ST. GEORGE — The Dixie Republican Forum is kicking off the New Year with a luncheon on Jan. 20, featuring constitutional attorney Nathan Caplin, former county attorney candidate in the Republican primary, who will speak on threats to First Amendment religious freedoms and how to protect liberties.
The luncheon will be at the Dixie State University Alumni House, 684 East 500 South, St. George. Gathering begins at 11:30 a.m. with the program beginning at noon.
This forum is open to the public, attendance is $12 with lunch or $2 without lunch.
The forum encourages members to pay dues for 2015 to keep memberships active. Dues are $25 for singles or $30 for a couple.
“We expect to have a great 2015. Future speakers will include former state Rep. Chris Herrod on illegal immigration and amnesty, Lt. Gov. Spencer Cox on election reforms, and more,” the forum’s executive committee stated in its press release. “We look forward to seeing you on the 20th!”
- What: Dixie Republican Forum luncheon
- When: Jan. 20, 11:30 a.m.
- Where: DSU Alumni House, 684 East 500 South, St. George
- Tickets: $12 with lunch, or $2 for meeting without lunch
- RSVP by calling Larry Meyers at 435-668-6292
Related posts
- Belnap, Caplin square off in live debate; recap, STGnews photo gallery
- Republican women present $15K check to DSU, seek to continue veterans scholarship
- Opinion: Are Republicans prepared to govern?
- Republicans take elections, RAP tax passes, state results; STGNews Videocast
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: @STGnews
This group does not represent the Republican Party, don’t let the name fool you. It would be like someone saying they’re Burger King but all they serve is tacos. I like the fee attached to their nonexistent group. Give the crazy (mr M) and the inexperienced, no business in politics (mr K) your money so they can make you look bad for associating with them. Mr Caplin Sr. Please get your son a job at IHC or Dixe State so he has less chance of ruining our community. Thank you and good night,
Mr. C
Nathan Caplin is called a “constitutional attorney” despite the fact that he has never argued a constitutional issue in any court ever. In fact, barely out of law school, he has appeared in court on only a few occasions for trivial matters. He is not a law professor at any law school, and is not recognized as a constitutional expert by any academic group whatsoever. He is a “constitutional attorney” as much as any law school graduate is. His father attempted to buy him the county attorney’s office, and luckily, he failed.