Friday, August 8, and a little announcement

Happy Friday. So far there are 70+ comments on my Thursday post/column proposing a new seventh-inning song for the Tampa Bay Rays. I liked a lot of them but am still sticking with Louie Louie.

I said on Wednesday that my choices were between writing about Amendment 5 and writing about a Rays song. I went with the lighter topic but will come back to Amendment 5 in my Sunday column.

Now, here is a spot of news that I wanted to tell you first, since you are being good enough to read this blog in the first place.

I'm takin' a little break from being a columnist. Just a little one.

I'm going to work on a reporting assignment for a little while, maybe a few weeks. I've got a topic that I hope proves to be worth pursuing in more depth than a column. It will give me a chance to stretch different muscles. I hope you'll be interested in the result.

I'll post a better announcement later. I know this is sort of leaving in the lurch, and it's also going to mean a lot less posting and traffic here. There are trade-offs involved.

Comments

[Rick K]

Good luck, Howard.

Obviously, you will be missed while you are away, but we'll all be cheering for you in your new assignment, even if it's temporary.

It's pretty exciting news, really. Go get 'em.

WOW!!!!!!! This reporter-type piece WILL be good if you are spending WEEKS on investigative work, Howard.........can't wait to read the final product. We'll keep posting and discussing while you're "gone"........Your live chats be shut down as well, I assume??

Lorraine

[guy]

Hi Howard, Well good luck to you.
I didn't know you had your own column, what paper was it in ??

[Jim Johnson]

SPT finally figured out that interesting stories appeal to readers more than sermonettes.

Bring us back a good story, Howard.

[Dave President ACTMA]

Hope it has something to do with Air Conditioning

Dave Lennox
President
ACTMA

better known as "Air Conditioned Tropicana Marketing Association

or

"Air Conditioned Tropicana Means Alot!

[Jan]

Dunno what it is, but I can't wait to read it... Go get 'em, Howard! :)

[guy]

Howard, I know that you will prevail on your new assignment.
Dont forget the treasure trove of information you can rely on by the people you talk to, here every day.
Most all are your trusted allies.
Does this mean you go back to the bow tie???

[Mr. Tibbs]

Though today's date doesn't have quite the same symbolic weight as 06/06/06 — a number often considered evil and named in the Bible as the date the Antichrist would be revealed — many are nevertheless buzzing about 08/08/08's potential implications.

According to Kelly Xu of the Organization of Chinese Americans in Washington, D.C., the Chinese view eight as an enormously lucky number.

"When they apply for [a] phone number or [a] car registration, they want eight as the last number," she said, or they want multiple eight's in a row — and they're often willing to pay big bucks to secure good luck.

The International Herald Tribune reported in 2006 that a Hangzhou man was offering to sell his license plate of A88888 online for the equivalent of $100,000, and a regional airline in China reportedly paid about $300,000 to have 8888 8888 as their telephone number.

Chinese Olympics officials chose the eighth as the opening day of this year's Summer Games for its auspicious date.

Additionally, officials in Beijing, who normally experience an increase in weddings on August 8, are expecting over 9,000 couples are to tie the knot tomorrow — nearly double their usual amount.

"Oh my goodness, this is really a very, very lucky day," said Belle Lam of the New York Chinese Cultural Association.

Not only does the number sound similar to 'prosperity' in Cantonese, making the repetition of eights like "you won the lotto and got rich," said Lam, but the eighth falls one day after the "Chinese Valentine's Day" — the seventh day in the seventh lunar month.

But before you start buying lottery tickets today to test your luck, realize the number is not considered lucky in all cultures.

According to Prem Jyotish, an astrologer in Jackson Heights, N.Y., the number is actually unlucky in Indian numerology, and numerologist Niraj Mancchanda told the Press Trust of India that "many disasters have occurred on the eighth or on a date, the total of which comes to eight."

"The number eight is not a very auspicious number. It brings hardship and bad luck," Mancchanda said.

The Amazing Kreskin, a thought-reader and mentalist who has appeared on FOX News and CNN, believes the furor over numbers has more to do with people's longing for hope than anything else — especially in China.

"Numbers are so intrinsically engrained in their culture," said Kreskin, and the people there are "living with a cloud over them."

"[They] need this as a release" because of the repressed environment, he added.

People are especially drawn to eight because "the number has a circular quality to it," said Kreskin. "Eights are mystical and mankind is an incurably mystical race."

So will there be the same excitement over 09/09/09?

"I would predict we're going to see greater superstition in the next 14-18 months," said Kreskin.

As for whether he believes in the auspiciousness of today's date, he said "I'm not superstitious, but sometimes you need to play it safe."

[Mr. Tibbs]

Hey I liked the bow tie, It made Howard stand out!

[Rick K]

Hey, should we all start wildly speculating about Howard's new secret assignment?

TIBBS, AWESOME POST ON THE DATE, NUMBERS AND LUCK THEME!!

In regards to Howard and the speculation on "things to come"....let's not pump "Mr. Bowtie" up TOO much yet...this is a test, see....if it's on taxes or baseball, I'LL SCREAM.........

Lorraine

[Mr. Tibbs]

Being a big election season, it's probably something to do with politics Lorraine, an area Howard really excells in.

[guy]

Ok MR TIBBS,
I'll get Howard a .380 Beretta and You can Annoint him 008.
on 8/8/8
What say you Miss Moneypenny??
I think he might stand out too much with the Bowtie though.

[oddjob]

I think he go undercover with Miss Galore.
Charlie Crist's ex girlfriend,
To find where all the Moneypenny went.

[Mr. Tibbs]

Hillary Clinton, never say never

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO5soX3iLtk

[surfdog]

Howard

Rumor has it the Rays are going to start a HUGE marketing campaign based on the unusual Air Conditioned Stadium they have...

have YOU heard anything about this??

[Mr. Tibbs]

Maybe this is Howards new assignment?

Israel Insider is reporting that analysts working separately have determined the birth certificate posted on the Daily Kos website and later on Sen. Barack Obama's "Fight the Smears" campaign website is fraudulent, and now two different actions have been launched to try and obtain the truth about the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee's birth.

The Israel Insider report said the two analysts it interviewed both have been "able to independently discern the name 'Maya Kassandra Soetoro' from artifacts left behind in the process of forging a new fake document for Barack from an image of Maya's original document." Maya is Obama's younger half-sister.

The report follows a posting from another researcher, identified by the news publication as Techdude, that the birth certificate is a forgery because it originally documented the birth of a woman in the 1970s.

Blogger Mitchell Langbert now has launched an online petition to the Federal Election Commission in which signers are asking the agency to "take responsibility to verify the eligibility of Mr. Barack H. Obama to be president of the United States."

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=71763

[Rick K]

Isn't "Mr. Tibbs" the name of a cat in the Harry Potter novels?

[surfdog]

maybe Howard is going to report on big oil fuzy campaign contributions.....

McCain Campaign said it would return all the contributions solicited for it by the Jordanian business partner of a prominent Florida fund-raiser for Mr. McCain.

For the McCain camp, the decision caps a queasy two days in which news accounts scrutinized a cluster of more than $50,000 in unusual contributions from a single extended family of Californians, the Abdullahs, and several of their friends. [...]

The donations came under scrutiny because of their large size and the fact that for the most part, the Abdullahs do not appear wealthy. In addition, several of them interviewed expressed indifference or even hostility to Mr. McCain’s candidacy.

All this taken together has raised the question of whether at least some of the family and their friends may have been donors in name only who were reimbursed by someone trying to skirt individual contribution limits.

It raised the question? It seems pretty clear that there is no question about the fact that a $9,200 donation from a Taco Bell manager, or another $9,200 from a man who, after first denying the donation, said of McCain:

He’s like a worse copy than Bush. I’m still not going to vote for him."

...does more than raise a question. And while the McCain campaign is still feeling queasy, perhaps they could look at the donation from the Hess Corporation office manager who decided to hang onto her 15 year old car so she could give McCain $57,000.

[Mr. Tibbs]

Newsweek sent me a free subscription to their magazine, one I’ve been trying to cancel for weeks now. Every time there is a picture of Obama on the front cover I rip it off, it never makes it to the house. The cover hits the trash can at the end of the dirt driveway. Nope won’t even allow it in the house. I would much rather burn it… When I’m not ripping off the front cover, I rip whole articles out of the magazine if it even mentions Obama. I am growing tired, the mention of his name puts me to sleep.

If tearing up magazines isn’t bad enough, I throw away the section of the newspaper he is mentioned in. Nope. I refuse to recycle it even. Newspaper is a commodity in this house, I need it for packing boxes. I won’t have it wrapping my fragile items. I really don’t want to open those boxes and see Obama’s face. Nope, can’t do it.

When the TV is on and I hear his name, I have to mute the sound. If the station, usually Fox insists on showing his face, I have to change channels. The repetition makes me want to take to my bed and sleep. Did I mention I am packing to move? I shut the TV down entirely. Did I mention I don’t watch CNN and MSNBC anymore, too much of him. Can’t do it and won’t do it.

[Rick K]

Surfdog, I loathe that you are using Trox's blog to post your mindless propaganda you appropriated from somewhere else on the internet.

But no office manager donated $57,000 to Mc Cain's campaign. Not permitted.

You are buying into a load of hokum!

[Mr. Tibbs]

Exxon [Hearts] Obama
August 07, 2008 4:02 PM

As we close up a week wherein Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, on the stump and in a TV ad accused rival Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., of being "in the pocket of big oil," and doing the industry's bidding -- not to mention a week during which the Democratic National Committee launched an Exxon-McCain '08 website to drive home this Democratic talking point -- the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics points out that the issue is a bit more complicated than it first would appear.

McCain has received three times more money from the oil industry in general -- $1.3 million for McCain compared to approximately $394,000 for Obama. But that said, Obama has received more campaign cash than McCain has from the employees of some of the biggest oil companies -- Exxon, Chevron and BP.

This might seem to complicate Obama's continual use of Exxon-Mobil on the stump.

In Youngstown, Ohio, this week Obama said that McCain is "offering $4 billion more in tax breaks to the biggest oil companies in America -- including $1.2 billion to Exxon-Mobil...a company that, last quarter, made the same amount of money in 30 seconds that a typical Ohio worker makes in a year."

In Lansing, Michigan, Obama said Exxon-Mobil "is the company that, last quarter, made $1,500 every second. That’s more than $300,000 in the time it takes you to fill up a tank with gas that’s costing you more than $4-a-gallon. And Senator McCain not only wants them to keep every dime of that money, he wants to give them more. So make no mistake – the oil companies have placed their bet on Senator McCain."

But based on data downloaded electronically from the Federal Election Commission on July 29, 2008, reports CRP: "Through June, Exxon employees have given Obama $42,100 to McCain's $35,166. Chevron favors Obama $35,157 to $28,500, and Obama edges out McCain with BP $16,046 vs. $11,500."

McCain himself has tried to push back against the Obama charge, telling votes at a town hall in Lima, Ohio, today, that he "spoke up against the Administration and Congress and Senator Obama when they gave us an energy bill with more giveaways to Big Oil and really no solution to our energy problems," and Obama did not.

Discussing the 2005 energy bill, which passed the Senate overwhelmingly, McCain said "I think Senator Obama might be a little bit confused. Yesterday, he accused me of having President Bush's policies on energy. That's odd because he voted for the President's energy bill and I voted against it. I voted against it, had $2.8 billion in corporate welfare to Big Oil companies, and they're already making record profits, as you know. Senator Obama voted for that bill and its Big Oil giveaways. I know he hasn't been in the Senate that long, but even in the real world, voting for something means you support it and voting against something means you oppose it."

The Obama campaign disputes that the bill was "the president's" energy bill, and in Lansing told voters that McCain voted "against an energy bill that – while far from perfect – represented the largest investment in renewable sources of energy in the history of this country."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/08/exxon-hearts-ob.html

[Larry]

Good luck and congratulations to you Howard. That exciting Master's thesis that earned you an advanced degree was key. We'll miss you while you are gone, you know that, and we wish you certain success in your new assignment.

[mole]

Howard, is going on a very dangerous undercover assignment in Miami with Sonny Crockett and Mr. Tubbs.
His mission if he chooses to accept it, will be to prove a connection between the Columbian drug cartel,Osama Bin Barack, John Edwards, Brett Farve and the Tampa Bay Ray's management.
He of course will be using an alias which cannot be devulged because it could embarass J. Lyash. Good luck and bring them all to Justice Mr. 008.

[surfdog]

Rick K

here is the source of the info.
they are giving money to "pacs"

..The Washington Post reported last week that campaign contributions from oil industry execs rose in a big way in the last half of June, after McCain drew a huge amount of attention by reversing his opposition on June 16th to the federal ban on offshore drilling.

These Hess contributions, however, hadn't been reported until now, and they will give more ammo to those arguing that McCain is being rewarded by campaign contributions in exchange for pro-industry positions. Here's a table detailing the contributions:

J. Barclay Collins Hess Corp. Attorney $28,500 19-Jun
John B. Hess Hess Corp. Executive $28,500 24-Jun
Susan K. Hess Homemaker Homemaker $28,500 24-Jun
Norma W. Hess Retired Retired $28,500 24-Jun
John J. O'Connor Hess Corp. Executive $28,500 24-Jun
Lawrence Ornstein Hess Corp. Senior VP $28,500 24-Jun
John Reilly Hess Corp. Executive $28,500 24-Jun
Alice Rocchio Hess Corp. Office Manager $28,500 24-Jun
John Scelfo Hess Corp. Senior VP of Finance $28,500 24-Jun
F. Borden Walker Hess Corp. Businessman $28,500 24-Jun

Norma W. Hess is the widow of oil magnate and company founder Leon Hess, and Susan K. Hess is the wife of Hess chairman and CEO John Hess.

Neither a spokesperson for Hess nor the McCain campaign immediately responded to requests for comment. More on this in a bit.

Late Update: It turns out that $28,500 is the maximum that can be given to the RNC, but because this particular victory fund collects money via various channels, an individual donor can actually give more than that to it. I've edited out "maximum" from the headline. Obviously this doesn't change the story in any way.

Late Late Update: A Hess office manager and her husband, an Amtrak worker, each chipped in $28,000 apiece, too.

so its o.k. for B^$sh&$@t OBAMA smears to go on this site but whenever I post something on MCCAIN you all start whining!!

all we were talking about was Howards assignment then Mr. "I have my head so far up bush's a55" Tibbs has to go put sh!t up about Obama

crybaby's

[Don Mott]

Maybe Howards working on this subterfuge. http://tampa.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/u_s_sugar_s_sweet_deal/Content?oid=489784

[Rick K]

Surfdog, I didn't say anything about Obama, only that an individual cannot give $57,000 to a candidate.

It's good that you identified your source and also clarified that you were talking about PACs.

I don't really care about McCain or Obama, in the area of fundraising. I just knew it wasn't true that one person gave $57 K to McCain.

[Rick K]

Mole.

I can't top that.

Funny and good.

[Gabriel]

Excited to see what you come back with, Howard.

[guy]

He'll be okay with Gabriel warching over him

[Mr. Tibbs]

Surf-dog is a little testy today, his messiah had a bad week. Time to quit drinking the koolaid surfdog!

[guy]

Yes just a tad testy.
Why do they continually pick on us old racists???

[guy]

Hey by the way I'm going to be on O'Reilly tonite

[gail]

I only read, don't write, so I'm guessing there will be no reading on the blog for a while? rats

[Mr. Tibbs]

Obama Salute
Wow... Did not know about this. The last politican to have their own salute was Adolf Hitler. That being said, Hitler promoted the greatness of Germany while Obama promotes that this country is bad and he does not promote starting wars - so he is not exactly like Hitler but...to me he is "Hitler lite"

Who advises this guy? Obama needs to fire the guy/gal. So far Obama has LECTURED us like children on race, patriotism, eating habits, driving preferences, thermostat settings and languages we need to speak. He tells us that we can eliminate drilling for our own oil simply by inflating our tires and and getting tuneups. Yet most vehicles today do not need regular tuneups and people tend to keep their tire inflated. Obama's economic policies consist of doubling capital gains tax and dividends - to be "fair" - but he doesn't seem to know that the vast majority of americans now have 401K's and benefit from capital gains and dividends. His foreign policy consists of talking with nations that support terrorism and promote policies that seriously discriminate against women, religous people who are not Muslim and gays. Obama promises to reduce America's nuclear arsenal and he will NOT miltarize space. While I do not like nuclear weapons or like the idea of weaponzing space, does Obama really believe that other countries will not weaponize space and reduce their nuclear aresnals? Obama has his own "presidental seal". What absolute disrespect for the office. He stopped wearing a flag pin in protest against the administration's policies. Hey Obama, the flag pin represents no particular administration; it represents America as a whole. Now Obama wears it. Why? Because he wants people to think he really cares about Ameica when his words consistently show he is and angry, bitter "victim" - albeit a 40+ year old multi-millionare "victim". I would love to be that kind of "victim".

I could go on for hours about this guy. As an independent I initially considered Obama. After reviewing his policies, I will not vote for a man who does not appreciate America and who absolutely does not relate to core America. Everytime he talks off promter, one can see that he relates and support the Reverend Wright's in the world. It is unfortunate. I initially really liked him.

But I am not stupid or nieve and I do pay attention to what Obama does and says; therefore, I will not vote for him anymore the I would vote for David Duke or Jessie Jackson or Pat Robertson or Adolf Hitler or anyone who blames a race or sex for their problems; considers Americans to stupid to be able to live without an elite politican regulating their activities and money via laws and taxes.

Hey Obama. Alert! Americans of all races, religions, male and female are smart and have tons of commonsense. They are smart enough to run their own lives. They don't need you and your infinte wisdom to guide them. Oh and America is still the greatest nation in the world. Where else could an Black American be a nominee for the highest office in the country. Obama get over it and get a life.

[Mr. Tibbs]

Guy

Weird Obama salute was stolen from star trek "Space Hippies" Episode.
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/08/figures-weird-obama-salute-was-stolen.html

[guy]

Heil Der OBamerica
Heil Der OBamerica
Heil Der OBamerica
Heil Der OBamerica
Heil Der OBamerica

[hilly]

Vatts isht loosh ender

[Mr. Tibbs]

It's funny it took the National Enquirer to expose Edwards when the main stream media chose to ignore the story.

[Voter 13]

Notice when this Edwards report came out. Right before the Olympics. At the start of a Russsian war. Late on a Friday night. All for the sake of burying it from America. The left wing media will do all in their power to keep this as low a profile as possible.

Makes you wonder why it took the National Enquirer to expose Edwards.

Double Democratic standards. They can cheat and it is OK. Let the other side cheat and it is front page stuff.

Dems are media hyprocrats.

So long Edwards. Ha Ha.

Now lets see who he slept with while his ailing wife was stricken with cancer. I bet she is a mental giant with big you know whats.

[Mr. Tibbs]

WASHINGTON (AP) _ Reporters don't like being beaten on a major political story, especially by a supermarket tabloid. And being beaten up over not reporting one by a supermarket tabloid. And being beaten up over not reporting one is even less appealing.

But a sexual affair can have just two people who know the truth. Without witnesses, documents, photographs or some form of irrefutable evidence pointing to the truth, news organizations will not endanger their own integrity.

That made it difficult to prove — and to print — the rumors that John Edwards had cheated on his seriously ill wife while running for president. Reporters were left to poke around the edges of a potentially career-ending scandal in search of an opening.

"It's not like they didn't know it was there," said Mark Feldstein, a former investigative reporter who teaches journalism at George Washington University.

"Proof is the biggest issue," Feldstein said. "The National Enquirer is not well-regarded as a news source by the news media."

Last year the National Enquirer published a story alleging that Edwards had an extramarital affair. It reported last month that the former senator had fathered a "love child." Readers of the popular if trashy weekly — perhaps some who only glance at the headlines at the checkout counter — joined the political enemies of the handsome Democrat in asking why other news media were not carrying the story.

So did many of those who live in the blogosphere, where the Enquirer story was taken as fact in spite of its anonymous sources. Where, they asked, were the reports on CNN, in The New York Times, on the news wire of The Associated Press? The AP had a fair number of inquiries by phone and e-mail as to when it would report the Edwards affair.

The answer for the AP and many other news media was simple: When it could be confirmed. And it never was confirmed to the AP's satisfaction or, apparently, to the satisfaction of others until Edwards himself owned up to the infidelity in an interview with ABC News.

"We began pursuing the story soon after it first appeared. But the standard for proof in this kind of intimate behavior is and should be very high," said Michael Oreskes, AP's managing editor for U.S. news. "Better to get it right even if we couldn't get it first."

After Edwards dropped his bid for the Democratic nomination, questions about his marital fidelity lost much of their relevance to the presidential race. Yet the affair still made news, even if he timed his confession for a Friday in August on the opening day of the Summer Olympics to soften the impact of a sex scandal.

Efforts had failed to find someone who could reveal the facts or to uncover a document linking Edwards to 42-year-old Rielle Hunter. No father is listed on the birth certificate, which the AP and other news organizations had obtained, and other evidence such as Edwards' political action committee paying her $100,000 for videos was only circumstantial.

That left little for reporters. The AP had been among those reporting in October 2007 that Edwards flatly stated that the Enquirer's initial story was false — a lie, he now admits. Still, the opening allowed news organizations to report what they otherwise stayed away from.

The process repeated itself a few weeks ago when the Enquirer reported that Edwards had paid a late-night visit to Hunter and her child. He called the allegation "tabloid trash" when a reporter asked about it on July 23 — not exactly a lie but certainly a description designed to deceive. Again, most news organization were loath to pick up the new Enquirer report, beyond the denial, and those who could have revealed the truth remained silent.

"I think the mainstream news media were responsible for not airing it and not printing it earlier. There really wasn't anything to report," Feldstein said. "If the story were false, it would be a tremendously hurtful thing for his family and professionally lethal to him."

Reporters looked for indirect ways to get at the story. The Raleigh News & Observer and others reported this week that the rumors and Edwards' silence about them were affecting plans for him to speak at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

Within days, Edwards broke his silence, an event sure to burst the dam that held back details about the affair, predictions for Edwards' future and criticism over how the news media got scooped by a publication they don't respect.

By DOUGLASS K. DANIEL, Associated Press Writer
4:12 PM PDT, August 8, 2008

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/wire/sns-ap-edwards-affair-media,1,375186.story

[Jon McPhee]

Interesting choice of monikers -- Mr. Virgil Tibbs, Chief of Detectives in the small town of Sparta, Miss., was played by the very dark-skinned Harold E. Rollins. His character backed up the crusty but kindly Chief of Police, played by Carroll "Archie Bunker" O'Connor. The TV show was "In The Heat Of The Night." The earlier movie version had Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger in those roles.

Or maybe it's a different Mr. Tibbs in mind.

[Don Mott]

Mr. Tibbs I respect the intelligence you have shown in your posts but must question why this seems to be such an important issue to you. There have been many pols on both sides of the aisle who have fornicated and committed adultery. That should be left to the fish wrapping, bird cage lining tabloids IMO. There are many important issues facing Florida and this nation and who is dipping their wick where should not be one of them. Just my opinion.

[John D]

Actually, I'm very curious about this Edwards thang, and I wish to commend Mr. Tibbs for pricking my interest.

Dear Don Mott,

John Edwards fornicating behind the back of his cancer-stricken wife just prior to running for President is actually quite HUGE. His career is over, he is now a proven IDIOT....and although I totally agree that wick-dipping is most certainly NOT UNUSUAL amongst the general public.....a high profile candidate and possible RUNNING-MATE on the Democratic ticket having been this lazy in his own personal husbandry is just.......oh, you fill in the blanks......................

John Edwards is a PUKE, and I'm a DEM. I can NOT imagine the pain that his wife is feeling.......on top of her cancer pain, that is.

Not too mention the pain for his loyal supporters for a man who claimed that MORALITY was the law of HIS land.

McPhee, you understand why I don't run for office.....??
I really don't want to hang out with elected officials.......volunteers seem to be usually much more even-keeled and seem to maintain a higher grade of behavior in my experience.

Lorraine

[Mr. Tibbs]

In 1999, when Edwards was a senator, he said of President Clinton and his affair with Monica Lewinsky:

“I think this president has shown a remarkable disrespect for his office, for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter. It is breathtaking to me the level to which that disrespect has risen.”

[Mr. Tibbs]

Don Motts

His wife was living the lie with him as he campaigned for President. Nice media dump on a friday night, Obama away on vaction in Hawaii, the olympics, this story is not over by a long shot.

[Mr. Tibbs]

Democrat John Edwards is trying to turn the Democratic presidential race into a referendum on honesty and integrity, areas where polling has shown that voters are divided about Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The argument marks a shift in a race where Edwards and Clinton’s other Democratic opponents have criticized her stance on policy but usually have avoided taking on her character directly. In an interview Monday with The Associated Press, Edwards said Clinton is part of a corrupt Washington system.

“Good people are caught up in this system, and I’ve given some examples of the places that I think she’s caught up in it,” Edwards said. “And I also, secondly, think that she continues to defend it. And I don’t think you can bring up the change this country needs if you defend a corrupt system that doesn’t work.

“The closer we get to the election and the more people move past celebrity and to the issues such as honesty, integrity and who can actually bring about change, I think they are going to pay very close attention to those questions,” Edwards said while riding in a minivan between campaign stops.

Also http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,306256,00.html

[Mr. Tibbs]

http://sometwittery.com/blog/sgt.-tibbs.html

[guy]

Lorraine is right, this guy is a lowlife.
But to make such a spectical of it only hurts his wife more.
He is all done forever, the people will see to this.I wish the media would drop it.

[Cathy Wilson]

Good luck Howard - I think the change of pace is just the right tonic. I look forward to reading about what you've been up to...

[guy]

Howard

are you keeping the blog open while you are gone?

[Mr. Tibbs]

Yeah Howard,

Lorraine can be in charge

[Rick K]

Why don't we take a vote to decide who will be in charge

[Lorraine]

I don't mind if Don Mott is in charge.

[Jon McPhee]

Yeah, Don Mott should start the morning off with a subject to discuss.

[Don Mott]

Oh, all right, I'll do it.

[Mr. Tibbs]

12:35 was'nt me,and I think it was guy.

[Mr. Tibbs]

Lets have Guy start the day off, I think he made the last five or six posts.

[guy]

O.k.

I'll start off Monday

My first subject:

"How some flip flops can be good for

one's sanity"

Honestly my friends, As a true

conservative

I've opened my mind:

Bush really did screw this country!

I am starting to feel pragmatic, we

need a new direction.

I'm voting Obama.

Say Howard, how bout it??

[since1962]

Perhaps Howard is dissecting the real estate/forclosure crisis with an in depth investigation of the VERY long history of boom and bust in Florida and Pinellas County?

Don't know what happened then but would be interested to see reported similarities to '60s Pinellas real estate downturn and striking paralell to Pasco and Citrus County 2008.

Rebound timeframe was quite long back then although was just a kid and am now getting old so perception and memory compromised at both ends of spectrum.
Folks sure would like local historical perspective if applicable; with solutions.

Howard, what indeed will become of your blog while you're away???

We AT LEAST will need a Sergeant at Arms!!

Don Mott, that was funny having me and McPhee vote for 'ya to start the day..............you get away with faking me JUST THIS ONE TIME...................

We'll be fine, Howard. When the kids get nutsy, I just go away...........

Thanks for the suggested day starter support, Tibbs! Hey, why don't y'all rotate for a start your day conversation? But you should use a media piece as the starter point posted with your suggested topic, not just your OWN opinion alone.

Lorraine

[Mr. Tibbs]

Lorraine
Notice the times on those last six posts, 2 minutes apart, it's hard to belive Rick k , Jon, and Don all posted within 2 minutes of each other that late at night, I think it was Guy having some fun. The post among them of me wasn't me either.

[Mr. Tibbs]

Lorraine
Even though Howards working on another project doesn't mean he can't take two minutes while eating lunch or while watching a Rays game to leave a post, maybe he just does'nt like blogging. Only Howard knows what his true feelings are.

[Don Mott]

Mr Tibbs is right Lorraine, that wasn't me. But since you mentioned a media piece I will re-post this since it didn't receive any replies before. It involves the closed door scheming regarding the Everglades sugar buyout. http://tampa.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/u_s_sugar_s_sweet_deal/Content?oid=489784

[guy]

TIBBS look me in the eye NOT ME ~~ guy

Lorraine has been known to dabble without being suspected,
She is better at this than most of us,
In fact Howard might not even exist.

[guy]

I might use an alias but never someones name from here

[guy]

I know it's tough to meet someone with ethics

[guy]

Everyone send me $10.00 That thought it was me.
AND
Who seen me on O'Reilly last nite????

[guy]

You notice I got in comment
#69.

Lorraine is a environmentalist with a strong Ideology which renders her impervious to guns and killing,
So with her at the helm we could not talk about fishing or weeding our garden or drilling holes out in the Ocean.
However I think she is beginning to get the message about the candidate from Illinois. So she might let us talk about how bad the south side of Chicago has become!! now that would really scare most Americans.

[Mr. Tibbs]

guy, $10.00 on the way I know it was
you
I seen what you wrote,
and I did see you on Fox ...
Mr. Alan Colmes

Lorraine,
Don't mention it, in fact the more I
listen to you the more I agree. I have
a feeling by November youre goin to
turn me into an Obamacain

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3466823.ece

[guy]

Humor

ONTARIO, Ore. — Police say there's been an alarming rise in urine-filled plastic containers found along a three-mile stretch of Interstate 84 in eastern Oregon.

A litter crew for the Oregon Department of Transportation picked up an estimated 200-300 urine filled plastic bottles, along the highway, about half of which were found in a short stretch dubbed "Three Mile Hill."

Police think the price of fuel may be causing drivers to travel slower than normal to save fuel while at the same time passing rest areas or truck stops.

Under Oregon law, improperly disposing of human waste is a misdemeanor which can carry a fine of up to $250 a gallon.

[Mr. Tibbs]

Lorraine
the 12:30 post wasn't mine

[Mr. Tibbs]

Hit the road(Donna Brazile) Jack!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-CTO6qsp-Y

[guy]

TIBBS that wasn't me @ 1:55

HE's is an old Dem.

1, Got To Like the taste of OBAMA.

2, Is A Bush Hater

3, Last name rymes with Pott

This is all I can get so far

[Mr. Tibbs]

Edwards nightline part one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-CTO6qsp-Y

part two
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbL-vj-RKxQ

[David Mathews]

Hello Everyone,

Wednesday was an especially lovely day at Ft. DeSoto. Here are some pictures, titled "Dolphin Bites Fish":

http://www.geocities.com/dmathew1/dbf.html

[David Mathews]

Hello Everyone,

August 7, 2008 was an especially lovely day. I happened to visit Ft. DeSoto and the dolphins were playing. Here are some photos, titled "Dolphin Bites Fish":

http://www.geocities.com/dmathew1/dbf.html

Dave Mathews,

GREAT pics.....I bird stewarded out at Ft. D today..........see your email in that post above.........I'll put you on my e-blast.

Wondrous things are happening out there.............I'll tell you.

Lorraine

Don Mott, I had a LONG day........and I just MUST do these pictures.....important. I'll get back to Big Sugar tomorrow.......I have a lot to say.

Cheers!

Lorraine

[Jon Mcphee]

While the cat's away, the rats will play. Fake posts are Fun-Ny, right?

Back to the real world:

Love it when “conservatives” get up a head of steam about the sins of others. What was that thing in the Bible about poking at the mote in your neighbor’s eye while trying to see around the log in your own?

Say it ain’t so, Newt and Rudy and all you toe-tappers!

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0607.benen.html

For a recenter take, try

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/008013.php

And for Ann Coulter’s view from the bridge? What a difference 8 years can make!

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/coulter052200.asp

C’mon, all you white-spittle sputterers, face the simple truth that “your guys” and “their guys” are all raised up from the same mud, with the same hormones and big egos and the sense that the world owes them an orgasm. Equal opportunity fornicators all. Like Kissinger said, “Power is der ultimate aphrodisiac,” vile he vas bangkingk Jill St. John.

How’s about maybe expecting our over-hormoned politicians to do something altogether different -- trying to figure out how to do the greatest good for the greatest number? And all that other New Testament stuff?

[Mr. Tibbs]

Jon McPhee
Here is a video I want you to see,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkUj9EIINIs&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/9/12402/83215/382/565088

I Truely hate lobbyists and think might change my mind come November.

[guy]

Mr. Tibbs

thats the smartest thing I've ever heard you say

go rays!

[Mr. Tibbs]

Jon
9:52 post not mine

Lorraine here's some nice nature photo's
http://www.nwf.org/nationalwildlife/article.cfm?issueID=79&articleID=1158

[Mr. Tibbs]

Jon
9:52 post not mine

Lorraine here's some nice nature photo's
http://www.nwf.org/nationalwildlife/article.cfm?issueID=79&articleID=1158

[guy]

Just playing with you Tibbs while I wait for the Rays game.

[guy]

Hey Tibbs..
Q: What is the difference between Yankee fans and dentists?
A: One roots for the yanks, and the other yanks for the roots.

[Rick K]

There once was a man from Nantucket who Kirbied his very own Puckett.

[zeek]

The story, conveyed to us in spoken word, poem, novel, television show, film, or any of the other myriad forms it may take, is at the very heart of what it is to be human. This brilliant usurpation of mere instinct provides us with the unique capacity to transcend, however briefly or transparently, the absolute singularity of the mind. This most fundamental of human interaction is, then, the arbiter of the most fundamental of human conflicts. In our struggles – derived from no less than other, older stories – the story necessarily becomes the object of our objections. But what stories ought we be allowed to tell? As long as there are authors there will be censors. As long as we are human there will be both. But at what cost does the story come? At what cost its censorship? Oceans of ink and blood have been spilled over our right to speak, but what of our right to hear, or worse yet, to listen? Who determines the stories we can tell and have told to us? Who should? Having now offered up this purgatory of hyperbole, let us now turn towards the more pragmatic concerns of censorship today – beginning with the lens of history – and perhaps find our way back to these more universal questions.

We must go rather far back to find one of the most intriguing victims of censorship in the history of the written word. The Yahwist or Jehovist or, more succinctly, “J” composed the earliest written portions of what later became the Torah around 950 BC. The Yahwist composed portions of the Book of Numbers, the first half of Exodus, and about half of Genesis. As G. Douglas Atkins puts it, the Yahwist is “stubbornly restless, probing, skeptical, constantly engaged in an effort to demystify and demythologize, attempting to reveal the constructed-ness and fictionality of all things.” (Atkins, 1980) The original work of the Yahwist would be subject to near constant censorship and revision over the five centuries that followed. The God of the Yahwist was, as Harold Bloom succinctly puts it, “human – all too human: he eats and drinks, frequently loses his temper, delights in his own mischief, is jealous and vindictive, proclaims his justness while constantly playing favorites, and develops a considerable case of neurotic anxiety when he allows himself to transfer his blessing from an elite to the entire Israelite host. By the time he leads that crazed and suffering rabblement through the Sinai wilderness, he has become so insane and dangerous, to himself and to others, that the J writer deserves to be called the most blasphemous of all authors ever.” (Bloom, 1994) That creative redacting, following through to Ezra, is one of the earliest examples of censorship. Such a God was ill-suited to provide the contrast with the vindictive deities of the pagan traditions that allowed Judaism to grow beyond the few nomadic followers of Yahweh of its early years.

In 25 AD the historical works of Aulus Cremutius Cordus were burned by order of the Senate, supposedly for having eulogized Brutus and Cassius in what was viewed as an unduly positive light – quite evidentiary of that other most prominent cause of censorship: politics. Two factors comprise the authority behind which censorship is almost always employed – the political, as demonstrated by the burning of Cordus’ work, and the moral, the latter usually couched in a particular religious tradition, and the two often intertwined. Examples of both litter the remaining pages of history, most graphically in instances of book burning. Priscillian of Ávila, who bears the distinction of being the first in the long line of Christians executed for heresy by fellow Christians, had many of his writings deemed heretical and burned in 383. In 650 Caliph Uthman ibn ‘Affan oversaw the creation of the Qur’an as we now know it, and subsequently had all other versions destroyed. Over the course of the 13th Century the Catholic Church systematically exterminated the Cathar sects of southeastern France, in the process burning nearly all of their writings. In 1242 the French government burned every copy of the Talmud in Paris following a trial in which the book was “found guilty.” In 1410 John Wycliffe, intellectual leader of the Lollards whose protégée Jan Huss would pioneer the giving of mass in the vernacular, had his books burned by Zbynek Zajic z Házmburka, Archbishop of Prague, who, incidentally, could not read. In 1562 the Bishop of the Yucatan, Fray Diego de Landa, burned the sacred texts of the Maya. In 1624 the Pope ordered the burning of Luther’s translation of the Bible in Germany. In 1683 students and faculty at Oxford burned a number of works by Hobbes and others. In 1842 the School for the Blind in Paris burned all the books they had containing the newly created Braille code.

This brings us to perhaps the most notorious instance of book burning in history, which was committed by the Nazis beginning on May 10, 1933 at the Humboldt University and Institut für Sexualwissenschaft (Institute for Sexuality) in Berlin. The precursor to that fateful night took the form of the Harmful Publications Act of 1926, which was instituted by the Weimar government. Klaus Petersen sums up well the terrific importance of this act: “Its significance lies in the fact that, more than any other censorship law of the time, it owed its emergence to broadly based groups and organization that persistently tried to mold public opinion morally and ideologically to their own patterns of thought and behavior.”(Petersen, 1992) Seven years later, when over 25,000 “un-German” books were burned in Berlin, it was the students of Germany’s universities who did the burning. They burned Bertolt Brecht and Alfred Kerr, Ernest Hemingway and Marc Chagall, Friedrich Engels and Jack London, Upton Sinclair and H.G. Wells. But what was the nature of this action? It clearly wasn’t purely anti-Semitic in nature, as all the authors were not Jews. Censorship, wrote Harrell Rodgers, originates, at least in part, from a question of status. “When public policies are formulated they answer a critical question: ‘On behalf of what ethnic, religious, or other cultural group is this government and this society being carried out?’ (Gusfield, 1963). Thus, governmental policies concerning civil rights, religion, welfare, and obscenity all involve the weighing of the government’s influence on the side of one set of values as opposed to others… Censorship campaigns involve defense of traditional moral standards and the societal position of those who defend those standards. Changes in the definition of acceptable sexual speech raise questions about the validity of the moral standards considered sacred by some members of society and questions about the dominant culture in society… Censorship campaigns, therefore, involve attempts to restore to prominence a certain value system or efforts to make certain that new values do not make serious inroads into the community.” (Rodgers, 1975)

Two decades later, in 1953, a similar phenomenon took place in the United States, under the banners of Senator Joe McCarthy’s anti-communist zealotry. At McCarthy’s urging, the State Department removed from the shelves of its libraries in Europe “material by any controversial persons, Communists, fellow travelers, etc.” Some of these books were subsequently burned. This, too, was a case of censorship in pursuit of the maintenance of a societal position. The communists were to be feared, and were to be rooted out wherever they were. America had turned fiercely xenophobic in war time, the Japanese internment camps were evidence enough of that, and McCarthy sought to wipe out any dissention in order to maintain that apprehension. Fear was, of course, the source of his power. In the absence of any communist literature or argument, it would be much easier to prove to the public how dangerous they were for it would be impossible for communists, or their so-called sympathizers, to argue otherwise.

The defining characteristic in these actions is, of course, the involvement of government or political authority. In turning towards the issues of censorship we face in the United States today, this kind of government involvement largely does not exist. Attempts have been made, but by and large (excluding free speech issues as engaged in campaign finance and the like) have been struck down by the courts as clear violations of Constitutional mandates. What we are faced with, then, is not censorship of the people by the government, but rather censorship of the people by themselves. That McCarthy was eventually struck down by a domestic popular backlash, unlike the Nazis, is evidentiary of Americans’ stubbornness in the defense of their liberties. But that tenacity seems to be leveled most ferociously when it is the government which oversteps its bounds – and it is not the government itself which gives greatest cause for concern.

The censorship we face today comes in many shapes and sizes, largely irrespective of political ideology. Conservative religious organizations stage burnings of Harry Potter novels, seek to regulate sexual material in films and television shows, and try to pull morally objectionable materials from library shelves. Abortion rights activists seek limitations on anti-abortion picketers at clinics. In the modern United States, purely political censorship has become a dangerous gambit, and is rarely practiced. Correspondingly, the bulk of our would-be censors come forth individually or in extra-governmental groups from a pedestal of perceived moral superiority – a superiority they seek to demonstrate to, and to impress upon, their opposition. This fight is, not unexpectedly, often focused on the access of children to material perceived by parents to be morally questionable, which leads us to one of the most highly publicized censorship battles of our time: Harry Potter.

Zeeland, Michigan and its 5,800 residents played host to one notable brawl over J.K. Rowling’s magical children’s series. Eight years ago school Superintendent Gary Feenstra, at the behest of several parents, removed the series from library shelves, banned their reading in classrooms, required parental approval for access to them, and stopped the further purchase of copies of the books. Similar moves took place in school districts all over the country – coinciding with highly publicized public burnings of the novels. The courts have – rightly – removed such restrictions on the books in libraries and school districts nationwide. Nonetheless, these actions, repeated time and again with books considered “inappropriate” for one reason or another, constitute a dangerous element in our civic culture if left unchecked.

I do not intend to say that fighting to have certain books removed from library shelves or classrooms is inherently wrong. It is not. There should certainly be restrictions placed upon what children can read or watch. Those restrictions, however, should not be dictated by the whims of handfuls of vocal parents. In 2002 the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill issued as its summer reading “Approaching the Qur’an”, a text on the Islamic holy book, and controversy erupted. The cries of Muslim advocacy and anti-Christian indoctrination were predictable, and boisterous, and the dynamics which fueled them were the same which have always fed the flames of book pyres. It was a lashing out of orthodoxy and heavy-handed, willful ignorance. Of course there were denunciations of UNC as having committed a crime, in Bill O’Reilly’s words, equivalent to assigning Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” in 1941. It is that very blatant kind of dissimilitude that makes such efforts at censorship so patently ridiculous. I would think a more rational comparison would be an Islamic school mandating the study of the Bible in 1187 as Philip II and Richard I descended upon the Holy Land. Of course, to some in this country, as has been the case everywhere and at every time, any attempt to understand that which is alien to us comes to be perceived as some kind of concession — a surrender of some fraction of that abstraction that makes us American. What danger is there in the pursuit of understanding? Some would have it that it is a step towards an unwanted pluralism, the calls of the Know-Nothings echoing out of the darker, meaner halls of history. Others may simply fear the humanization of a foe. How much harder it is to wage war when the bombs are landing on human beings, not devils made flesh! Some, perhaps, merely lash out at anything beyond the standard American lexicon. It is a misguided adventure, whatever the motivation.

But do not get me wrong, it is well within the rights of those who challenge books or television shows or movies to do so, just as it is within their rights to withhold them from their children, for a time. But exercising such outrageous arrogance as to withhold ideas, legitimate or not, controversial or tame, without even consideration of the needs and desires of those from whom they are being withheld is, dare I say it, fundamentally un-American. There will always be those who seek to protect others from what they view as obscene, corrupting, inappropriate or unpatriotic. A driving purpose of our democracy and of our humanity is, then, to protect that which we value in spite of these denunciations. We are dependent upon the free exchange of ideas, and we must view it as our sacred duty to protect that exchange whenever possible. We are perpetually engaged in the struggle between past and future, and I, for one, will side with the future. There is no greater freedom than the ability to seek out new ideas and information, regardless of how contrary to an individual’s personal beliefs those ideas may be. There is no danger to the individual in the dissemination of ideas. The greater the conflict between our ideas, and the lesser our conflict over which ideas we may consider, the better our ideas will become. The danger that some would proscribe as threatening our youth or our righteousness is a danger that only presents itself to those institutions that perpetuate our shortcomings. There is no permissible way to limit this attack on change and openness – it would be the very icon of self-defeatism. There is only one path for the determined advocate of choice to take, and that is to read, to watch, to listen, to disagree and agree when the evidence presents itself, to question, to answer, to debate and to discuss. Our inquisitive minds burn hotter than any paper, and we must use that inextinguishable flame to fight fire with fire.

Those who choose to denounce the cries of indecency in the name of personal choice, responsibility, and intellectual freedom have given the world access to Joyce, Salinger, Hemingway, Galileo, Socrates, Goethe, Aristophanes, Hawthorne, Greene, Orwell, Pynchon, Steinbeck, Morrison, Boccaccio, Faulkner, Flaubert, Whitman, Tolstoy, Shakespeare, Rousseau, Paine, Heller, Balzac, Bradbury, Dreiser, and Rabelais, all of whom were or are subject to the censor’s ire. I, for my part, am thrilled to have such company.

[guy]

RAYS WIN! RAYS WIN! RAYS WIN!

hope you all saw tonights game!!

seattle up 5 - 0 rays score one then six in sixth to go up 7-5
seattle ties it in th 8th 7-7

Rays score a run in the 11 to win! win! win! A road win!
go rays! go rays!

Ilooked up obamas website he is better for me
and I have made up my mind,
OBAMA all the way!

[Mr. Tibbs]

YES, Go Rays! stayedup watching and was it worth it! Go gabe!

And I'm with you guy, I'm voting obama

On July 29, President George W. Bush appeared at the Lincoln Electric Company in Euclid, Ohio, where he spoke about energy and then asked the audience for questions. The opportunity for people in a small town in the Midwest to pose a question directly to the president of the United States is a rare one, possibly a once in a lifetime experience. "And now I'd like to answer some questions, if you have any," said Bush. But his request was returned with silence. Bush filled the air with an awkward joke: "After seven-and-a-half years, if I can't figure out how to dodge them, I shouldn't..." The audience tittered nervously. Bush continued, "If you don't have any questions, I can tell you a lot of interesting stories." The crowd laughed again, but no one raised a hand. "Okay," said Bush, "I'll tell you a story."

Despite the daily tracking polls and the back-and-forth of the candidates, the underlying story of the 2008 presidential campaign remains the Bush presidency and how it brought about the end of the long era of Republican political dominance that began in 1968 with the election of Richard Nixon. That story is the subject of my new book, "The Strange Death of Republican America: Chronicles of a Collapsing Party."

Bush has the lowest sustained popularity among modern presidents. The Republican Party has fallen farther behind the Democratic Party in party identification and favorable ratings than it has in decades. Democrats are poised to make dramatic gains in their numbers in the House of Representatives and the Senate. The previously little-known Senator Barack Obama could have vaulted to become the presumptive Democratic nominee only as a response to Bush. Senator John McCain's emergence at the presumptive Republican nominee is also one of Bush's consequences. Without the crackup of the conservative movement and the fragmentation of the Republican primary field, McCain would not have had his opening. His candidacy is as much a manifestation of the shattering of the Republican phalanx as Obama's. Whatever the outcome of their contest, the party as it was is over. Today no one can even envision when the Republicans will control the presidency and both houses of the Congress as they did just two years ago.

Bush's decline is an end to more than family dynasty; it is an end of political empire. Bush, "The Decider," was the implementer of complementary radical plans for an imperial residency and a one-party government to be ruled for generations by Republicans.

Dick Cheney, whose Secret Service code name when he was President Gerald Ford's chief of staff, "Backseat," suggested his invisible influence, was the originator of the imperial presidency. It was a overarching idea he took from the Nixon White House, when he was then counselor Donald Rumsfeld's deputy, and elaborated as vice president into a doctrine of an unaccountable and unfettered "unitary executive" that had the right unto itself even to order torture.

Bush's chief political strategist, Karl Rove, whom he has called "The Architect" and "Turdblossom," was the designer of the grand realignment that would lock in Republican control for time immemorial.

But Bush's fiascos, from Gulf to shining Gulf, from the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq to FEMA in New Orleans, were the culmination of Republican ideology and have unraveled Republican strengths built up over 40 years. I explain the scope of Bush's damage to his party in a talk on July 31 at the New America Foundation in Washington, D.C., which can be viewed here.

Though the Republican era is drawing to an end, a new Democratic one is not inevitable. Its dawning would require not only winning the White House and the Congress but also governing together successfully, which has not been possible since Lyndon Johnson was president.

In the meantime, the growing intensity of the day-to-day campaign has turned the focus away from the Bush presidency. Bush has achieved the weird effect of being the incumbent, still responsible, and increasingly ignored as somehow irrelevant. The silence that greeted Bush in Euclid, Ohio is symptomatic of his fading while still being present. Dominating politics just a short time ago, his elusiveness can only work to the advantage of the Republicans. If the Democratic campaign allows him to escape from being in the picture it will have forgotten a cardinal law of politics that voters can be led into the future only by making the election a referendum on the past.

I'm going to be an Obamacain

[guy]

That was me again at 2:56 (Guy)

[Rick K]

Several posts above with my name on them were not made by me.

[Julia V]

Good post. Louie Louie is a classic. Always brings in the right emotions.