Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

A SHAMELESS PLUG

It's December, and people start thinking about gifts.  Have you considered that a subscription to Urgent Agenda makes a fine gift for a person of like mind?  And, for people who disagree, it makes the kind of great punishment you've always wanted to mete out.  You win either way.

If you're a current subscriber, a gift subscription is only $21 for a year.  Just e-mail us the name and e-mail of the recipient, enter your gift by making a DONATION of $21 in the column on the right, and you're home.

If you're not a current subscriber, shame on you.  Redemption occurs when you enter a subscription in the column on the right, or enter a subscription with a gift subscription for someone else.

Subscriptions keep us going, and give you the Urgent Agenda you've come to expect.  Gift subscriptions spread the word and help us grow.   All subscribers and donators receive the Angel's Corner. 

By the way, we use PayPal for our subscription service.  If you don't like PayPal, or believe they're a threat to the Republic, just tell us and we'll give you a traditional, red-blooded American mail address

DECEMBER 8,  2010

OPTIMISM ON TAX COMPROMISE – AT 9:39 P.M. ET:  Despite deep angst among liberal Dems that their souls have been violated, predictions are positive that the tax compromise agreed to by Republicans and President Obama will make it through Congress.   From The Politico:

A wave of new Democratic support Wednesday signaled that President Barack Obama’s deal to renew the Bush tax cuts would make it through Congress, as long as most Republicans lined up behind it as expected.

With Democrats in both chambers still angry about parts of the package, the administration scrambled to allay concerns and build momentum for the unusual deal with congressional Republicans reached this week. By the end of the day, the measure looked increasingly likely to pass, as Democrats stepped forward one by one to back it.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced that he hopes to begin consideration of the bill as early as Thursday — a sign that the measure will receive a filibuster-proof majority.

And in the House, high-decibel liberal complaints were countered by a silent minority of Blue Dogs, New Democrats and even a handful of veteran liberals who said outright that they would vote for the bill or hinted strongly in private that they were leaning in that direction.

The one trump card for liberals is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who could follow the will of the majority of her caucus and keep the bill off the floor. There was no sign Wednesday that she would use that authority, and lawmakers and aides said that this reality was beginning to set in with the caucus and that anger was turning to acceptance in some corners.

COMMENT:  Now we await liberal Democratic acceptance of the results of the 2000 election. 

And it is true that a majority of the liberal caucus wants to keep the tax bill from ever coming to the floor.  But they must surely understand that such a move would occur only after a storming of the parliament buildings by the proletariat, the Leninist factions, and the Modern Languages Association.

December 8, 2010      Permalink

MORE RESULTS FROM THE MADNESS PATROL – AT 9:06 P.M. ET:  Remember the days when Sergeant York was a hero?  John McCain?  The astronauts?  The Marines at Iwo Jima?

Well, I guess definitions of words are a bit different out in lala land.  From The Washington Examiner:

America's nuttiest city is at it again:

The Berkeley City Council will consider a resolution that would declare the Army private suspected of leaking classified information to WikiLeaks a hero and call for his release.

The council plans a vote Tuesday on the resolution in support of Pfc. Bradley Manning, who is being held in a military brig in Virginia. A city commission already has approved it.

Bob Meola, who authored the resolution, tells the San Francisco Chronicle that Manning is a patriot who deserves a medal.

COMMENT:  A medal?  A MEDAL?  Now, just what would this medal be?  What would the citation say?  "For conspicuous treachery in the face of a computer"?

Who would award the medal?  I know.  The publisher of The New York Times would award it "on behalf of a grateful nation."  The nation, of course, would be Iran, or maybe North Korea. 

And I could easily see the statue of Manning in Berkeley's Red Square, or Town Square, or whatever they call it.  This American hero, with laptop, grinning.  Berkeley citizens can come by and give marijuana offerings.

Yuch.

December 8, 2010      Permalink

BULLETIN:  THE FATE OF THE NATION IS INVOLVED – AT 9:27 A.M. ET:  This just in, from The Politico:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is trying to use the tax cut package President Barack Obama brokered with Republicans to legalize online poker, POLITICO has learned — a move that could further complicate the deal Obama announced Monday.

Already, the online poker proposal has exposed the Nevada Democrat to charges of flip-flopping on a controversial issue, as well as using his Senate leadership position to repay big casino interests that helped him win reelection in a hard-fought campaign against Republican Sharron Angle last month.

What?  Reward the casinos?  Why, I never heard...

Reid, who has previously opposed online gambling, declined to comment Monday through a spokesman.

But Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), as well as several senior congressional sources and gambling lobbyists, confirmed that Reid and his staff have reached out to other Senate offices to try to build support for adding the online poker legislation — a draft of which POLITICO has obtained — to a measure extending the Bush-era tax cuts.

"They're trying," said Hatch, who next year will become ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over parts of the gambling measure. "Sen. Reid would like to do that."

COMMENT:  It is moving to see our esteemed leaders involved in grave matters of state.  Online poker is desperately needed to save the national soul.  Without it, what are we?  What do we have?  Baseball?  The Super Bowl?  The NBA?

It is obvious that a real national need has been identified by the senator from Las Vegas.

I've never played poker.  Is it fun?

December 8, 2010        Permalink

GOOD FOR THE PARENTS! – AT 9:07 A.M. ET:  I want to call your attention to a well reported story in The New York Times about a parents' revolt in Compton, California, a predominantly African-American community.

COMPTON, Calif. — By Marlene Romero’s count, her son has had just one effective teacher in his five years at McKinley Elementary School here. Most of the time, she said, he has merely shuffled through classrooms, struggling in math without ever getting extra help.

So when an organizer came knocking at her door promising that if she signed a petition, her son’s school could radically improve, Ms. Romero immediately pledged her support.

Now, she is one of more than 250 parents in Compton who are using a new state law to force the failing school to be taken over by a charter school operator, the first such move in the country.

Voicing enormous frustration with the existing school, the parents handed over the petition on Tuesday to district officials. “We are completely fed up,” Ms. Romero said. “We’ve been told to wait every year and nothing changes.”

When Ms. Romero attended Compton schools in the 1990s, she said, nobody seemed to notice or care when she skipped school for days at a time. She dropped out at the age of 16. “I want my children to be able to have what I didn’t,” she said.

For the last several months, Ms. Romero has helped gather petitions for the school takeover, which is expected to face legal challenges from the school board and teachers’ union, which strongly opposed the new law.

The usual suspects are on the other side:

Under the law, if 51 percent of parents at a school sign a petition, it “triggers” one of four actions, including takeover by a charter school. In this case, 61 percent of the parents signed the petition. When the State Legislature approved the measure in January, union officials referred to it as a “lynch mob provision.”

The move in Compton will likely be watched by educators and political leaders all over the country, as many advocates try to exert more pressure on teachers’ unions. Education Secretary Arne Duncan is supporting the effort and Rahm Emanuel has promised to introduce similar regulations in Chicago if he wins his bid for mayor there.

COMMENT:  There is a sign outside most American schools.  It says "public school" or something like it.  Tax-supported schools are owned by the public, not by "educators" or unions, or school boards, or anyone else.

It is inspiring to see what Ms. Romero and her fellow citizens are doing.  Many of our schools must be taken back from the "professionals" and local patronage-seeking politicians who have run them into the ground.

Obviously, this has to be done with some care.  Too often we see that "reform" groups are as bad as those they seek to replace.  But the California law is a good one, and allows parents to stir the pot. 

As the story reports, the Compton case is the first in the nation.  We'll follow it, and expect that other communities will see similar action.

And, by the way, do you know what your kids are being taught in school?  It's not a bad idea to leaf through their books.  You may get a jolt.

December 8, 2010       Permalink

THE GUN IS STARTING TO SMOKE – AT 8:52 A.M. ET:  The Scotsman, obviously published in Scotland, is a spirited newspaper that often breaks major stories, or at least identifies them.  It has picked up the story of an Iranian defector who confirms what we have suspected for years:

A FORMER Iranian diplomat who defected to the West this year has described how he saw North Korean technicians repeatedly travel to Iran, which western officials fear is trying to develop nuclear weapons.

Mohammad Reza Heydari, who resigned in January as the Iranian consul in Norway, said he was "certain" the co-operation was continuing between his country and North Korea.

His comments, at a Paris think-tank conference, come amid rising international concerns that North Korea, which has already staged atomic tests, is helping Iran with its nuclear programme.

Mr Heydari said that from 2002 to 2007, when he headed the Iranian foreign ministry's office with responsibility for airports, he saw many technicians from North Korea travel to Iran.

"I witnessed repeated round-trips of North Korean specialists and technicians - given that I was right there at the border - who came to collaborate on the Iranian nuclear programme," he said through a translator.

COMMENT:  And yet, nothing really has been done.  We continue to "engage" with North Korea, year after year, as that rogue nation develops nuclear weapons and shares technology with delights such as Iran. 

Nuclear proliferation is the single greatest problem facing civilization in the foreseeable future.  We can handle just about everything else.  But two nuclear weapons set off in, say, New York and Washington, would kill a ghastly number of Americans and probably wreck the American economy, as well as cutting off the head of the U.S. government.

Nuclear weapons do exactly what they're designed to do.  They do not require careful aim.  And nonsense about "crude nuclear devices" is simply an illusion.  A "crude" device explodes with the same force as a sophisticated one. 

We always look at defector reports with some skepticism.  Defectors often tell us what they think we want to hear, the better to get an enhanced deal.  But this defector is confirming what others have reported, and his report appears genuine and well documented.

We have gotten nowhere with Iran.  New "talks" are scheduled with Tehran for January.  They will also get nowhere.

Condi Rice, as secretary of state, was ridiculed for warning of a "mushroom cloud over Atlanta."  She was right.  Those who laughed were wrong.

December 8, 2010      Permalink

NOT EXACTLY CHURCHILLIAN – AT 8:35 A.M. ET:  The ethical question arises:  Should we use material from WikiLeaks, knowing that it has been illegally obtained, and that some of it is damaging to the United States?

The answer, it seems to me, is that material should be used, on a very limited and careful basis, if it helps to illuminate a situation, and perhaps prevent a further tragedy.  But we are looking at the revelations on a case by case basis, while still deeply opposing what WikiLeaks did, and urging prosecution of those involved.

The legal expression is "fruit of the poisonous tree."  Evidence presented in an American legal case is often thrown out if it was illegally obtained, if it was the "fruit of the poisonous tree."  Many judicial scholars, including the late Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo, were skeptical of the concept, wondering why justice should be denied, say, the victim of a crime, because the constable made a mistake. 

WikiLeaks is the poisonous tree.  But there may be circumstances where exposing the poison may do some good.  One such case arises this morning, as reported by Fox News:

The British government feared a furious Libyan reaction if the convicted Lockerbie bomber wasn't set free and expressed relief when they learned that he would be released on compassionate grounds, leaked U.S. diplomatic cables show.

A cache of cables from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli describes the run-up to the decision to free Abdel Baset Ali al-Megrahi, a former Libyan agent whose freedom on Aug. 20, 2009, sparked jubilation in Libya but roiled relations between London and Washington.

Critics of the decision on both sides of the Atlantic have alleged that British officials were motivated by commercial interests -- including those of energy company BP PLC -- when they moved to free al-Megrahi, the only man convicted in the 1988 attack on Pan Am Flight 103.

While officials here have always stressed that the 58-year-old al-Megrahi was released because he suffers from terminal prostate cancer, the cables show the Brits were keenly aware that they faced a hugely damaging backlash if they didn't do as the Libyans wanted.

COMMENT:  I can't imagine Churchill just caving like that.  The revelations are frightening for they expose the chronic tendency of some in the UK and Europe to think like diplomats of the 1930s, making one more concession just to get by. 

We recently learned, again from these leaked cables, that Washington is having a terrible time getting Mideast countries to stop funding terrorists.  Again, the terrorists practice terror – no doubt threatening governments if they don't write the checks, or look the other way while others write them.

Our struggle against terror is fragile, and will go on for decades.  We fought a Cold War for decades, and came out victorious.  This struggle, against an extremist enemy, may be more difficult, especially as terror groups begin to acquire weapons of mass destruction.

Actions like releasing the Lockerbie bomber only give aid and comfort to our enemies.

December 8, 2010     Permalink

DECEMBER 7,  2010

HEY, COLLEGE KIDS, GET YOUR SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PACKETS! – AT 10:11 P.M. ET:  You aren't going to believe this.  From the Daily Caller:

Many American colleges and universities are steering their students toward a new source of “financial aid”: food stamps.

In Oregon, for instance, both Portland State and Pacific University encourage their students to apply for food stamps. “Many students are surprised to learn that they may be eligible for Food Stamps,” explains Portland State’s website.

This may be a little surprising given that food stamps were created to help struggling poor people, not heavily-subsidized and frequently-idle college kids. But have no fear, assures Portland State: “Being a college student is hard work! Not just academically, but financially too.”

Our hearts are breaking, especially at a time when some colleges charge $52,000 a year.  And for what?

Far from framing the decision to apply for food stamps as a last resort, the university’s website makes taking government handouts sound like a moral imperative. “As tuition increases, many students struggle to make ends meet,” the site explains. “Sometimes grants and loans don’t stretch far enough and students are forced to work low-paying jobs. For some, this still is not enough to get by...

...Cornell University, meanwhile, has assembled a handy instruction sheet for students hoping to get federal food assistance.

That's an Ivy League school. 

Encouraging middle class kids to sign up for welfare may seem like a quick way to overburden government services (not to mention foster dependency), but the federal government itself appears to be in favor of it. In 2008, the Department of Agriculture renamed the food stamps program, part of a rebranding effort designed to remove the stigma attached to government aid. Food stamps are now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and accepting them isn’t supposed to be embarrassing.

COMMENT:  Maybe the colleges might show some responsibility by lowering their fees.  This can be accomplished in the real world by cutting spending for frivolous items and maybe cutting some departments with the word "studies" at the end of their names.  Some chance.

December 7, 2010        Permalink

THE LUNATIC FRINGE MARCHES ON – AT 9:24 P.M. ET:  President Obama defended his tax deal with Republicans today, but the troops on his far left are very restless.

Commentators report that the votes currently aren't there to pass the plan in this lame duck session of Congress, where Dems control the House by a decisive margin.  The new neighbors don't move in until January.  And the Dems are angry.  They feel betrayed.  Obama's compromise is not what Marx would do, Karl or Groucho.

Yes, enough Dems will probably have their arms twisted to get the deal through, but the rumblings grow that Mr. Obama might be challenged from the left in the 2012 primaries.  The New York Times reports:

Of course, Mr. Obama is only the latest in a long line of Democratic presidents, going back to Franklin D. Roosevelt, to disappoint the liberal wing of his party and to at least hear rumblings of a challenge. In 1960, the hipster John F. Kennedy represented for liberals something similar to what Mr. Obama embodied as a candidate; two years later, the writer Norman Mailer acidly concluded that Kennedy stood for nothing but the pursuit of power, “without light or principle.”

Both Johnson and President Jimmy Carter faced liberal primary challenges when they stood for re-election: Mr. Johnson because of the Vietnam War and Mr. Carter because he was deemed to be ineffectual in advancing liberal ideals. Bill Clinton’s stances on issues like free trade and welfare reform similarly infuriated the left, though he managed to avoid a primary.

Echoing his Democratic predecessors, Mr. Obama seemed frustrated at a news conference on Tuesday about being pilloried by liberals who haven’t had to wrestle with the realities of governing. “I’ve got a whole bunch of lines in the sand,” Mr. Obama protested.

Mr. Obama will not lose the nomination to a leftist challenger.  No way.  But a challenge could hurt him:

...Mr. Obama must be aware that not all primary challenges to sitting presidents are about winning. Some, like Edward Kennedy’s in 1980 and Ronald Reagan’s in 1976, are in fact designed to unseat the incumbent and capture the presidency. But other ideological challengers, like Eugene J. McCarthy in 1968 and Patrick J. Buchanan 24 years later, measure their success not by where they’re standing on Inauguration Day, but by whether they have changed the trajectory of their parties.

Such protests candidates don’t have to win more than a state or two to have an impact; they merely have to show up and sow division. It probably isn’t coincidental that none of the last four American presidents to face primaries while seeking re-election — Johnson, Gerald R. Ford, Carter and George H. W. Bush — survived to serve another term.

In other words, should the president’s progressive critics warm to the idea, it might not take a particularly credible primary challenge to weaken Mr. Obama’s chances for re-election. It might only take a challenge designed to do exactly that.

COMMENT:  Ah, the kamikaze mentality is alive and well on the left.  What really baffles me is the failure of leftists, and occasionally of hard-line rightists, to understand that they don't command a majority in this nation, or anything near it.  They live in their delusional world, and are pleased by where they live.

December 7, 2010      Permalink

WHY PEARL HARBOR HAPPENED, AND A REPEAT PERFORMANCE – AT 10:13 A.M. ET:  As we commemorate Pearl Harbor day (see post just below), let us not forget why Pearl Harbor happened:  Appeasement and lack of preparation.  The free nations had appeased Nazi Germany and imperial Japan, doing little about their aggression in Europe and Asia respectively, except for throwing out some words and trying some occasional sanctions.

Sound familiar?

History doesn't repeat itself.  The psychology of history repeats itself.  And we are seeing it with Iran, which is not a small country, and which, if equipped with nuclear weapons, could become a major power, reckless and fanatical:

GENEVA (AP) — Iran and six world powers concluded talks Tuesday with an agreement to reconvene early next year, suggesting Tehran may be willing to address concerns about its nuclear program. But Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned that unless they lift U.N. sanctions the six face failure in the next round.

Diplomats from delegations at the table with Iran said Tehran made no commitments to talking about U.N. Security Council demands that Tehran freeze uranium enrichment — which has both civilian and military uses.

"We didn't get anywhere on substance," said one of the officials. "It was an exchange of views."

A senior U.S. administration official, in a similarly sober assessment, said: "Our expectations for these talks were low, and they were never exceeded."

Iran's chief negotiator, Saed Jalili also sought to dampen expectations.

"I am telling you clearly and openly that halting uranium enrichment will not be discussed at the Istanbul meeting," he told reporters.

So, they're having meetings to plan other meetings.  How typical.  And this new round of "negotiations" is being pushed by the usual suspects, the Europeans.  Their foreign ministries continue to hire the same kind of people they hired in the 1930s, and with the same result.  If it were not for the United States, Western Europe may well have fallen into the old Soviet orbit. 

We have gotten nowhere with the Iranians.  They'll have nuclear weapons.  Think of the world five years from now.

December 7, 2010       Permalink

DECEMBER 7TH – AT 9:12 A.M. ET:  This, of course, is the date that will live in infamy.  For those of a certain age, December 7, 1941, was one of those days that defined a generation and its struggles. 

The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor that Sunday morning ended America's debate over isolationism.  War had come to us.  We didn't have to come to the war.

And yet, the only things that many young Americans know about World War II is that we interned the Japanese on the West Coast and that we used the atomic bomb against Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  The leftist control of American education has stolen our history, twisted it, and used it as a weapon to indoctrinate the young.  A recent "academic conference" in Hawaii, centering on the Japanese attack, was an academic scandal itself.  It was dominated by leftists, who informed us that Pearl Harbor was all America's fault.  One "scholar" announced to the brilliant assemblage that he had turned down an academic assignment because he would have had an office overlooking an American naval base, and that he had found the sight repugnant. 

This is what's teaching our kids.

Those who are old enough, or informed enough, mark each December 7th, mindful of the fact that we suffered another December 7th on September 11, 2001, with even greater casualties.  December 7, 1941, marked the start of America's entry into World War II, a war which ended in total victory.  Nine-eleven marked the start of a longer, twilight struggle, still to be resolved.

Even during World War II, President Roosevelt worried that Americans might not remember Pearl Harbor, although they were on all the fighting fronts.  He asked Hollywood to create a song to remind the nation of the day of infamy, which is how "Remember Pearl Harbor" came to be written.

Now, too many Americans have forgotten Pearl Harbor, or have not even been taught about it.  And we are starting to forget September 11th.  I wonder how much passion will be attached to the tenth anniversary of the terrorist attacks next year.

It is bad enough to forget our history.  To have it replaced by a corrupt narrative dictated by radical professors and their disciples, is worse still.  If we do not confront the damage done to our educational system, nothing else will save us.

December 7, 2010       Permalink

THE DAMAGE THUS FAR – AT 8:57 A.M. ET:  The German magazine, Spiegel, has a well-reported piece about the damage to American diplomacy that WikiLeaks has caused so far.  At the center is Hillary Clinton, who is on a repair mission.

Over the weekend, Clinton said that secretary of state would be her last public position.  Maybe this time she actually meant it.  She cannot enjoy the mess, and the strain, that the WikiLeaks leaks have caused.

Her face has seemed frozen in place for days. She looks peaked, thin-lipped and serious, very serious. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is currently enduring the consequences of what is probably the biggest indiscretion in the history of diplomacy, and it shows.

Clinton, who has embarked on a damage-control trip around the world, sharply condemned the publication of the embassy cables by the website WikiLeaks, calling it a "very irresponsible, thoughtless act that put at risk the lives of innocent people all over the world."

"Secretary Clinton is literally working night and day in conversations with countless leaders around the world to try as best we can not only to express regret but to work through these issues," Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns told US lawmakers. Her husband, former President Bill Clinton, said he would be "very surprised if some people don't lose their lives" as a result of the leaks.

And get this:

Apologies, professions of solidarity and efforts to make amends: Is this what American foreign policy will look like for the next few months?

"We cannot, of course, put the toothpaste back in the tube," writes former CIA case officer Robert Baer in an opinion piece for the Financial Times. "The credibility of the State Department as a reliable interlocutor has evaporated, and no doubt for a long time."

And once again, there are questions, serious questions, about the role of the president of the United States, who was, not long ago, the darling of the world:

One leading politician who hasn't said much is President Barack Obama, whose handling of the WikiLeaks affair thus far only confirms his political adversaries' criticisms. Just like with the controversy over an Islamic center in New York and the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, Obama is once again being accused of not taking decisive action, showing weakness and putting America's superpower status at risk. Obama's inaction in the WikiLeaks case was the focus of conservative criticism in the second half of the week.

Commentator Ann Coulter calls Obama a hesitant, powerless leader who is stuck in the White House, incapable of doing anything to defend his country. While Interpol is looking for Assange, she says, the US government isn't doing everything in its power to apprehend him. She characterizes the United States as "a helpless, pitiful giant."

A few days ago, a group of Latin American nations, led by leftist Brazil, announced that it was preparing to recognize Palestine as a nation within the 1967 borders that prevailed just before the Six-Day War.  The reckless announcement, which can destroy the peace process, is being widely seen by diplomatic observers as a slap in the face to the United States, which is laboring to bring the parties back to the peace table.  Obama brings us, not respect and admiration, but weakness and ridicule.  His response to WikiLeaks is more proof, as if any were needed.

December 7, 2010       Permalink

WIKILEAKS TOP GUY IS ARRESTED IN LONDON – AT 8:29 A.M. ET:  A number of news sources are reporting the arrest of Julian Assange.  From The New York Times:

LONDON — Police in Britain arrested Julian Assange on Tuesday on a Swedish warrant issued in connection with alleged sex offenses, British police officials said, the latest twist in the drama swirling around the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks and its beleaguered founder.

But his associates said his detention would not alter plans for further disclosures like those it has made in recent months relating to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and, over the past 9 days, disclosing confidential diplomatic messages between the State Department and American representatives abroad.

“Today’s actions against our editor-in-chief Julian Assange won’t affect our operations: we will release more cables tonight as normal,” a posting on the WikiLeaks Twitter account said.

COMMENT:  Isn't it remarkable, and perhaps it's a sign of the decadence of Western Civilization, that it took a sex charge to bring Assange in.  All the damage he has done to American interests apparently counted for nothing. 

But, as the story notes, the leaks will continue.  Apparently, Assange has arranged for more disclosures in the event of his arrest.  You may be sure that he's holding back some bombshells, to be burst over us if he gets into real legal trouble.  Indeed, he could conceivably use his power over classified documents as a bargaining chip to make his legal woes disappear. 

Damage has already been done by this creep.  He had to have help.  Is Washington on this case, or away for the holidays?

December 7, 2010     Permalink