended or susceptible of literal interpretation. To attach greater significance to them is stupid, ignorant, or naive”. So why the confusion?

Furthermore, Section 11.4 of the ordinance established the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as the final authority of a word’s meaning. One of its definitions of the “f-word” is vulgarity of a “damning sense”, i.e., to condemn vigorously, publicly object/criticize, or to swear at. So why wasn’t Merriam-Webster used to adjudicate this matter? But in fairness to the hearing officers and enforcement authorities, this is what happens when elected officials make bad law. And that’s why these laws are struck down.

In ruling that government can’t pass laws that prohibit the mere expression and display of speech people find offensive, including vulgarity, Justice Harlan stated, “If you don’t want to look at a word you don’t like – then look the other way”. Punta Gorda needs to read that memo.

On their June 2 meeting, one councilperson noted “while the Sign Code was being drafted to ensure free speech, many individuals perceived it as limiting free speech”. No, it suppresses free speech as determined by the Supreme Court. The Cohen case clearly reaffirmed extra protections that are afforded political speech and hyperbole, including the use of salty language. Yet, instead of protecting the rights of protestors, the City approved an ordinance that was designed to placate those who objected to the display of political speech they didn’t like. Perhaps our officials didn’t see it that way, but that’s what they did.

At that June meeting, another councilperson spoke on the “difficulty of balancing the right to free speech with the public’s desire for civility”. No, it’s not difficult because you have neither the responsibility nor

the authority to control what words people use. Of course we want a civil society, it’s just that government’s role is limited in shaping it. California, in defense of its action likewise thought it was appropriate for government to legislate civility. The court disagreed and said it was not the job of the state to set up a code of etiquette, courtesy or to maintain a suitable level of public discourse.

Several lawsuits are on the horizon. Some City Council members said they are not "backing down". Sadly, it will be us taxpayers, and not them, who will be responsible for these legal fees and settlements. It is so easy to roll the Constitutional dice when you’re playing with taxpayer’s money.

Paul Cohen was given the right to wear a jacket that said, “F*** the Draft” in a crowded courthouse. But anyone who wears that same jacket on the sidewalks in Punta Gorda will be in violation of the law. This is unacceptable. Please explain how a law that is so constitutionally problematic will stand?

Communities and states have been repealing laws that ban speech, but Punta Gorda enacted one despite the many decisions prohibiting such laws. The City Council needs to do what responsible leaders do, i.e., be contrite and admit they made a mistake, and rescind this ordinance so we can put this issue behind us.

City of Punta Gorda Trampling on First Amendment

By Bill Abbatematteo 

When I was Chief of Police, I inherited a situation where we had a number of watchdog people in the City, not any different from what Punta Gorda and many other communities in America experience.  I could have asked to City Council to pass ordinances to suppress these people/groups, but I knew that such legislation would have infringed upon their rights of free speech. It never crossed my mind.

While some people called them agitators, trouble makers and a nuisance, I saw them as an integral part of holding government accountable.  I spent my career protecting the rights of others, even when I and members of my command were the targets of obscene gestures and other choice words. I knew what the law was and expected everyone in the department to be trained and abide by it. It was our duty to protect free speech, whether it "pleased or pinched" us, as Justice Sutherland famously said.


Plus, taking that course of action would have violated a basic management principle of not"Managing by Exception", where managers end up implementing ill-conceived measures, often draconian in nature, to reign in undesirable behavior and language of a few (the exceptions) at the expense of infringing upon the rights of the vast majority of the people who are not the problem. But politicians often do that. The Left is notorious for doing that. They take the fast and "easy" way out by passing laws to regulate behavior and society rather than putting in the time and effort, being creative and coming up with solutions to solve problems as they arise.  It’s the classis “ideology over consequences” model of decision making.  


In the end, I met with the "radicals" and "trouble makers" of our City and implemented solutions that everyone was agreeable to, and the problems stopped. I had been brought in from the outside and showed our department to "think out of the box" when problem solving - and it worked. Sure, these people used tactics and methods that I wouldn’t use, but in America, everyone has a right to dance to the beat of a different drum.  And if you don’t recognize that, you shouldn’t be an elected official or a government worker.


In Punta Gorda, they make a conscious decision to wield their power regardless of the short and long term consequences of the 

unconstitutionality of their action, including potential financial consequences of litigation along with the negative publicity it will bring and the potential loss of revenue to our community.  True conservative officials do not resort to such tactics in the first place.  


For example, earlier this year in Virginia Beach city officials were faced with a similar situation involving an offensive flag. Their City’s communications director, Julie Hill stated, “There is no City ordinance that regulates signage based on offensive statements or profanityA rule like that would be illegal because the First Amendment restricts the ability of local governments to regulate speech.” 


Our council did not do that, but instead managed by exception and thumbed their nose at the Supreme Court and the Bill of Rights.  They trampled on the First Amendment and settled jurisprudence of the Supreme Court. They yielded to a vocal few, resulting in what's classified as Tyranny by the Minority.  This is Un-American and We the People do not consent to be governed in this fashion.


Just like the Biden Administration has ignored the decision of the Supreme Court regarding unconstitutionality of the bureaucratic moratorium on payment of rents, ruling that only Congress can make such laws, the Punta Gorda City Council has also ignored a 50 history of Supreme Court rulings that have made ordinances that suppress the freedom of expression, including "salty" language, unconstitutional laws.  What the Biden Administration did on a Federal level, Punta Gorda did on a local level, i.e., ignore settled law. If Julie Hill, I and millions of other citizens know that salty language on signs can’t be restricted, why doesn’t Joe Biden and our five Council members know that too?  Or are they just deliberately ignoring the rule of law when it pinches.  And if they are, then THAT is what is truly obscene, and need people like Julie Hill on our City Council.

The Media is at it again -- from the Desk of Christian Ziegler, Vice Chairman, RPOF


Shocking to no one, the media is at it again.

Their response to our Save America Rally featuring President Trump in Sarasota is to try to generate a narrative that there is a "rift" between The President and our Governor, Ron DeSantis, over logistics of the rally.

First - I can first-hand vouch that this simply isn't true. I have been on the ground for the last week working with Team Trump, Team DeSantis and Team FloridaGOP to plan and execute this rally, and I can report back that their narrative is a lie. In all my discussions and engagement with the individuals helping to host the rally, no example of a rift has been spotted.

Second - Keep an eye out for these tactics going forward. President Trump launched a national movement fueled by record energy that no one has seen before. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has become the poster child for how to lead a state, respond to COVID and fight back against the Left. Our Republican Party of Florida is jam packed with momentum and energy as Pres. Trump and Gov. DeSantis working hand in hand to advance our party. We saw it in 2020 when Florida outperformed not only our 2016 win for Trump, but almost every other state for Pres. Trump, and we'll see it again in 2022 when Gov. DeSantis crushes whomever the Democrat Party runs.

The Left and The Media knows this. They see the poll numbers. They feel the energy. The are hearing from The People. And it scares them. Thus, the fake news narratives will be launch to try to divide us. My suggestion is - Ignore the fake news narratives, keep moving and stay unified.

Lastly - I hope you will join us in Sarasota for the Rally TOMORROW.

Christian Ziegler
FloridaGOP Vice Chairman

On City Council’s Move On Free Speech

 By Bill Abatematteo

How is it that elected officials swear to uphold the US Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Florida, but then unanimously pass laws that fly in the face of that oath. So much for making a promise. 

I am aware and understand that it sometimes can be in bad taste to publicly wear clothing, hold signs or have bumper stickers that some people find offensive, including some salty language. But SO WHAT? It's not ILLEGAL. The Supreme Court has already spoken to this issue.

Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court holding that the First Amendment prevented the conviction of Paul Robert Cohen for the crime of disturbing the peace by wearing a jacket displaying "F**k the Draft" in the public corridors of a California courthouse.

The Court ultimately found that displaying a mere four-letter word was not sufficient justification to allow states to restrict free speech and that free speech can be restricted only under severe circumstances beyond offensiveness.  Under modern First Amendment jurisprudence profanity cannot categorically be banned.

Because Cohen's conviction was based on speech, Justice Harlan stated that the defendant may be criminally punished only if his speech (the words on his jacket) fell within a specific category of speech that is not protected by the First Amendment, such as speech that incites imminent lawless action. The justice then outlined why the word "f**k" did not fall into one of those categories. 

As Justice Harlan said in the decision, "...while the particular four-letter word being litigated here is perhaps more distasteful than most others of its genre, it is nevertheless often true that one man's vulgarity is another's lyric".

The ruling set a precedent used in future cases concerning the power of states to regulate free speech in order to maintain public civility.  We learned that; 1) Government at all levels cannot censor their citizens in order to make a “civil” society, because, 2) Knowing where to draw the line between harmless heightened emotion and vulgarity is difficult, arbitrary and subjective, and 3) People bring passion to politics and profanity is simply a side effect of a free exchange of ideas – not matter how radical or offensive they may be to others or how well-intended the law-makers were.  

Either our City Council members DON'T know this OR they DON'T CARE. Whether it's ignorance of the law or a blatant disregard of the law, both are equally unacceptable.  They Constitution is the Supreme law of the land and NO ONE, including our local lawmakers, are about the law.

In America there are many fundamental things that we hold sacred. They are what sets us apart from every other nation, even if it makes us uncomfortable. And Freedom of Speech is one of them.

Since our Founding, over 1.3 Million Veterans made the Supreme sacrifice so that others can keep saying, displaying and printing things that others may not like. And just like that, the Punta Gorda City Council tramples on their graves and spits in the face of the Constitution with their censorship law. Doesn’t that just suck? 

Who made them the Ministry of Speech? The Centurions of Censorship? They should either repeal the unconstitutional provisions of this ill-advised law, no matter how “well intended” it was, or resign. People who do not honor their oath of office don’t truly represent or work for us at all, nor do they deserve to.  

This attempt to outlaw protected speech could bring negative publicity to our community and has the potential to result in a series of lawsuits and costly litigation, settlements and awards by those charged with this unconstitutional offense, as well as from those groups and organizations that will target our City for this legislative transgression.  If this happens, who will be responsible for these expenses?  And will those responsible be held accountable?

I think it's about time we start electing Patriots to office. People who, no matter how unpopular it might be at times, will pledge to honor, uphold and make our Constitution their PRIORITY - rather than their latest version of Political Correctness or Social Control.

DeSantis Puts Florida School Boards on Notice


Letter From Christian Ziegler, Vice Chair Republican Party of Florida

I'll admit, it's VERY difficult to drill down to my favorite action taken by Governor DeSantis to date. 

But outside of his freedom loving response to COVID, DeSantis pouncing on Critical Race Theory and Mandatory Masking of our Children might be my favorite action he has taken thus far. 

And as the husband of Conservative School Board Member Bridget Ziegler(follow her on Facebook) who has battled "Republican" School Board Members in a Republican County that run & win as Republicans, but vote as Liberals once sworn-in, I am happy to see DeSantis has figured out the game and won't stand for it.

Because by putting both Democrat AND Republican School Board Members on notice that his political operation will target them if they support Critical Race Theory and/or Mandatory Masking of our children, he is not only cleaning house today, but protecting the next generation. This is fantastic.

Watch the video clip, share the image, and read the article (all posted below). Make sure to share each piece of content to help us get the word out!

New Precinct Leadership Join Our Ranks.


Sixteen new Republican Committeemen and women sworn in on May 27 at the Executive Committee quarterly meeting   

Independents Forfeit Voting Opportunities

When voters choose to be “independent,” they forfeit their chance to pre-select their choice of whom will be on the ballot for President, Senator and other important Federal, State and Local offices in November when the general election takes place. In Charlotte County, largely Republican,  often the final choice for whom will assume key local offices takes place in the primary election.  

When a large percentage  of our population does not participate in the primary process, our election system as a whole may be compromised by not having their weigh-in in the selection of who will ultimately run for key elected offices including the presidency.  

While there may be a lot of moral or symbolic satisfaction in skipping primaries by declaring oneself “independent,” in a practical sense it’s a surrender of one of the most important political rights you have and could pose a threat to our Republic.  

We encourage your full participation in our political process.   And if you believe in a limited Federal Government, fair immigration policies with secure borders, equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability, we hope you will consider registering as a Republican.  

It is quite easy to change your registration.  Go to  

Fight Back against Fake News - Don't Cancel - Fight

It's easy to say I'm going to cancel the local paper when they continuously run articles against our conservative values and our Republican officials like Ron DeSantis, our Governor.  But, unfortunately, until someone can come along with the bucks to start a local newspaper that will compete, we are where we are and can't afford to give up on a megaphone that reaches thousands of citizens in our community. So what to do.  Do what the Dems do -- Fight.  

Write letters to the editor supportive of Republican legislators, and supportive of legislative initiatives that will protect our vote, protect parent's rights in education.  Write letters supporting our Bill of Rights - freedom of speech, the right to bear arms.  Respond to negative articles and editorials in the paper -- present good arguments against them.  If you don't have time to write letters yourself, join our letter writing group and we will help.  Go to and volunteer.  

If you are really angry, talk to advertisers and ask them to tell the paper to get more articles and editorials in the paper that support conservative, Republican issues and events. Our county has 2/1 registered Republicans.  Advertisers want to reach them.   The advertisers have more power with the press - they pay a larger portion of the bill.  

You accomplish very little by canceling your local subscription  They will carry on without your subscription.  What we need to do is intervene and do everything we can to get our message out. 



Beware of the Poisoned Apple - The Left’s Agenda


In the classic fairy tale Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, the evil Queen arrives at Snow White’;s cottage disguised as an old peddler. Despite being warned by the seven dwarfs to not open the door for anyone or accept any gifts, Snow White answers the door. The Evil Queen lures Snow White into taking a bite from a beautiful , shiny apple, actually a poisoned apple. 

The moral of the story is be wary of hidden agendas such as that behind much of the Democrat’s legislation but in particular their deceptively labeled For the People Act.  Presented as a shiny apple that will repair democracy and bring social justice, the bill is transformative alright as described and poison to our Republic.  It would essentially federalize elections and make it easier for Democrats to cheat.

Now in the Senate as S. 1, some of the poison:

Sends federal dollars to fund political campaigns. Not to build roads or bridges but to add 600 percent of federal money to every small dollar donated by Americans. So let’s say Mary from Michigan donates $200 to her preferred candidate. Well, now the U.S. Treasury has just chipped in another 1,200 bucks.

Legalizes voting for convicted felons all over the country…even if they were convicted of election fraud. Does that make sense to you? Not only is this dangerous…it’

Weakens the security of our elections and make it harder to protect against voter fraud. Here’s how: It would automatically register voters from DMV and other government databases. Voting is a right, not a mandate. In most cases, this legislation would actually prevent officials from removing ineligible voters from the rolls and would make it much more difficult to verify the accuracy of voter information. So future voters might be underage or dead or illegal immigrants, or registered two or three times….

Contains  various poorly written and confusing requirements that could be difficult or even impossible to interpret leading to election malfunctions  

The shiny apple with false misleading promises actually is designed to keep a Federal Government run by Democrats in power indefinitely - a dangerous, poisonous path.