March 12, 2005

Diane Lane Photo of the Week


"Phone's ringing. Hmm. Is that Gandalf again?

Posted by: Gary at 11:17 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 19 words, total size 1 kb.

Eleanor Clift gets a scoop...

Can you believe it? Hillary is probably going run for President? That's right, according to the former liberal panelist of "The McLaughlin Group" - who provided a great source of comic relief on that show - the former first lady has her eyes on...get this...the White House. Thanks for the breaking news, Eleanor. I never even considered this possibility. (sarcasm off)

But here's the real thrust of her column. Hillary is crazy like a fox. She's got all the voters fooled. And, damnit, the GOP is getting its panties in a snit over it:

"Keeping company with Hillary is frustrating for the right because she’s proving to be something different from the caricature they made of her. “She’s having a rebirth,” says Marshall Wittmann, a former McCain staffer who’s now with the centrist Democratic Leadership Conference. More than any other Democrat eyeing the presidency, Hillary understands the cultural weakness of the party. Her recent comments on wanting to find common ground on abortion and her appearance at a press conference with such avatars of the right as Santorum and Brownback show she has absorbed the lesson of the ’04 election more systematically than anyone else."
Umm, yeah Eleanor. We're all frustrated that Hillary is masquerading as a "centrist".

The right has been lampooning this "reinvention" tour for weeks. Where have you been? Does she think even the dumbest voter can't see through this charade?

The real problem for Hillary will come in about three years. The Senator from NY believes that if she presents herself as a "moderate" that the whacko MoveOn.org wing of her party will chalk it up to political reality and support her regardless. But they're the only folks who will take this "centrist" talk seriously - and they will try to force her hand. Either she starts spouting the leftist garbage that they want to hear or they back another candidate. The idea that Hillary is "the chosen one" flies in the face of the current movement of the Left to take control of the Democrats.
Poor Hillary. She knows the only chance in winning a general election outflank the moonbats and appear "mainstream". However, the Howard Dean-led pirates are hoisting the Jolly-Roger on the good ship "Democrat" and they have other ideas.

Posted by: Gary at 07:19 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 386 words, total size 3 kb.

Welcome readers of Solomonia.com...


Red-State Americans in Blue-State Hell Unite!!

Posted by: Gary at 12:19 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.

March 11, 2005

Hey, United Nations!

PO(U.N.)D SAND!
cartoon courtesy of Cox & Forkum

Posted by: Gary at 10:30 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.

Florida Lawmaker Seeks Toilet Paper Tax...

Somebody at the Associated Press had fun writing up this story:

"Florida's Legislature is flush with good ideas."

"The Democratic lawmaker's pay-as-you-go bill has been the source of many jokes." (what? not the "butt" of many jokes?)

"In a Republican-dominated Legislature that doesn't like new taxes, the idea is likely to pretty quickly end up in the tank."

"'We'll be getting to the bottom of it real soon,' [Senate President Tom] Lee said."

"'We're not wild about tax increases,' said House Speaker Allan Bense, R-Panama City. 'But we'll certainly let it go through the system.'"

"And what about consumers? Wouldn't they be squeezed by a tax on the Charmin?"

Who says the MSM has no sense of humor?

Posted by: Gary at 02:02 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.

Soaring Gas Prices? It's all relative...(Part II)

Neal Boortz links an excellent chart that shows how, when adjusted for inflation, gas prices are actually 40% LOWER today than they were more than twenty years ago. Go check it out.

And go back and read my last rant on Gas Prices and how the MSM always manages to distort the issue with it's lazy reporting.

Posted by: Gary at 09:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 71 words, total size 1 kb.

Oh, looky here...

Sen. Russ "what freedom of speech?" Feingold is gettin' all warm and fuzzy about blogs. He seems to try to go to great pains to ease the concerns of bloggers who are facing possible regulation by the FEC.

The man who helped bring us the McCain-Feingold

Free Speech Regulation Act

Campaign Finance Reform has been under fire over concerns that the Blogosphere is the next target.

He warns of "overreaching" in the area of free speech on the Internet. But wasn't "overreaching" on free speech what McCain-Feingold was all about?

But wait, at the end of the column look out for this:

'The FEC should generally exempt independent, unpaid political activity by bloggers on the Internet. We must let this town square, which has added a significant dimension to our political process, continue to flourish. When the FEC issues a proposal on this issue later this month, rest assured that I will be reviewing it carefully and offering detailed comments.
Generally? Uh-oh. There's a weasel word if I ever heard one. Senator, reviewing this issue carefully is exactly why we can't be "rest assured".

Link from Real Clear Politics

Posted by: Gary at 06:59 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 193 words, total size 2 kb.

March 10, 2005

Breaking (Good) News on ANWR drilling...

Red State reports that the Senate Budget Committee voted 12-10 against a measure that would have stricken down a provision to allow for oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) within the Budget bill.

As a budget provision, ANWR will not be subject to a Dem filibuster and will pass on a simple majority vote. Democrat Russ Feingold of Wisconsin complained that this was a "backdoor maneuver" to help the drilling provision through the Senate, still wishing that the provision would have been voted on as a separate piece of legislation, as it had been in years past, allowing the Dems to block it with a minority of 41 votes.
Bite me, Russ! It's the only way to keep you guys from obstructionism.

Damn, it's good to see the Senate GOP start to find their balls again. I've already made the case before, so I won't repeat myself.

Now send it to the President's desk with the new budget and let's get the ball rolling...

Posted by: Gary at 09:55 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 178 words, total size 1 kb.

Soaring Gas Prices? It's all relative...

I came across this great column by John Stossel in Jewish World Review and bookmarked it. Now I can't remember who linked it, so apologies all around. If anyone recognizes the blog source, leave a comment and I'll be happy to update it.

Anyway, Stossel really gives it to the MSM about how they like to report about the periodic "gas crisis" the U.S. faces. Whether it's an attempt to make Bush look bad or make a case for some sort of "innovative" energy policy - whatever that means, the fact remains is that that way the media does it's reporting on gas prices is extremely misleading to the American people because it's never put into any context.

"Well, it's time to wake up from the gas-price nightmare. All these media people are saying the gas prices are high for one simple, simple-minded reason: They are looking at big numbers — but they are not accounting for inflation. So the numbers look bigger than the costs actually are. That's what inflation does. The reporting is irresponsible and silly. Not adjusting for inflation would mean "Shrek 2" is one of the highest-grossing movies of all time."
Now most journalism majors never took an economics class in college, so how can we expect these folks to do simple mathematical adjustments? Easy, says Stossel:

"It's not as if the reporters would have to work at doing calculations to figure this out. Not only are there instant inflation calculators on the Web, but the federal Department of Energy accounts for inflation in its annual report of gas prices. It says gas is actually cheaper now than it was throughout most of the 20th century. Yes, it's 65 cents more than it was six years ago, but it's nearly a dollar cheaper than it was for much of the 1920s and '30s — and more than a dollar cheaper than in 1980."
But far be it for a MSM journalist to trust the Dept. of Energy. I mean, aren't they in bed with "big oil"? Forget that they could always verify the information - if they ever bothered to.
Here's a little perspective. Stossel asks the average dope on the street what is more expensive - gas or water? Guess what people always answer? Gasoline, of course.

A gallon of gas is - on average - $2.00 per gallon. Water? At $1.29 per 24 oz bottle, that's $6.88 per gallon. Quite a difference, huh? Although it does make sense to have to pay more for something you actually need to live, like water? Of course, a lot of people don't think it's unreasonable to pay a dollar or more for bottled water when in fact the price is 3.5 times the cost for same amount of gasoline. Don't even get me started on the whole paying for bottled water thing, that's a topic for another time.

Here's the point:

"We should marvel at how cheap gasoline is — what a bargain we're getting from oil companies. After all, it's easy to bottle water, but think about what it takes to produce gasoline and deliver it. Oil has to be sucked out of the ground, sometimes from deep beneath an ocean, a desert, or ice. To get to the oil, the drills often have to bend and dig sideways through as much as five miles of earth. What they find then has to be delivered through long pipelines or shipped in monstrously expensive ships, then converted into three or more different formulas of gasoline and transported in trucks that cost more than $100,000 each. Then your local gas station must spend a fortune on safety devices to satisfy government regulators and make sure you don't blow yourself up. At nearly $2 a gallon (an average of 44 cents of which goes to taxes), gas isn't expensive — it's miraculously cheap!"
And Stossel doesn't even go into how ridiculously expensive gas is in the "social utopias" of Europe. With the taxes so high, a gallon of gas in Britain, France or Germany can be as high as US$4.00 per gallon.

I admit, psychologically it's tortuous to see gas prices creep over $2.00. And I have reason to bitch, seeing as CT has the most expensive gas in the U.S. because of State taxes - which they are talking about raising, BTW. But I remember when I was a teenager and gas was about $1.50 a gallon - that was more than 20 years ago.

Hey, want cheaper gas? One acronym is all you need to know: ANWR

Posted by: Gary at 04:06 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 769 words, total size 5 kb.

(Dirty) Harry ReidÂ’s Line in the SandÂ…

Patrick Hynes of Ankle-Biting Pundits has a good article in Tech Central Station today about his attempt to unify opposition among his Party against the current Social Security reform ideas - private savings accounts in particular:

"The trouble with Harry and his anti-reform allies is that they have popped the victory cork too soon. They are celebrating after the first 100 meters of a marathon. To run the risk of dangerously mixing my metaphors, the two sides' approaches to this debate are rather like the ways they view the markets, which, circularly, have shaped their divergent perspectives. Reid and company watch and react to the ups and downs of the debate on a day-to-day basis, judging their gains and losses in twenty-four hour cycles. President Bush, on the other hand, is looking to retire this issue well down the road, like say, this fall. So Bush is investing his political capital at what seems like a loss, but he's really dollar-cost averaging. Bush is gobbling up a bigger share of the issue, which will pay bigger returns in the long run.

It didn't have to be this way for Democrats in Washington. Sen. Reid himself once understood the power of markets to improve Americans' retirement security. He told Fox News Channel in 1999, "Most of us have no problem taking a small amount of the Social Security proceeds and putting it into the private sector."

His like number in the House, Nancy Pelosi saw the light, too. Of Sen. Pat Moynihan's Social Security reform bill in 1998, which included personal retirement accounts, she said, "because the economy is good, maybe the heat can be turned down and people can look at this issue objectively." At the time, she said personal retirement accounts had "some appeal." But we had a different president then, didn't we?

It seems all too obvious that based on their actions and their prior positions that this "line in the sand" represents nothing more than an attempt to derail Bush's chances at a political victory - which takes their eyes off what they should be focusing on - a workable solution to benefit the American people. But then, why should they start now?

Posted by: Gary at 02:24 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 380 words, total size 3 kb.

A Little Lunchtime Humor....

courtesy of Ace of Spades.

I never knew you could get so much laugh-out-loud material from one simple story:
"Man Accused of Cattle Fornication".

Enjoy!

Posted by: Gary at 11:45 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

Bush-Hating Loser "Loses it", almost kills woman and her kids...

Check this story out from Tampa FL - via the Drudge Report - about a whack-job who was so incensed by a Bush/Cheney bumper sticker that he succumbs to a fit of road rage.

Nathan Winkler, 31, was arrested overnight and charged with aggravated stalking for allegedly terrorizing a mother and her two children. According to police, Winkler pulled up alongside Michelle Fernandez as she was headed south on Armenia and began beeping his horn and flailing his arms, pointing at her. Fernandez, meanwhile, could not see Winkler's face because of a handmade sign in his window that read, "Never forget Bush's illegal oil war murdered thousands in Iraq."
The mother called 911.

Winkler apparently grew more agitated as they continued to drive along, allegedly trying to run Fernandez's car off the road several times over the next few miles. The 34-year-old grew increasingly concerned for herself and her two children in the car and called 911. Action News obtained recordings of those calls, in which the fear in her voice is evident.

"Look, he's trying to run me off the road," she is heard telling the 911 dispatcher. "Look at him. You [censored] idiot! Whatever, you moron! Get away from me." "I was blowing my horn at someone because I'm running stop signs and everything to get away from him," she added later.

Winkler persisted, pulling in front of her car so that she had to stop.
As he tried to run up to her car, she drove away and was headed to police district headquarters when she finally managed to lose Winkler. Cops caught up with Winkler at his home not long afterwards, where he reportedly blamed Fernandez for starting the altercation by making an obscene gesture. Back at home Wednesday morning, Winkler declined to answer the door. From inside, a female voice told Action News that the incident was simply a "misunderstanding" with another driver.
Misunderstanding? I suppose he only forced her off the road and ran over to her car to tell her he just saved a bunch of money switching his car insurance to GEICO.

Posted by: Gary at 08:49 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 367 words, total size 3 kb.

March 09, 2005

Getting Tired Of All The "Tributes" to Dan Rather in the MSM today?

Well, let The Weekly Standard serve you up a heaping helping of reality.

Learn a few things that you didn't know about Mr. Rather's early career, like:

"Eddie Barker, for one, remembers. The news director for CBS's radio and TV affiliates in Dallas at the time of President Kennedy's November 22, 1963, assassination, Barker is widely credited with first reporting on the air that the president was dead, having received word through a doctor acquaintance
directly from the hospital ER.

Rather, then based in Dallas as a reporter for CBS's national news broadcast and working out of Barker's newsroom, later took credit for the scoop, Barker says. The error is repeated in historical accounts often enough to annoy the now-retired Barker, though he says the falsehood was
later acknowledged by Rather."

And arising out of the same tragedy:

"As reporters from around the world descended on the Texas city, Rather went on the air with a local Methodist minister who made a stunning claim: Children at Dallas's University Park Elementary School had cheered when told of the president's death. The tale was perfect for the moment, reinforcing the notion among distant media elites that Dallas was a reactionary "City of Hate."...

...Except that it wasn't true, and Rather knew it, Barker says. Approached earlier by the same minister with what was a second-hand account, Barker himself had run the story by the school's principal and some teachers, all of whom denied it
outright. Because of the shooting, which took place at 12:30 p.m., the principal had decided to close the school early, though without telling the students why.

The children at the school--including three of Barker's own--were merely happy to be going home early, he was told. There couldn't have been any spontaneous cheering at the news of Kennedy's murder, because no such news had been announced.

Undaunted, the dogged minister--"a very, very strong liberal and a very, very strong Kennedy supporter," Barker says--moved on to Rather. "Rather came to me, and I said, 'My kids are in school there, and I checked it out, and there's not a darn thing to it,'" says Barker. "He said, 'Well, great--I'll just forget it.' But instead of forgetting it, he went out and did this gut job on Dallas and its conservatism," with the preacher's story at the center of his report."

The forty years that followed may very well have resulted in Rather having a bust in the broadcaster's hall of fame along side Edward R. Murrow, except for one tiny little story that he lost control over, turned out to be based on lies and he staunchly defended even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, to the point where he made himself and the "Tiffany Network" look ridiculous. And this will be his legacy.

Goodbye, Dan

Posted by: Gary at 10:37 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 495 words, total size 4 kb.

New Season of "South Park" starts tonight!

10pm - Comedy Central


Be a good "South Park Conservative" and watch the boys lampoon political correctness!

Posted by: Gary at 07:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 31 words, total size 1 kb.

An Ode To Spring...

Roses are Red,
Violets are Blue,
I swear to God if doesn't stop snowing,
I'm going to strangle someone...and soon.

My fingers are beginning to twitch...

Posted by: Gary at 04:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.

The Politics of ANWR...

Boortz hits the nail on the head about gas prices today.

"The problem here is not that the world's supply of oil is running short. The problem is that the supply is undependable. Every time Islamic goons blow up an oil pipeline in Iraq you see a spike in oil prices. Add the terrorism problem to the fact that we don't have enough refining capacity .. and you have expensive gas.

How many years has it been since an oil refinery was built in the United States? I think that it's been over 25 years. Can't you imagine that this is having some affect on getting gas to the pumps for your Summer driving? And then there's all those special blends. We have about 55 different blends for different parts of the country .. all demanded by the eco-whacko crowd. The refineries can't keep up."

Look folks, the price of gas - as with any commodity - is based on pure supply and demand. OPEC tightens the supply + people driving more = higher gas prices. When the supply is increased from other sources and people drive less - low and behold they go down. The fluctuations seem to take forever because crude oil needs to be refined. And once it's turned into home heating oil, jet fuel, diesel, gasoline or whatever it can't be "unrefined". It has to be used as it is. So we could have a surplus of diesel fuel, but a shortage of gasoline - which means now we have to refine more gasoline. Hello?!?


"Any plan to build a new refinery is immediately met by a tidal wave of opposition from so-called "environmental" groups. Ditto for any suggestion that we start retrieving the supplies of crude oil and natural gas from the Gulf shore of Florida and the Pacific coast. No can do, the environmentalists don't like it. Then, of course, there's ANWR. On its best days ANWR looks like a vacant urban lot. Most of the time it looks like an iced-over K-Mart parking lot. There's oil there, but we can't get to it. Again... blame the environmentalists."
Ah, yes. Supply is a biggie and the reason OPEC's power is less than it was, say, thirty years ago when they could actually cause a gas crisis is because oil is being drilled by Mexico and Norway and the UK and Russia and Canada and...well, you get idea. So we need to increase the supply ourselves. The best place to drill is the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) on the Northern Slope of Alaska.

But Gandalf, what about the poor Caribou? What about the local indigenous population? What about the pristine beauty of the land?

OK, first let me refer you to an excellent piece by Johah Goldberg in National Review from back in 2001. Goldberg actually went to this pestilential wasteland that is so hallowed among Eco-Nuts. And it sucks.

"[T]he drilling would be in ANWR, but it wouldn't be where the beauty shots are. It's like doing an on-location report on New York City's urban blight and crime, but broadcasting from a café in Rockefeller Center. The coastal plain is, in fact, a vast tract of peat bog and mud puddles (sounds like a crime fighting duo: "Tune in this fall to see Pete Bog and his fast-talking streetwise sidekick Mudd Puddles, tackle evildoers. Tuesdays at 9.").

The coastal plain is a breeding ground for all sorts of awful flying critters. There are trillions of mosquitoes. There are these creatures called warble flies and nosebots, two bumblebee-like flies that cause the caribou unrelenting grief. I could swear I even saw Alan Dershowitz whiz past my ear."

Now also we're talking about a piece of real estate that is roughly the size of South Carolina. And the amount of land that would actually need to be disturbed would be comparable to the size of Washington-Dulles airport. Why? Because of advance drilling technology. And the operation would barely leave a trace of its activity. As Goldberg explains:

"The oil industry has made huge strides in oil exploration in the last few decades. The oil under the coastal plain could literally be extracted during the dead of winter — when it's night for 58 straight days and no caribou would be dumb enough to come within 500 miles of the Arctic Ocean — and all that would be left come spring would be a couple of Portosan-sized boxes (which the caribou would probably climb onto to catch a better wind and avoid the bugs that breed in their nostrils — I am not kidding)."
Go read the whole thing because for every lame excuse the Greenies can come up with for not drilling, he squashes.

The Democrats in Congress are so beholden to groups like Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, the World Wildlife Fund, etc. that they play politics on the issue and block it at every opportunity? But aren't the Republicans trying to drill in ANWR because they are beholden to Big Oil? You can make that argument. But you can argue just as convincingly that they want to do it because it's in the interest of the country.

Posted by: Gary at 03:07 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 869 words, total size 5 kb.

Welcome!

Weekend Pundit readers. Red-State Americans in Blue-State Hell Unite!

Posted by: Gary at 12:30 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 11 words, total size 1 kb.

Mount St. Helen erupts!

Large plums of smoke belching out of the infamous volcano in WA yesterday.

I remember vividly the last time she blew: the morning of May 18, 1980. The reason I can recall is that it was my thirteenth birthday.

Now that I think about it, I very well may have erupted that morning as well.

Posted by: Gary at 08:59 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

March 08, 2005

2008 GOP Presidential Field...

During the last election cycle, one of my favorite spots for polls and political handicapping was Polipundit. One of the contributors, Alexander K. McClure (who apparently called the Senate gains of 4 to 5 seats prior to November) takes a little (very) early look at the potential candidates for '08.

My take:

The Gov's: Pawlenty (MN), Sanford (SC), Romney (MA), Pataki (NY) & Bush (FL).

  • I'm not familiar with Pawlenty or Sanford.
  • Romney is a dark horse - IMO.
  • Pataki? For the life of me I can't understand why this guy's name EVER comes up. He's, frankly, a disaster. I know from proximity.
  • Bush apparently is wary of the "dynasty" thing. I think the American people are as well. Best for him to wait, he's young.
The Senators: Frist (TN), Santorum (PA), Allen (VA), McCain (AZ), Hagel (NE) & Brownback (KS).
  • Frist would probably make a good candidate - conservative physician from the Mid-South - but he has yet to prove he has the cojones for a tough race.
  • Santorum is a big question mark. He represents a swing State and he'd be popular with the base, but what appeal does he have beyond that? We'll have to see if he makes a name for himself in the next couple of years.
  • George Allen strikes me as pretty likable, down-to-earth type of candidate - much like Bush was. I probably like him as much as any of the others, but again will he be buried in the stampede?
  • McCain, forget it. He pisses off the base to much. Plays it too cute with the media. I'm convinced he almost caught lightning in a bottle in 2000, but that opportunity is gone.
  • Chuck Hagel - this is guy who is so desperate to be President but doesn't understand why no one else thinks it's a good idea.
  • Brownback - probably the most conservative of the bunch. The right will love him but his appeal may be limited.
All in all Senators have the toughest time because a) they are on record for pretty much every issue you can think of and b) the temperment required to succeed in the Senate is often at odds with the one that gets you elected President.

The wildcards: Guiliani & Rice

  • Rudy is first in the hearts of the American people but when it comes down to brass taxes (whatever that means), I doubt he can get the nomination even though as a national candidate he would be formidable - especially against Hillary.
  • Condi - Ah, Condoleeza Rice. She's pretty much the dream candidate. The two big problems is that she is a very private person and may shrink in the spotlight and she may very well not want it anyway. Personally, I think she'd be a shoo-in, but there are also a lot of unanswered questions in the Domestic Issue arena - and the answers might very well chip away at her current luster. She may, however, be the leading candidate for Veep regardless of the top of the ticket.
So, in a nutshell I would put the top five for me (in order of enthusiasm):
5) Rudy Giuliani
4) Sam Brownback
3) Bill Frist
2) George Allen
and
1) Condi!

No seeing as two to three years is an eternity in politics, we have a long wait to see who's for sure going to throw their hat in the ring. After the 2006 elections, Bush may make a subtle nod to one or two.

Posted by: Gary at 09:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 586 words, total size 4 kb.

Bolt Upright...

Frank Gaffney really pumps up John Bolton, the U.N. Ambassador-to-be (who looks a little like Captain Kangaroo) in NRO today.

"[President Bush] recognizes that — if the U.N. is to survive and be useful — it is going to have to engage in not just cosmetic reform, but in a significant course correction. In order for the institution to deserve, let alone enjoy, the generous support of the American people, it must live up to its founding principles.

It was, in no small measure, toward this end that President Bush insisted on action by the United Nations in the face of Saddam HusseinÂ’s serial defiance of its Security Council resolutions. Subsequently, he has repeatedly challenged the organization to confront the dangers posed by regimes willing to engage in genocide and pursuing the destructive means to affect it."

Democrats may tread with caution in the face of public opinion which currently sees the U.N. as - at best - a glorified debating society and - at worst - an ineffective anti-American league of thugs, criminals and appeasers.

"It is noteworthy that, while John Kerry has denounced the Bolton appointment, some other Democratic senators like Minority Leader Harry Reid and Joseph Biden have so far been more measured. Even more interesting, however, has been the reaction of some of the U.N.Â’s most prominent champions. A spokesman for U.N. Secretary-General Annan is quoted as saying that Annan had "nothing against people who hold us accountable," and that the latter was "looking forward to working with Mr. Bolton."

I'll just bet he is.

Posted by: Gary at 08:28 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 262 words, total size 2 kb.

<< Page 112 of 120 >>
64kb generated in CPU 0.0178, elapsed 0.153 seconds.
110 queries taking 0.1408 seconds, 272 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.