“Clueless” home buyers

The weekend takeover of Fannie and Freddie by the feds has restarted a lot of talk about the mess in the housing market. On the conservative side, there’s not a lot of sympathy for the “foolish/clueless” buyers who “bought more house than they could afford” and “failed to be cautious” of things like adjustable rate mortgages. They should have “done their research,” and not “ignored the warnings in the disclosures.” (paraphrasing comments by one local radio talker)

I’ll buy that, to a degree. But as somebody who has spent the last three months as an on-the-sidelines witness to a couple of real estate closings, I want to say that it’s not that simple, at least for most home buyers.

more...

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 20:05:02 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1343 words, total size 12 kb.

Bad science reporting, and “disease of the day”

Here we go again:

According to a new study released by researchers at Rutgers University in New Jersey, a firm link has been found between very common moisturizers and the development of skin cancer.

Researchers were led by Dr. Allan Conney from Rutgers University, as they ran a test on mice to see what type of effect these moisturizers had on their bodies.

They tested four common types, Dermavan, Eucerin, Vanicream, and Dermabase. What they found was that all four were linked to the development of skin cancer tumors on the mice tested in the study.

A “firm link,” huh? Before panicing, let’s Google up a better explanation of how the study actually worked^[1]:

For the study, Conney's team exposed hairless mice to an extended period of UV radiation, which induced non-melanoma skin cancer. After stopping UV treatment, they applied four different common brands of skin moisturizers to the animals’ skin five days a week for 17 weeks.

The researchers found that mice treated with skin moisturizers showed an increased rate of tumor formation. In addition, there were more tumors on the animals treated with moisturizers than on the mice that were only given UV radiation.

So it appears (to this layman) that, based on this study’s findings, we can conclude:

• If you already have skin cancer (or, perhaps, pre-cancerous UV-induced skin damage),
• some of the ingredients in moisturizers promote tumor growth, or accelerate tumor development,
  
• provided you’re a hairless mouse.

So far, that’s it. But it was instructive to look at how this (very preliminary) study has been covered in the press. For my findings, read on...

more...

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 21:36:29 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1248 words, total size 14 kb.

Why John McCain is “stupid”

Daniel Henninger gropes for an explanation:

On Sunday, [John McCain] said on national television that to solve Social Security “everything’s on the table,” which of course means raising payroll taxes. On July 7 in Denver he said: “Senator Obama will raise your taxes. I won’t.”

This isn't a flip-flop. It's a sex-change operation...

The one thing -- arguably the only thing -- the McCain candidacy has going for it is a sense among voters that they don't know what Barack Obama stands for or believes. Why then would Mr. McCain give voters reason to wonder the same thing about himself?

Henninger is amazed that McCain called Nancy Pelosi (who “heads a House with a 9% approval”) an “inspiration to millions of Americans.” And, says Henninger, “Sen. McCain saying off-handedly that it [Al Gore’s “preposterous free-of-oil-in-10-years whopper”] is ‘doable’ is, in a word, thoughtless.”^[1]

How could anyone with the least amount of political sense allow himself to make such “loopy” unforced errors?  Henninger says it’s because of McCain’s “famously undisciplined” political style, and the Senatorial culture of “compulsive compromise.”  Maybe so, but I believe it goes deeper.

Put someone in an unstructured situation, and the real person is revealed. Anyone who has interviewed job candidates knows that it’s the off-the-wall, out-of-nowhere question that drags the candidate out from behind his resumé.  And trial lawyers know that the truth comes out once you get the witness off balance.  What of McCain?  Are his gaffes just gaffes, or do they reveal something more?

Get Obama off his talking points, and he’s an empty suit who says things that would have embarrassed Dan Quayle.^[2]  There’s no “there” there.

But when McCain gets away from his prepared script, he reveals a man who I really don’t like very much.  He exhibits all the faults of our entrenched political class: He doesn’t respect average citizens, having no problem stealing their money in the name of the greater good, or their liberties in the name of political expediency.  He doesn’t trust their judgment: He says he “learned a lesson” from citizen opposion to immigration amnesty, while repeatedly signalling that he hasn’t really changed his mind.^[3]

The people he does trust are– other politicians!  Could anyone outside of the beltway call Nancy Pelosi as an “inspiration” while keeping a straight face?  Would anyone (except an entrenched U.S. Senator) want to share billing with the odious Ted Kennedy?

And McCain sees his role as ruler, not as representative. Which explains a lot of his record: Everything from McCain-Feingold to the Gang of 14 is informed by an underlying “John McCain knows better than you.”

Henninger says that if McCain wants to win he must get serious about monitoring himself and run a more disciplined (more Machiavellian, if you will) campaign:  Specifically, he must weigh his words, concentrate on consistency, and, most of all, stop creating obvious openings for the Democrats to beat him over the head.

But suppose McCain is already doing this?  Suppose that his whole campaign so far has been a tight-lipped effort to stop the real McCain from getting out?  Then what?

In any election we can expect a certain amount of pandering and evasiveness.  But “tailoring your message to suit your audience” is still different from “saying whatever it takes to get elected.”  The difference comes when the candidate has principles (beyond “I should be in charge because I’m better than everyone else”) and is not trying to fool the public about what they are.

We should have taken warning back a year ago, when a large part of the debate on the Republican side was over whether we could actually believe what the candidates were saying.  Quoting Henninger: “...the American people... believe most senators, adept at compulsive compromise, have no political compass and will sell them out.”  In McCain’s case, the “American people” are right.


This morning Glenn Reynolds linked a Roger Kimball essay “Can Britain Survive multiculturalism?” with the comment

British multiculturalism is symptomatic of a governing class that doesn't really believe in the nation it governs.

Seems to me we’re seeing the same thing here, with a  political class that views the process as corrupt, the government as semi-legitimate, and the electorate as a body to be bullied, bribed, or bamboozled into giving them power.

Related:

-------

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 18:58:46 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 912 words, total size 10 kb.

D’ya remember those Republicans...?

...the ones who

...threatened to block nearly all other bills pending before the August recess if Democrats refuse to vote with them on expanding offshore drilling.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said bills that do not pertain to energy can wait until after the August recess, with gas prices now surpassing $4 per gallon. McConnell and top Republicans indicated Wednesday they would oppose any procedural votes to take up other legislation, which require 60 votes to succeed. - The Hill

...?

Well, THAT lasted a whole two days:

Congress approved mortgage relief for 400,000 struggling homeowners the Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac bailout bill Saturday as part of an election-year housing plan... - AP Report at Yahoo.com [“correction” mine - O.G.]

The Wall Street Journal thinks it has an explanation:

PAC campaign contributions of over $800,000 to date, including:

• House Speaker Nancy Pelosi - $10,000
• Republican House whip Roy Blunt - $10,000
• House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer - $8,500
• House Minority Leader John Boehner - $7,500
• Nearly half of [all] Senators... [with] almost all of the money... directed to incumbents.

The best government money can buy.  Bought with our money.


Previously:  No Expectations

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 16:45:22 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 191 words, total size 3 kb.

Taking your liberties, one step at a time

Now it’s California.  (No surprise there, and it took only eight days.)

At this rate, by the time “thuh CHILL-DRUN” are grown up, there won’t be any freedom left for them.

Previously.

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 16:07:31 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 40 words, total size 1 kb.

Net neutrality again- another abuse, is it *finally* time?

Here we go again! Somebody called Nebu-Ad, with the connivance of some ISPs, has been caught modifying web pages:

“There was an extra 133 bytes of JavaScript code being added to web pages being sent...”

That bit of JavaScript code... instructed the browser to load additional script from the domain a.faireagle.com. (FairEagle is a subsidiary of NebuAd...)

...while forging network packets from third-party sites...

“...even though it wasn't coming from Google, it was identified as being from www.google.com.”

I’m sure all you hackers out there immediately understood the humorous possibilities of hijacking the Nebu-Ad system. Start by using it to inject evil child pr0n onto random web pages, then stand back and watch the fun while the affected site owners (think NewYorkTimes.com, or Whitehouse.gov) try to explain all those embarrassing screen captures to the FBI. If that’s too noisy for you, there’s minor amusement to be had in touching off an IRS investigation of some innocent not-for-profit organization by loading its web pages with a bunch of commercial advertising. And just imagine creating some “extra” web ads for your “favorite” candidate, then tipping off the FEC. Why, the possibilities are endless!

Fun is fun, but enough is enough.  We already know that about 1 percent of web pages are being changed in transit.  There’s already a scandal underway in the U.K. revolving around secret tests (conducted by BT Internet) of a Nebu-Ad-like system that substituted ads while it silently tracked user behaviour.  Before that, Comcast got caught traffic-shaping-by-forging-reset-packets.  And then there are Verizon Communications’ senior vice president and deputy general counsel John Thorne and AT&T’s CEO Ed Whitacre, both of whom have been making “Nice packets ya got there... too bad if something might happen to them” noises in the direction of Google and Yahoo!^[1]  What’s become obvious is that ISPs can no longer be trusted to simply “deliver the bits.”

Aside from the problem of responsibility– how can a site owner be liable for something on a web page when what the viewer sees is different from what the server sent out?– and the possibility of massive copyright violation– does a modified page consititute a “derivative work”?– there’s also the likelihood of massive breakdown of the web’s advertising model. If ISPs substitute or inject ads willy-nilly, how can a site owner know that his ads are being seen?

The issue of advertising– who gets paid– may not be as vital to the web purists as the others, but because it involves massive amounts of money it will most likely determine the direction of any solution.  Site owners, not interlopers, need the proceeds of any clicks on their pages.  Advertisers require reliable site traffic stats when making their buys.  Both fail when ads are silently replaced somewhere downstream.  And nobody wants to be blamed for something they didn’t have anything to do with.

Look for the pressure to come from the advertisers.  Says Google spokesman Michael Kirkland, “We’re obviously aware of this issue and are looking into it.” Here’s hoping they decide to stop looking and start spreading some money in the direction of the boodlers in Congress and the FCC.

Meanwhile, we can all help things along by adding adjuggler.nebuad.com and a.faireagle.com to our HOSTS files.

Elsewhere:


-------

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 04:53:31 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 583 words, total size 7 kb.

Democrat AG, ISPs, team up to block 99% of usenet

So Sprint, Time Warner, and Verizon made a deal with New York Attorney General (Democrat) Andrew Cuomo to “block websites and newsgroups containing child pornography” (and pay $1.125 million extortion) in exchange for Cuomo making his agency’s trumped-up charges^[1] of “fraud and deceptive business practices” go away.

Aside from getting out from Cuomo’s harassment and the “it’s for the CHILL-DRUN” photo-op, what’s in it for the ISPs?  This:

Verizon Communications confirmed on Thursday that it will stop offering its customers access to tens of thousands of Usenet discussion areas, including the alt.* groups that have been a free-flowing area for discussions for over two decades.
...
What this means in practice is that, thanks to the New York state attorney general, Verizon customers will lose out on innocent discussions.  Verizon is retaining only eight newsgroup hierarchies, even though over 1,000 hierarchies exist. [link in original - o.g.]

Usenet (“net news”) is a service that most of the big ISPs have been eager to dump for a long time.  Despite being unknown to (and unused by) most customers, net news (unlike the “world wide web”) requires the individual ISP to maintain server capacity and some level of administration for it.  The Cuomo agreement gives the ISPs cover for getting rid of something they have long viewed as an expensive nuisance, all in the name of combatting child p0rn.

And because it involves nation-wide companies, the agreement has nation-wide implications:  Effectively, a combination of New York State politicians, QUANGOs^[2], and the big providers will determine what part of the internet the rest of the country can access.

Oh, and how much child pr0n are they talking about?  About 11,000 images on 88 (out of 100,000+) groups.

And how many groups are getting censored?  Roughly 99% of them.

And Democrats are champions of freedom?

I’m so glad to see my liberties are in such responsible hands.



---------

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 16:12:14 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 453 words, total size 5 kb.

Transportation “security:” fire them all

We’re now told that the Transportation Security Administration’s “no-fly” list has been doing a good job catching Federal Air Marshals– for years:

Federal Air Marshals (FAMs) familiar with the situation say the mix-ups, in which marshals are mistaken for terrorism suspects who share the same names, have gone on for years — just as they have for thousands of members of the traveling public.
...
“In some cases, planes have departed without any coverage because the airline employees were adamant they would not fly...”

Incompetence exemplified.  And I don’t blame the airline employees:  They are, after all, following the regulations.

Buried further down in the article is this little gem:

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said this week that one major air carrier reports roughly 9,000 false positive hits on the watch list every day.

And this has been going on for how many years?  Oh yes, Homeland Security’s “Terrorist Screening Center^[1]” says it’s finally getting ready to deal with the estimated

...500,000 names on its watch list that are frequently matched during airport screenings and other law-enforcement encounters with the general public, and remove those names that don't belong to actual suspects.

Incredible.  500,000 names– that’s half a million, folks!  And 9,000 false hits â€“ from one airline â€“ every day.  Wotthehel has DHS/TSA been doing that they’re only now getting around to removing names that “don’t belong to actual suspects?”

If Chertoff had any self-respect, he’d fire every subordinate he has authority over, call for abolition of his agency, and then resign.  It’s long past time that this production of Homeland Security Theatre got the hook.


Via: Instapundit

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 16:12:00 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 307 words, total size 4 kb.

Michael Hirsch reads NYT story about “American Idol,” gets the vapors, thinks the North should secede

What passes for sense at Newsweek Online:

In the summer of 1863, Robert E. Lee led an ill-advised incursion into Pennsylvania. His army was defeated at Gettysburg, and thence afterward Lee beat a fighting retreat until the South lost the Civil War. One hundred and forty-five years later, the South--or what has become the South-Southwest--has won another kind of Civil War.

“Hey boys, did you save your Confederate money like I told-ja? ’Cause it looks like the South’s finally gonna rise! Yee-haw!”

It has transformed the sensibility of the country. It is setting the agenda for our political, social and religious mores--in Pennsylvania and everywhere else.

...which is why this year’s Presidential choices are two leftys and a RINO, right? Oh well, for the sake of argument, continue...

This thought, which has been recurring to me regularly over the years as I've watched the Southernization of our national politics at the hands of

(cue scary music...)

the GOP and its evangelical base,

(Okay, what would you expect him to say, “transnational progressives and Gramscian socialists?” Come on, it’s Newsweek!)

surfaced again when I read a New York Times story

Well, there’s your problem...

today. The article was about an “American Idol” contestant--apparently quite talented--who was eliminated after she sang the title song from “Jesus Christ Superstar.”

Dear Michael, “After” != “because,” although the Times might like you to confuse them.

When it debuted 38 years ago, the rock opera was considered controversial for its rather arch portrayal of a doubt-wracked, very human Jesus, but the music was so good and the lyrics so clever that it quickly became a huge hit. In the delicate balance of forces that have always defined American tastes--nativism and yahooism

...and bitterness. Don't forget bitterness!

versus eagerness for the new and openness to innovation--art, or at least high craft, it seemed, had triumphed. But our national common denominator of taste is so altered today that the blasphemous dimension of “Jesus Christ Superstar” now trumps the artistic part.

...at least, for readers of the New York Times. See above.

And somehow, no one is surprised. Our reaction

Whaddaya mean, “Our?” You got a mouse in your typewriter?

is more like, “Why would she risk singing a song like that?”

In part this is a triumph of demographics. As John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge observed in their 2004 book, “The Right Nation: Conservative Power in America,” the nation's population center has been “moving south and west at a rate of three feet an hour, five miles a year.”

...in what’s been, so far, a futile attempt to get away from all those damyankees

Another author, Anatol Lieven, in his 2005 book “America Right or Wrong: An Anatomy of American Nationalism,” describes how the “radical nationalism”

as opposed to non-radical, EU-style nationalism?  Or maybe peaceful, cooperative Iranian nationalism?

that has so dominated the nation's discourse since 9/11

except for Newsweek, National Public Radio, The New York Times, the alphabet networks, MSNBC, the Democrat party, etc., etc...

traces its origins to the demographic makeup and mores of the South and much of the West and Southern Midwest--in other words, what we know today as Red State America. This region was heavily settled by Scots-Irish immigrants--the same ethnic mix King James I sent to Northern Ireland to clear out the native Celtic Catholics. After succeeding at that,

“Succeeding?” Guess that’s why all those former-IRA people are now part of the British government.

they then settled the American Frontier, suffering Indian raids and fighting for their lives every step of the way.

...and did a great job of it, too. Now we’ve got the country, while the Indians run the casinos and are exempt from federal taxes. Win/win!

And the Southern frontiersmen never got over their hatred of the East Coast elites

...or their liking of bagpipe music. Horrible, just horrible...

...and a belief in the morality and nobility of defying them.

And it’s fun, too.

Their champion was the Indian-fighter Andrew Jackson. The outcome was that a substantial portion of the new nation developed, over many generations, a rather savage, unsophisticated set of mores.

“A man’s word is his bond.” “Never start a fight, but if you find yourself in one, fight to win.” Stuff like that...

Traditionally, it has been balanced by a more diplomatic, communitarian Yankee sensibility from the Northeast and upper Midwest. But that latter sensibility has been losing ground in population numbers--and cultural weight.

“’bout time, too... by crackee!”

The coarsened sensibility that this now-dominant Southernism and frontierism has brought to our national dialogue is unmistakable.

to readers of The New York Times. See above.

We must endure “lapel-pin politics” that elevates the shallowest sort of faux jingoism

as opposed to... real jingoism? Wotthehel is that supposed to mean?

over who’s got a better plan for Iraq and Afghanistan. We have re-imported creationism into our political dialogue (in the form of “intelligent design”).

...which is so uncontroversial

Hillary Clinton panders shamelessly to Roman Catholics,

When she’s not pandering shamlessly to anybody else who might vote for her. (It’s called “running for office.”)

who have allied with

(Cue more scary music)

Southern Protestant evangelicals

Aieeee!

on questions of morality, with anti-abortionism serving as the main bridge.

because it's such a... um... settled issue

Barack Obama seems to be so leery of being identified as an urban Northern liberal

I can’t imagine why. Look at all that the urban northern Liberals have given us.

that he's running away from the most obvious explanation of his association with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and former Weatherman Bill Ayers: after Obama graduated from college he became an inner-city organizer in Chicago, and they were natural allies for someone in a situation like that.

Yep. Wouldn’t want to draw any conclusions. “Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas,” another of those “unsophisticated mores,” I guess.

We routinely demonize organizations like the United Nations

deservedly. See Bolton.

that we desperately need

Whaddaya mean... oh, forget it.

and which are critical to missions like nation-building in Afghanistan.

Because they’ve done so well in Africa, Bosnia, and Palestine.

On foreign policy, the realism and internationalism of the Eastern elitist tradition

“Sure, we can make a deal with North Korea. No problem!”

once kept the Southern-frontier warrior culture and Wilsonian messianism

Hey, “He kept us out of war!” Also, he was a Democrat. Just watch it!

in check. Now the latter two, in toxic combination, have taken over our national dialogue, and the Easterners are running for the hills.

Attention all Easterners: Hills ----> thataway.

In Texas in particular, Lieven

a Brit who hangs out around east coast.think tanks, and is therefore qualified to expound on all things Texan

writes, we can see “the mingling of the Southern and Western traditions” that made its first appearance during Jackson's presidency, and which today so defines our current politics, culture, and foreign policy.

...except for the Presidential candidates, most of Congress, Hollywood, and the State Department

Indeed, George W. Bush himself may embody this national trend best.

Warning: Preposterousity Zone Ahead!

In Bush there seems little trace left of the Eastern WASP sensibility into which he was born and educated, and which explains so much of his father's far more moderate presidency. The younger Bush went to Andover, Yale and Harvard, but he rebelled against the ethos he learned there. The transformation is complete, right down to the Texas accent that no one else in his family seems to have. Bush is a Jacksonian pod person.

!!!

None of this is quite as simple as the triumph of the South, of course. “I’m suspicious of that argument,” says Gaines M. Foster of Louisiana State University, author of “Ghosts of the Confederacy: Defeat, the Lost Cause, and the Emergence of the New South, 1865-1913.” “The Civil War was essentially about preserving slavery and acquiring independence. And the South lost both of those things. And gave them up.” Beyond that, the Old South is gone with the wind in other ways, having suffered a hybridization from Northern and Midwestern influences. “At least one of four people in the South were not born here.

Yep, runnin’ from those damyankees

Even ‘Southern’ is now a fuzzy term,” Foster told me. And as Mike Huckabee demonstrated when he failed to spread his appeal beyond his Southern base, there is such a thing as too Southern.

...as opposed to Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Oh wait, you mean Southern and Republican...

Polls show that at least as many Americans think Barack Obama shares their values as John McCain.

IMHO, not good news for either candidate.

Still, something deep and basic has changed in our country. After watching the recent, excellent (despite some historical inaccuracies) series “John Adams” on HBO, I dipped back into the Adams-Jefferson letters. Two things occurred to me: one, party politics was just as vicious back then, in its earliest days, as it is today. Nothing new there. What does seem foreign to us today is the dedication to free thought and, even more, free moral choice that so dominated the correspondence between those two great minds.

Why, look at the American university:  No “free thought” there. (At least, not if you want to graduate. Whoops!)

When Jefferson, in his letter of May 5, 1817, condemned the “den of the priesthood” and “protestant popedom”

Hey, wait a minute. Are the Catholics supposed to be good guys, or not? I’m confused!

represented by Massachusetts’ state-supported church, he was speaking for both of them--the North and South poles of the revolution. Yet John McCain, even with the GOP nomination in hand, would never dare repeat his brave but politically foolhardy condemnation of the religious right in 2000 as “agents of intolerance.” Why? Because we have become an intolerant nation, and that's what gets you elected.

Or maybe it’s just that he’s pissed off so many people that he needs every vote he has left.

Another expert on the mores of the South, author Michael Lind,

...who also hangs out at an east coast think tank.

notes this change is also attributable to the rise of the mass media and the eclipsing of the patrician culture that produced both Adams and Jefferson. “Both the New England Yankee and the old Southern colonel are gone,” he says. “It’s a battle between folk cultures, and it seems the Jacksonian is the more dominant.” It's not a clear-cut victory, but the South has won the day.

Hey Mike, if you want to hook up with Quebec...

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 18:47:14 GMT | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1688 words, total size 16 kb.

McCain sets himself up the bomb

Kimberley Strassel:

...McCain-Feingold’s biggest “accomplishment” these past five years has been the flowering of those shadowy operations known as 527s, which abide by no rules. Democrats have fine-tuned these outfits, and are gearing up to unload hundreds of millions in negative advertising on none other than Mr. McCain...

In light of all this, the McCain camp has come up with a plan that it hopes will tighten the score. It has filed to create the “McCain Victory ’08” fund, a “hybrid legal structure” that includes the campaign, the Republican National Committee, and [committees in?] four battleground states.

Mr. McCain’s own law restricts individuals to donations of $2,300 per candidate, but those individuals can also contribute much bigger amounts to different party funds. So, with “McCain Victory ’08,” donors can write a check for $70,000.

Technically, the money is divided up between Mr. McCain, the RNC ($28,500) and the four states ($10,000 each). In reality, it will in effect all be used for the candidate’s benefit.

Strassel laments that McCain wouldn’t be faced with the prospect of weaseling around his own law if he “had fought instead for simple transparency– and trusted Americans to decide how much to give and to whom.”

But that’s water under the bridge.  Thanks to Congress, George Bush, and the Supreme Court, the law is the law, and the McCain campaign is attempting to get around the law’s $2,300 limit by gaming the system. Should ordinary folks try tricks like this, the government is quick to register its disapproval; as Bill Quick pointed out (in another context):

...Law enforcement views attempts to game the system as evidence of a crime if not a crime in itself. (Search the first link for “structure,” as in structured deposit or structured transaction. Search the second link for the Structured Transactions section, about 40% of the way down.)

If Mr. McCain doesn’t possess the integrity to instruct his supporters to abide by the spirit of his own law, maybe this finagling should be referred for prosecution.

(Hah.  Not likely!)

But what is likely is that the MSM and all of those evil Democrat 527s will be all over this, come next fall.  

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 16:03:04 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 362 words, total size 4 kb.