CONGRESSMAN MARLIN STUTZMAN RAPE QUESTIONS

burn a copy of this- and badger stutzman over "question 17"- then bore in on the "richard mourdock question"- aka "the "kitty dukakis question"( from a previous presidential debate: congressman stutzman- lets take a hypothetical scenario- lets say your wife or daughters or some other female family member or friend was gang raped by thugs, and became pregnant. would you force that woman to carry her rape baby to term? do you agree with richard mourdock that as he said --quote" rape is a gift from god"? then let him twist in the wind.. hell weasel around it, then "re-direct"- get some national media embarassing "killer" sound bite; and stutzmans toast.. page 1:http://www.ichooselife.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/candidate-survey-fall.pdf

2LikeLike · 

• 

  David Legalize Marijuajuana RoachPAGE 2 :http://www.ichooselife.org/.../candidate-survey-fall-BACK...

  2 minutes ago · Like
• 

  David Legalize Marijuajuana Roachpage 3- question 16... http://www.irtl.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/50440-IRTL-VotersGuide-FINAL.pdf

STUTZMAN SAID" ABORTION SHOULD NEVER BE LEGAL; LIFE OF THE MOTHER ONLY- AND "NO" FOR RAPE AND INCEST"- so- a bunch of inbred children; and rape babies- women FORCED to keep their RAPISTS OFF SPRING, AND CARRY TO TERM? so visitation from prison? and child support on prison work detail wages.. hmm- interesting follow up questions to THAT ONE.. http://www.irtl.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/50440-IRTL-VotersGuide-FINAL.pdf

ANSWERED "  NO"

14. Will you endorse, financially support, or in any way work to elect any
candidate of any party who supports abortion on demand for any reason
and at any stage of pregnancy?
___Yes ___No ___Unsure


ANSWERED  A + B
16 Under what circumstances do you believe abortion should be legal?
__A__ Abortion should never be legal
__B__ Life of the mother only
__C__ Rape and/or incest
__D__ Other:________________________ 

__E__ Abortion should be legal in all cases

David Roach‎David Legalize Marijuajuana Roach

3 hrs · 

VOTE FOR JUSTIN KUHNLE FOR CONGRESS THIS NOV 4TH( JUST VOTE "STRAIGHT DEMOCRAT TICKET. VOTE ONE AND DONE( (DEMOCRAT).. AND VOTE NO FOR "UNIGOV SCHEME BY CORPORATIST SCHEMERS..)..
FCK THE TEA PARTY, AND STUTZMAN( SOUDER REDUX..)-

Gina Burgess

MY CONGRESSIONAL PICK – JUSTIN KUHNLE (D): My vote for Justin Kuhnle (D) is more a referendum on incumbent Marlin Stutzman and is a specific vote against him.

Mr. Stutzman is a career politician and a Washington D.C. insider and has been active in D.C. politics since 2005, nearly a decade. During his tenure, he has managed to falsely portray himself as a both a farmer and a small business owner. He is neither. He has an ownership interest in a commercial agribusiness that was started by his father and is operated by his father and brothers, not by Stutzman.

Stutzman’s “work” on the family farm consists of photo shoots to portray himself as a “family farmer” and to procure farm subsidies. He claims to own Stutzman Farms Trucking, which is not a business entity registered with either the Indiana Secretary of State nor the Michigan Secretary of State—meaning it does not legally exist. From all accounts, Stutzman Farms Trucking is merely a tax write off to claim transportation related expenses that the agribusiness known as Stutzman Farms is not able to specifically write off.

Stutzman attempts to portray himself as being pro-veteran, pro-small banker, pro-infrastructure, etc, but he says one thing and then votes the opposite of what he says. During last night’s congressional debate, he touted the need for more infrastructure in Northeast Indiana, but earlier this year, he voted against that very infrastructure. (See HR 5021 Highway and Infrastructure Funding Act of 2014 )

He sat on one of the subcommittees of the Veterans Administration this year, during the VA scandal which revealed systemic and systematic failures causing delayed treatment to veterans and subsequent deaths. During his stint on the VA committee, he did NOTHING to engage in this topic---not even a formal or public statement acknowledging the event and what he was going to do to make sure such travesties do not happen in the future. Instead, he sat there in his subcommittee and passed legislation that would make it possible for Vets to get more post-war job training…by for-profit educational institution that was, itself, embroiled in scandal from offering programs that essentially scammed veterans out of money and did little in the way of securing jobs.

Stutzman likes to portray he is for small bankers, like the kind found in small rural farming towns, but the reality is that he is backed by Chase Bank and Goldman Sachs and others responsible for the 2008 financial meltdown that led to unprecedented numbers of foreclosure. Stutzman has never publically spoken out against his financial bankers or sought to hold them accountable as people in his own district were losing their homes in the aftermath of the meltdown.

Stutzman does a really good song and dance about how he is against “Obamacare.” However, this past September at a candidate forum in DeKalb County, he admitted to being financially backed by some of the biggest insurance companies in North America—insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and hospitals/health networks are the biggest beneficiaries of “Obamacare,” which artificially inflates the cost of medical care and keeps those costs artificially inflated.

At last night’s debate, Stutzman finally got caught up in his own lines at one point saying that he was for the U.S. being independent when it came to oil and then later, not even realizing his contradiction, he made statements encouraging the U.S.’ continued dependency on foreign oil. Ironically, Stutzman’s flip-flop does not come at a surprise. You see, he voted in June of this year to manipulate gas prices so gas prices would be lower this fall, right before the elections. (See HR 4899 Lowering Gasoline Prices to Fuel an America That Works Act of 2014)

Stutzman is an ambitious, self-serving, flip-flopper who raises money to fund other, out-of-state campaigns for the purpose of securing a more visible leadership role in Washington.

In addition to being beholden to big banks and insurance companies, Stutzman is beholdened to Keith Busse/Steel Dynamics and Charles Henry/C. Henry Steel. These two Northeast Indiana companies would love to see certain environmental policies eliminated, such as cap-and-trade. Actually, Busse/Steel Dynamics would like to see the EPA dismantled and eliminated. Stutzman’s public policy on environmental matters confirms this as does that of fellow Republican, Mike Pence.

Stutzman recently tried to portray himself as the single most effective Congressman from Indiana. In fairness, to his credit, there is some truth to that. According to a study performed by Vanderbilt University, during the 2011-2012 legislative session, Stutzman ranked 66th in Congress (out of 245 who were ranked) and that ranking did make him the #1 legislature in Indiana. (Interestingly, Mike Pence was also scored and he came in as 208 out of 245.) The question that must be asked here is why is Stutzman, in 2014, now touting a study performed in 2012? The answer is that its just another example of smoke and mirrors in a long-line of examples of how this career and self-dedicated politician behaves either in his own best interest or in the best interest of those he is beholden to, and NOT in the best interest of his constituents.

Something else that really bothers me about Stutzman, and again this came from last night’s debate, his stance on the cost of education and how he felt about loan forgiveness programs. His response was that these programs could….emphasis on “could”….work. That bothers me because he should have taken the approach of “yes, these programs are working” or “no, these programs are not working and here’s how we need to fix ‘em.” Its like he didn’t even know that the programs being asked about were already in existence.

Also, I found it really interesting that at the DeKalb County forum, Stutzman was all about getting rid of the Department of Education but last night was quiet as a librarian on the topic, probably setting the stage for another flip-flop. I’m also disturbed by another Stutzman flip-flop. In DeKalb County, he was against Obama’s call for airstrikes and instead was all for putting boots on the ground in terms of how to deal with ISIS. Last night, however, he was in favor of Obama’s call for airstrikes and silent on the matter of boots on the ground. Which is it Mr. Stutzman? Personally, as someone from a military family, I have no respect for a legislator who has never served his country as a member of our armed forces and believes they have the right to decide what is best in military matters. I base that premise on his voting to keep troops in Iraq ten years after the original invasion.

That’s the problem with Stutzman’s foreign policy. He lacks the necessary experience to make good judgment in foreign affairs matters but is too egotistical to own that shortcoming. That’s the sort of policy-maker that gets people killed.

This brings me to another matter regarding Stutzman, he is not “pro-life.” I know he has been endorsed by Indiana Pro-Life….and really, surprise, surprise…he’s a Republican for goodness sakes and that endorsement doesn’t mean a hill of beans in a Congressional district that lacks an abortion clinic. Really, how hard is it to be pro-life in this district?? Mr. Stutzman isn’t pro-life. He is pro-birth. Once a child is born, he has no care or concern for that child’s well-being. He doesn’t care if that child has enough food to eat as evidenced by his cutting back on the food stamp program (an indirect form of farm subsidies that benefit food growers, like small and real farmers). He doesn’t care if that child has an education—primary or secondary—as evidenced by his willingness to glut the public school system of funds in favor of vouchers that go to homeschoolers like himself. He doesn’t care about that child when he’s sending him or her off to war at the age of 18 and he doesn’t care about that child getting buried in a pile of educational debt to get a minimum-wage paying job.

At the end of the day, Stutzman is about Stutzman. Pure and simple. He is the worst kind of politician---ambitious, money-grubbing, and self-centered. He’s part of a status quo that truly needs to go.

Stutzman has two opponents this year, Libertarian Scott Wise and Democrat Justin Kuhnle.

Wise is a former tea party Republican who converted over to Libertarians upon not winning races in the GOP. Wise has a lot of good ideas, but so many of his ideas are extremes of what is currently happening in D.C., that I don’t think he is going to be able to get them implemented. In giving Wise the benefit of the doubt and assuming that he could get policy changes implemented, I’m not so sure he knows how to go about actually doing that. For example, like Stutzman, he has talked about eliminating the Department of Education. He basis this decision on the Department of Education not being listed as a provision in the Constitution and that it should be a matter left to the state and local governments. Technically, Wise is correct in this ascertion. However, if Wise were able to magically erase the Department of Education, then how would that federal void be filled by the states? Would it be a gradual reduction of federal authority coupled with a gradual increase of state authority? Who would handle existing federal loans, Pell grants and other financial aid resources?

It’s a noble thing to say there is no Constitutional authority for this department, but without a clear plan of action to dismantle and make up for the dismantling….all we are left with is talk.

To Wise’ credit, he does bring with him some real moments of common sense brilliance, especially as it pertains to letting free markets determine costs in the fields of health care and education. Regrettably, that common sense is not backed up by any clear, logistical plan capable of converting that common sense into action.

Something else that disturbs me about Wise---whom I have personally met and had the chance to talk to, and, for the record feel he is a really good guy---but he has ran this race two other times and each time, has been asked how he is going to accomplish anything in Congress as its sole Libertarian. To which Wise responds, by building a coalition. The problem here is that Wise has had multiple chances to build coalitions for his campaign and has seemingly failed to do so. It’s one thing not to have the financial backing of the big boys. It’s another thing not to have access to the same resources as the favored candidates do of either the Republican or Democrat Parties. But when you don’t have money and you don’t have resources, then you’d better have a coalition of volunteers. I have yet to see this from Wise. If he can’t muster a volunteer coalition here at home to help get him elected, then how can we be expected to believe he will fare better in Washington D.C. as the lone voice advocating for a change that very few people in Congress want.

Democrat Justin Kuhnle is not without his flaws. Matter-of-fact, he probably has the most outward flaws of all three candidates. He tenses when he gets nervous, uses hand gestures when he speaks that are irritatingly distracting, and is just not generally the most polished candidate in this field of candidates. Like Wise, he does not have the money that this sort of campaign requires and the local Democratic Party has written him off as a “has been who never was.”

But what Kuhnle has is heart and a deep-rooted desire to do good by his community, a desire recently elevated by the birth of his first-born child. He has a willingness to roll up his sleeves and get the job done even when the odds are against him. Unlike Wise, he has built a coalition of support.

Unlike Stutzman, he is well versed on all the issues and has demonstrated a willingness to acknowledge when a public policy plan is good, when it is bad, and when it needs tweaked, regardless of who proposes or sponsors it. Whether the issue be education, health care, infrastructure of ISIS, he knows that there is no such thing as a perfect plan but he chooses not to buy into the rhetoric of all-or-nothing, either-its-Republican-or-its-Democrat paradigm. For example, with regards to Affordable Health Care (aka “Obamacare”), he knows all-too-well through first-hand experience just how flawed the system is and readily admits that it needs work.

Kuhnle’s approach is different from both Stutzman and Wise, who are both for dismantling the Department of Education, in that he’s willing to first recognize that a problem exists and second is agreeable to finding points of agreement in an effort to build upon that agreement. On the topic of ISIS, he is agreement with Obama’s first strike initiative because he doesn’t want America embroiled in another war. Unlike Stutzman, he feels there should be some sort of exit strategy and that there should also be an overall strategy that prevents this regional conflict from being another American war.

Does Kuhnle know as much as Stutzman? Originally I would have said no, but after listening to last night’s debate, I’m not sure. But for argument’s sake, lets assume that Kuhnle doesn’t….but in fairness, let’s also assume that Stutzman didn’t either before he entered his first term in office.

Now, I know there are some folks out there that feel voting for a Democrat in a Congressional race in this district is tantamount to throwing away a vote, but that’s simply not true. Allen County holds the key to the Congressional Third District race as it has the Lion’s share of registered voters of all the counties that make up the Third District. Also, this year, there is an anti-incumbent mood among most voters who are tired of the same ol’ same ol.’ Remember, this is the historic year that Eric Cantor, a sitting majority whip was voted out of office in a race where all the polls showed he was ahead and where he had outraised and outspent his opponent…..only to lose to an underfunded school teacher who was supposedly behind in the polls, much like Kuhnle.

FWPD FORT WAYNE POLICE SCANDAL

http://www.frostillustrated.com/2014/upfront-rogers30/http://www.frostillustrated.com/2014/upfront-rogers30/

An officer’s betrayal: Decorated black FWPD officer fights for job, reputation
Frost Editor | October 7, 2014
Fredrick Rogers
An officer’s betrayal: Decorated black FWPD officer fights for job, reputation
Son defends father’s service to department, community
Editor’s note: Over the years, Fort Wayne Police Officer Frederick “Fred” Rogers Sr. has earned a reputation as one of the city’s most well-known law enforcement officials. During his tenure in the Detective Bureau, Rogers compiled a stellar record of cases solved—particularly homicides. He’s also a familiar face throughout the black community providing security for various events and visiting dignitaries. He’s also won numerous law enforcement awards and accolades. Despite all his success, Rogers would admit that it hasn’t always been smooth sailing between him and the department’s upper echelon. He’s had to defend his work, record and reputation on a number of occasions, during which he said he’s been targeted unfairly for criticism and disciplinary action. Rogers is currently facing department actions against him for alleged “ghost employment.” His son, Fredrick Rogers Jr., wrote the following in his father’s defense.
By Fredrick Rogers Jr.
Special to Frost Illustrated
What began as a simple allegation of ghost employment now has a veteran police officer fighting for his career.
I have watched my father as I have grown up.  I have watched him undergo stress, and struggle with the job that he has worked for 33 years.  I am the oldest of his three sons and his namesake.
Fredrick Rogers Sr. joined the Fort Wayne Police Department in 1981 to make a better life for his family and to have a prideful, more challenging career.  But what he got instead has been a career filled with strife, backstabbing and a lack of support from his command.  We, his children have seen the community come together to support him.  He has long-standing relationships made from years of coaching Metro football, Village Woods baseball, Unique Track Club, and assistant track coach at Paul Harding High School.  He performed security jobs in Fort Wayne Community Schools and Anthis and various other establishments throughout the city.
It was this rapport that he has built through generations of citizens that has served him well in his contacts and cooperative support, whether it be Community Policing or a homicide investigation in which the citizens have come to rely on him. And they have appreciated his dedication and efforts, appreciation that he has never felt from the Fort Wayne Police Department.
And now I have seen with my very eyes the proof that the upper command of that department does not appreciate him.
My brother and I came from out of town to stand with him in support throughout his appeal before the Board of Safety, along with my sisters and the rest of the family, friends and co-workers of my father.  We have been told that in the past other police officers have been allowed to have open hearings but we were not allowed inside the hearing room.  Although it was of the understanding that there had been a “gag order” put into effect concerning the appeals hearing, (which was later lifted at the conclusion of the hearing), Sergeant James Seay of Internal Affairs (IA) approached me in the hallway before the hearing and asked me “if I knew who he was?” as if he was trying to get some sort of response out of me.  I remained neutral.  I did not know where he was coming from but I did not feel that it was from a good place.
You see, around the first part of May of this year, Sergeant Rogers was notified by Sergeant Seay of Internal Affairs of the Fort Wayne Police Department that he was being investigated for ghost employment, an administrative misdemeanor offense for allegedly overlapping work for city police with a  job at a local food restaurant.
An interview was conducted at which time Sergeant Rogers stated that he had not worked on the original two days in question (April 3, 4); another officer had worked for him.  That officer, when interviewed advised that he had worked for Sergeant Rogers, but was given dates other than April 3 and 4 when questioned and was answering off of memory.  Once he was able to check his phone records, however, the officer verified April 3 and 4 as when he had indeed worked for Sergeant Rogers.  At that point, Sergeant Rogers was notified by IA that he had been cleared of the ghost employment allegation.
The IA Department’s “investigation” consisted of speaking with a general manager of the food establishment over the phone who had never actually worked with Sergeant Rogers during his employment.  The hours that the general manager gave IA were not even the actual hours that Sergeant Rogers worked.  They also spoke with another manager, either on the phone or in person, who verified that Sergeant Rogers had not committed ghost employment.  However, Sergeant Seay decided not to utilize this manager’s statement, as he felt that this witness was lying.
On a later date, two FOP Representatives, Mitch McKinney and Rod Bradtmueller met with Chief of Police Garry Hamilton on Sergeant Rogers’ behalf, at which time they informed my father that he was to receive 180 days’ suspension and to be demoted from sergeant to patrolman, or he could retire and there would be no charges filed.  Sergeant Rogers informed the reps to notify Chief Hamilton that he would not accept either of the two choices.
Later still, Chief Hamilton asked to meet with the same two reps and Sergeant Rogers.  Also present was Assistant Chief Steve Reed.  At that time, Chief Hamilton presented Sergeant Rogers with documentation ordering him to be suspended for 180 days.  Sergeant Rogers refused to sign this, stating that he would be appealing the disciplinary action.
What a “coincidence” then, that on May 19, the disciplinary action stating that Sergeant Rogers received 180 days suspension and a demotion from sergeant to patrolman was found filed in his personnel file ANYWAY.  The only way it was found was because the FOP Rep had requested a copy of Sergeant Rogers’ personnel file.  The reason that was given by the chief of police as to how it made it’s way into  the file?  It got in there by mistake. ????!!!!!!
On May 30, all witnesses and persons involved in the investigation met with the three members of the Board of Safety.  The following next several paragraphs is what occurred during the Appeal before the Board of Safety:
The two employees of the food establishment gave statements that would indicate that Sergeant Rogers fulfilled his obligation of two hours of employment.  They informed the board that he would lock the doors at closing and if he had arrived late, he would return in the morning and make up the time to complete his two hours.  They further stated that the food establishment had no issues with my father’s  employment.
The City then called Cpt. Paul Smith who gave statements that would indicate that he had watched Sergeant Rogers while he was at this food establishment.  He stated that Sergeant Rogers would call on duty from this location and he had observed him sitting inside the establishment after 9:30 p.m.   Cpt. Smith is in Sergeant Rogers’ direct chain of command.  He was asked by the Board if he felt that Sergeant Rogers was wrong for remaining at the food establishment after 9:30 p.m., the time he was to be working for the City.  Cpt. Smith stated that he didn’t have a problem with Sergeant Rogers being at the food establishment. He stated that officers don’t have set times to eat; they eat when time allows.  He further stated that sergeants work under a different protocol than patrolmen; sergeants have more freedom of movement and are not held to restraints within their quadrants.
The City then spent the next hour explaining the Automatic Vehicle Locator (AVL) which simply is another name for a GPS. (The showing of how the system works didn’t have anything to do with the two days (April 3 and 4 being the only dates that Sergeant Rogers had been questioned about during his IA interview with Sergeant Seay.)
Chief Hamilton informed the Board that he and Sergeant Rogers were close friends and that he could tell when Sergeant Rogers was lying from the audible recording of the interview he had with Sergeant Seay. The chief also stated that their close friendship was the reason that he had felt compelled to offer Sergeant Rogers a 180 days suspension and demotion for his many years of service. The meeting was ended with the City having presented its entire case. All parties were to convene the following week at which time Sergeant Rogers and his attorney would present their case.
The following week, all parties were present.  Sergeant Rogers was instructed by his attorney to tell the Board who the “real Sergeant Rogers was,” which was totally different than that person that the City had described. Sergeant Rogers explained to the Board that Chief Hamilton had told an untruth himself when he stated that he and Sergeant Rogers were friends and that there were reasons for them not being friends. However, Sergeant Rogers explained to the Board that this was not the forum for that discussion, even though the Safety Director Rusty York, the City Attorney Tim Manges, as well as Chief Hamilton are all well aware of the reasons.  Sergeant Rogers further stated that he and the Chief are not friends; they don’t socialize together; he has never visited his home nor has he visited his. They have never ridden in the same vehicle nor sat down at the same dinner table together.
Chief Hamilton stated that during the previous week, he had reviewed Sergeant Rogers’ disciplinary record and afterwards felt that my father was unfit to be an officer or sergeant of the Fort Wayne Police Department and had nothing to offer the police department.
I wonder if the community feels the same way?  I think that they would wholeheartedly say otherwise.  There is no way to quantitatively or qualitatively measure just what Sergeant Rogers has meant to the City of Fort Wayne.  For the chief of police to form his mouth to glibly state in so much of a wanton manner that my father has nothing more to offer the department is the lowest form of disrespect that one can receive and I and the rest of the family take it as a personal affront upon our father because that summation was delivered with such egregiousness.
Sergeant Rogers asked the chief if it was fair to look only at an officer’s disciplinary record without looking at that officer’s accomplishments and awards.  He received no response.
Sergeant Rogers then attempted to give a presentation on the projector screen of the many accolades and awards he has received during his thirty three years as a Fort Wayne Police Officer.   (The Board cut my father off prior to his presentation being completed and he was not allowed to finish.) Sergeant Rogers has been a Hostage Negotiator, Voice Stress Examiner, Computerized Face Recognition Composite Drawer, SWAT Team Member, Financial Investigator, Bicycle Certified, and Lead Homicide Investigator from 1980-1988.   As a homicide detective, Sergeant Rogers had a solvability rating in the high 90 percentile range, a number that would rival ANY police department across the country as well as a MONUMENTAL difference when compared with the homicide solve rate of the last several years.
Sergeant Rogers made reference to the Ex-Chief Rusty York, who was present at both today’s and last week’s Appeal.  He gave examples of how Chief York had failed the City by not taking advantage of Sergeant Rogers’ knowledge and success as a Homicide Investigator to ask for his further assistance in more recent years as the homicides spiraled out of control.  Instead, his expertise was squandered as a sergeant.  Those talents could have been BEST utilized as a deputy chief in charge of Homicide, but Rusty York made the mistake not to place him as a resource that could have been a win for the Department, the community, and most importantly, the families of the homicide victims.
Sergeant Rogers’ attorney then called other employees of the food establishment to testify who gave statements that Sergeant Rogers was paid for services rendered and that the food establishment had no qualms with Sergeant Rogers about the hours he worked from October 2013 to April 2014.
Sergeant Rogers’ attorney closed out the Appeal before the Board of Public Safety stating that his client was an exemplary officer whose career is “being thrown away over charges that have not been proven”.
As stated earlier in this article, the gag order that was originally set at the Appeal hearing before the Board of Public Safety was lifted and that is why the information from that hearing is being referenced in this article.
One can only ask, then, from looking at all of the facts: is it personal, or is it professional past, bad blood that has been keeping the former and current Police Chiefs from doing right by my father?  Sergeant Rogers has been continuously overlooked in getting what is owed to him, by way of recognition, promotions, etc., but also for the overall good that HE has done or COULD have done for the police department and the community as well.
Sergeant Rogers continues to fight for his career as of the writing of this article.  He awaits the Board of Safety’s ruling, which will be rendered next month.  He is being supported by both the FOP and PBA. Councilman Glynn A. Hines has pledged his support, and the Reverend Michael Latham and other clergymen of Fort Wayne, as well as fellow black police officers called The Guardians of Police.
Could you keep Sergeant Rogers in your prayers?  He has given the City of Fort Wayne his own pound of flesh with blood, sweat and tears for the past 33 years.
You can show your support, either by contacting the mayor directly at (260) 427-1111 or on Facebook (city of fort wayne-municipal government) or visit http:www.cityoffortwayne.org/.
We need to hear from YOU!!!!!    THE COMMUNITY!!!!!
Thank you for your attention to this most urgent matter.
Sincerely,
Fredrick Rogers Jr.