Good pick-up Howard. It should have been a gimmee.

I want to leave an irrelevant comment too.

JSpencer is wrong. If there's a tie for No. 10, the previous race is No. 9; however, the next one would be No. 12 rather than No. 11. Even though the races are being counted down, numbers are counted from No. 1 and proceed greater. Otherwise, there could be a tie at No. 2 and no No. 1.

Journalistic license. This isn't the PGA.

And, it gives us at least one more race to discuss.

Hey, Chris. Two points. If there's a tie for #10, the next one should be #8. or don't you watch golf?? As for Iowa, any chance that Jim Leach might run? He's a good liberal Republican (and a fellow Princetonian.) It might make for a good contest with Harkin. (But my sense is that he's pretty tuckered out after his unmpteen years in Congress and might want to take a breather.)

I live in Maine and I voted for Senator Collins in 2002. I will not do so again.

Senator Collins has a nasty habit of saying what the folks in Maine want to hear but voting with the President and the Republicans on all crucial votes. She talks the talk, but does not walk the walk.

I predict Mainers will show her the door in 2008.

With regard to the Wisconsin U.S. attorney who was spared the axe, this is another HUGE shoe in the scandal that's about to drop. Let's hope the national media gives it its due.

To the poster who compared the Duke scandal to Guantanamo, a better comparison would be to Maher Arar, the Canadian citizen of Syrian birth who was sent to Syria by U.S. authorities, where he was tortured, when it turns out that he had no ties to terrorism. One of the Duke players remarked that it's scary to think about what police and prosecutors can do to people who don't have the resources to defend themselves. I'm glad he said that and he's certainly correct, but, unfortunately, I highly doubt it's a "what if" situation. It has happened before and will happen again.

Blumenauer is wacky left wing?? Compared to Peter DeFazio?? Please explain. That sounds bizarre.

None of the US senators is poor, but a bunch are no more than middle class. Senators like Patty Murray and Russ Feingold, or freshmen Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders, don't come from money and have never earned super high salaries other than what they make as members of Congress. Members of Congress have to file documents annually listing their assets; their incomes are already public domain. According to CNN, in the 2003 reports 40 senators were millionaires while 60 weren't.

Denny Rehberg is not running against Max Baucus again. Nor is any substantive challenger to Kerry going to emerge. If William Weld couldn't beat him, it's unlikely anyone else is going to. Carl Levin and Frank Lautenberg are completely safe, but keep dreaming. Maybe Ken Blackwell can still be elected Governor of Ohio...

Republicans have great chances to win in La. and South Dakota. Montana could also become very competitive if Sec. of state Brad Johnson or US rep. Dennis Rehberg runs. According to recent polls (over the past 4 months) US senator John Kerry's approval ratings are in the negative. Does Mass. have a Rep. candidate that could make him vulnerable? I doubt it seriously. I know of none if there are. Does anyone have an answer for that? Also, Michigan and New Jersey have the potential to get interesting, as both state's have credible Republicans that could run. In New Jersey, Estabrook would be a fine candidate. She has the money to run her own campaign and could write big checks in order to beat Lautenberg. The question is, will the national climate be too much for her? In Michigan, AG Mike Cox or US reps.Candice Miller or Mike Rogers is likely to run and either one would be a great statewide candidate.

For the dems., they must look at Colorodo as their #1 pick-up chance. With Allard retiring, they have a good shot there to pick one up. Although, the Democratic convention being held there will tie Udall to the ultra-liberal left...which Colorodo is not. But that's still their best shot. IN Minn., Coleman is going to be hard to beat. He won a tough election in 02', and he's tested and seasoned. He doesn't mind going negative, so it will be a tough election there. Oregon is a pick up chance, especially if a pro gun guy like DeFazio runs. If not, then Smith is pretty liked in Ore. and has the ability to write big checks to help himself win. But Oregon is a product of the ntl. environment, which really helps the dems. b/c nationally it's very anti-rep. In NH, John Sununu will be a big target.

We have an interesting political season.

Oh Roger, these new pajamas are so soft and luxurious! You spoil me.

i almost forgot to remind you: http://dont-vote-plutocrat.blogspot.com

This guy has no idea how Maine politics works. Tom Allen will loose big time..By 20 percent or more..

Collins is the best Senator Maine has to offer..

Attention, VA Patriot. There will be a quiz later.

- The Democrats tried to raise minimum wage, to account for all that inflation that's been happening since they last raised it 20 years ago. If this does "actually increase unemployment," it goes against economics as I understand it; namely, as a symbiotic relationship between buyers and sellers in which each is able to gain what he / she wants / needs.
- The Democrats tried to force the president to acknowledge that his poorly justified / poorly planned / poorly executed five year adventure in a country which had no weapons of mass destruction has become an unsustainable and undesirable use of US forces, money, and international good will, with no apparent end in sight. Typically, he and his allies characterize this position (wrongly) as "surrender in Iraq."
- As have congresses since the beginning of time, yes, the Democrats added domestic spending to a critical war bill. I feel neither one way nor the other about this. Are you suggesting that the GOP has not recently been guilty of this, too? Where did that bridge go, do you remember?
- The Democrats tried to eliminate a voting system used in union votes which led to many employees being coerced or connived into opposing unionization. (note that I'm not saying unions are always good / appropriate, but in some cases they are, and they should always be an option. They should also be an option for employees of DHS.)
- The Democrats appointed William Jefferson to a Homeland Security panel, which was granted not the best decision, but still leaves this congress far more competently staffed than the one it succeeds
- The Democrats attacked Bush, appropriately exercising the oversight authority granted Congress by the Constitution (yet sadly unexercised for the past 6 years), on a series of issues about which many or most members and their constituents had grave concerns.
- The Democrats attacked Gonzales for abusing his role as Attorney General to hire and fire for purely political reasons... granted not a crime (although it should be), but remember that lying about it to the Senate is perjury. And there's more out now, involving the White House and Rove, so we may not have heard the whole story yet.
- Speaker Pelosi took the initiative to visit Syria, a major and well-armed regional player, on her tour of the Middle East. This is in contrast to Bush's childish refusal to talk to anyone mean.
- The Democrats appropriately elevated the issue of global warming to a major political focus. This is rapidly becoming the most important and relevant scientific news story ever, and the Democrats are treating it with the seriousness it deserves. It's about time we stopped listening to the preachers and starting paying attention to the scientists, at least on matters involving science. Somehow, the GOP doesn't see this.

What's coming soon:
- a realistic reassessment of our illegal immigration policy, designed to adapt it to our current economic and social conditions
- a limited repeal of the most irresponsible tax cut in US history, especially that portion provided as an additional benefit to those who neither asked for it nor needed it.
- universal health coverage, whether through the current system or some modification thereof.
- a continued refusal to divert the public investments contained in the Social Security system to the vagaries and conniving of the market.

Doesn't it sound nicer that way? More realistic, too.

Karl Rove: *The dog ate my hard drive.*

Mark Udall is very popular in his super-liberal Boulder district. But that district is a different world compared to most Coloradans who lean to the right. Bob Schaffer is a conservative through and through and he's not ashamed by it. He's popular--hardly scary--and very electable. In Colorado conservatism wins--which puts liberal Mark Udall behind the eight ball.

Oregon:

DeFazio wins easily in liberal Oregon. Blumenauer is whacky left-wing and will have a tougher time against fairly popular Gordon Smith (approval #s above 50%). My guess is that DeFazio will announce his candidacy and the GOP has to scrap to stay close in this race.

Wow, the Washington Post is predicting the Democrats will pickup seats in the Senate? What a surprise!! The WP already has personally impacted the VA Senate race last year, handing it to the incompetant Jim Webb. Now they have outlined their attack strategy.

Yet look at the RECORDS of the Democrats these days. Look at the issues they champion. Look at the LACK of success in accomplishing their agenda this year. What have the Democrat Congress accomplished to date?

- Tried to raise minimum wage, which will actually increase unemployment (stuck in conference)
- Tried to force the US surrender in Iraq
- Added $25B in domestic pork to a critical war bill
- Tried to eliminate secret ballots in union votes - a payback of the $500 million in union donations to the Dem Party
- Appointed William (cash in the fridge) Jefferson to a Homeland Security panel
- Attacked Bush on a series of issues
- Attacked Gonzales for something which is not illegal or immoral
- Failed attempt at International Diplomacy, negotiating with terrorists and screwing up Israeli - Arab issues
- Elevated screwball Al Gore's issue into a major political drama

And what's coming soon:
- Illegal immigration amnesty
- Largest tax increase in US history
- Socialized healthcare
- Another year negleting social security, Medicaid, and Medicare crisis

Can you tell me why you guys continue to believe the Democrats are here to help America?

This is why I http://dont-vote-democrat.blogspot.com

Nor'Easter: I know there are no poor Senators, poor choice of a word. What I was wondering was about how the bottom 10 Rich Senators voted on the bill, as well as the total nay and yea.

Not with a bang, my friends, but with a whimper:

Scientists claim radiation from handsets are to blame for mysterious 'colony collapse' of bees

It seems like the plot of a particularly far-fetched horror film. But some scientists suggest that our love of the mobile phone could cause massive food shortages, as the world's harvests fail.

They are putting forward the theory that radiation given off by mobile phones and other hi-tech gadgets is a possible answer to one of the more bizarre mysteries ever to happen in the natural world - the abrupt disappearance of the bees that pollinate crops. Late last week, some bee-keepers claimed that the phenomenon - which started in the US, then spread to continental Europe - was beginning to hit Britain as well.

The theory is that radiation from mobile phones interferes with bees' navigation systems, preventing the famously homeloving species from finding their way back to their hives. Improbable as it may seem, there is now evidence to back this up.

Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) occurs when a hive's inhabitants suddenly disappear, leaving only queens, eggs and a few immature workers, like so many apian Mary Celestes. The vanished bees are never found, but thought to die singly far from home. The parasites, wildlife and other bees that normally raid the honey and pollen left behind when a colony dies, refuse to go anywhere near the abandoned hives.

The alarm was first sounded last autumn, but has now hit half of all American states. The West Coast is thought to have lost 60 per cent of its commercial bee population, with 70 per cent missing on the East Coast.

CCD has since spread to Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, Italy and Greece. And last week John Chapple, one of London's biggest bee-keepers, announced that 23 of his 40 hives have been abruptly abandoned.

Other apiarists have recorded losses in Scotland, Wales and north-west England.

The implications of the spread are alarming. Most of the world's crops depend on pollination by bees. Albert Einstein once said that if the bees disappeared, "man would have only four years of life left".

Sorry, but it looks as if the public just might rather have "General Pelosi" and other Dem Congressional leaders calling the shots on troop levels than the Commander in Chief himself. Or so this number in the CBS poll suggests:

Currently, President Bush and Congress disagree about what to do about U.S. troop levels in Iraq. Who do you think should have the final say about troop levels in Iraq, the President or Congress?

President: 44%
Congress: 49%

The poll also finds that an astonishing 67 percent of respondents think Congress should either allow funding only with a withdrawal timeline (58%) or cut off funding completely (9%).

'In a sort of reverse "Nixon's secret plan to end the war" scenario, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., tells the NYT point blank that he has no "Plan B" for Iraq, should President Bush's "surge" strategy fail. McCain tells the paper that if it became clear the surge was not working, then he would try to think of another idea, but at present "I cannot give you a good alternative because if I had a good alternative, maybe we could consider it now."

The U.S. military has brought charges against dozens of soldiers and Marines in Iraq, including 64 servicemen linked to murders. Not a single case has been brought against a security contractor, and confusion is widespread among contractors and the military over what laws, if any, apply to their conduct.

'On the afternoon of July 8, 2006, four private security guards rolled out of Baghdad's Green Zone in an armored SUV. The team leader, Jacob C. Washbourne, rode in the front passenger seat. He seemed in a good mood. His vacation started the next day.

"I want to kill somebody today," Washbourne said, according to the three other men in the vehicle, who later recalled it as an offhand remark. Before the day was over, however, the guards had been involved in three shooting incidents. In one, Washbourne allegedly fired into the windshield of a taxi for amusement, according to interviews and statements from the three other guards.'

The U.S. military now confirms that Marines fired on civilians during an incident in Afghanistan last month, killing or injuring more than 40 people.

This is one of the most interestng things I've ssen in a while. The military implications of climate change. Makes sense.

'WASHINGTON (AP) -- Global warming poses a "serious threat to America's national security" and the U.S. likely will be dragged into fights over water and other shortages, top retired military leaders warn in a new report.

The report says that in the next 30 to 40 years there will be wars over water, increased hunger instability from worsening disease and rising sea levels and global warming-induced refugees. "The chaos that results can be an incubator of civil strife, genocide and the growth of terrorism," the 35-page report predicts.

"Climate change exacerbates already unstable situations," former U.S. Army chief of staff Gordon Sullivan told Associated Press Radio. "Everybody needs to start paying attention to what's going on. I don't think this is a particularly hard sell in the Pentagon. ... We're paying attention to what those security implications are."

Gen. Anthony "Tony" Zinni, President Bush's former Middle East envoy, says in the report: "It's not hard to make the connection between climate change and instability, or climate change and terrorism."

The report was issued by the Alexandria, Virginia-based, national security think-tank The CNA Corporation and was written by six retired admirals and five retired generals. They warn of a future of rampant disease, water shortages and flooding that will make already dicey areas -- such as the Middle East, Asia and Africa -- even worse.

"Weakened and failing governments, with an already thin margin for survival, foster the conditions for internal conflicts, extremism and movement toward increased authoritarianism and radical ideologies," the report says. "The U.S. will be drawn more frequently into these situations."

Joining calls already made by scientists and environmental activists, the retired U.S. military leaders call on the U.S. government to make major cuts in emissions of gases that cause global warming.

"We will pay for this one way or another," writes Zinni, former commander of U.S. Central Command. "We will pay to reduce greenhouse gas emissions today, and we'll have to take an economic hit of some kind. Or we will pay the price later in military terms. And that will involve human lives. There will be a human toll."

'Which seat is that magic Ninth Seat which would roll the Senate over to filibuster-proof Democratic control?'

Interesting question. A lot of sane comentary this morning -- how refreshing. Max Cleland I would love to see running agian. What happened to him was one of the most egregious dirty tricks I've ever seen in politics--Ann Coulter mocking a man because he had his limbs blown off serving his country. I guess that's supporting the troops, R-style.

Coleman, too. The things he said about Wellstone, a truly decent man, were despicable. And toward the end, the race was not that close. Wellstone was going to win. That was why there was a lot of whispering about what a strange coincidence, just 3 days before the election, he days in a small plane crash -- just like John Ashcroft's opponent did, who was pulling ahead, just 3 days before the election. I'm not saying, but some people did. All I know is, if I were a dem in a close race, there's certain things I'd avoid.

It's pouring, pouring here, getting floodier and floodier. Time for either an ark or a NorEaster bonnet.

Sandwich - It's; Rain, rain, Go Away!

Miserable Marathon tomorrow; Sox Patriot's Day game probably rained out. (Patriot's Day is really the 19th anyway.)

Lylepink - There are no poor Senators. You can rank the richest Senators from 1 to 100.

The 09:27 AM was mine. lylepink, sorry for the mistake in spelling.

More importantly, what does Hillary think of the bill? She's so cute.

Old Atlantic: How did the 10 poorest vote on the bill??

7 of the top 8 wealthiest Senators voted for S. 2611, amnesty, affirmative action, non-deportable crime, and a pathway for the top 1 percent of households to continue to enjoy 20 percent of each year's income, compared to 10 percent before Kennedy's 1965 Immigration Act. The only 1 of the top 8 who didn't vote for S. 2611 didn't vote, Jay Rockefeller. McCain is 7th and Kennedy 8th in wealth.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/overview.asp?type=W&cycle=2005&filter=S

Rank Name Minimum Net Worth Maximum Net Worth

1 Herb Kohl (D-Wis) $219,098,029 to $234,549,004 Voted Yes S. 2611

2 John Kerry (D-Mass) $165,741,511 to $235,262,100

Voted Yes S. 2611

3 Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa) $78,150,023 to $101,579,003 Not Voting S. 2611

4 Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) $43,343,464 to $98,660,021 Voted Yes S. 2611

5 Lincoln D. Chafee (R-RI) $41,153,105 to $64,096,019 Voted Yes S. 2611

6 Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) $38,198,170 to $90,733,019 Voted Yes S. 2611

7 John McCain (R-Ariz) $25,071,142 to $38,043,014

Voted Yes S. 2611

8 Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass) $19,189,049 to $93,043,004 Voted Yes S. 2611

Senators understand: immigration goes up, wages go down. Wages go down Senators' stocks go up. Senators understand, if emissions go up, their stocks go up. So they vote for emission, they vote for legal immigration.

Max Cleland would appear to stand a good chance in Ga. since Saxby has been a consistant supporter of GW. The races that would have been fairly close now are shaping up as a referendum on this Administration and the extent of their following, or support, of GW. As of now, I think the change to February by a lot of states has close to 70% of the votes and this could all be just about over by then. Texas could go dem if they select a hispanic as their candidate, for they make up a pretty big block and I think, don't know for sure, they vote for the dems by a good margin, but have been turned off and not voting because the dems have ignored them, as someone said earlier.

MikeB, do you think DeFazio would be a stronger candidate than Blumenauer? Why or why not? I'm curious.

Chris, Here in Oregon it is being reported that Peter Defazio is seriously thinking of running against Gordon Smith. If Mr. Defazio does, that seat goes Democratic almost automatically. In Oregon, Peter DeFazio has name recognition, sky high approval ratings, and is loved by just about everyone. On top of that, he is honest, extremely hard working for his constituents, and just a nice man. He'll win in a walk. So, depending upon Peter's decision, that Senate seat might just be the top of your list.

Any chance of Max Cleland running for his old seat in GA? I'd really like to see that.

Why is DeFazio considered a stronger candidate than Blumenauer in OR? Blumenauer is from the state's biggest media market and perceived to be more moderate?

"Yes, Colemanwas elected after the death of Paul Wellstone, but he was also giving Wellstone a strong challenge prior to his sad death."

True, but go back and look at the 2002 MN polls, and you'll see Wellstone narrowly leading in almost all of them. Look at those taken after his October 3 speech opposing the Iraq war, and you see the race breaking in Wellstone's favor--he was 11 points ahead of Coleman in one, and I don't think he tied with or trailed Coleman once after that. The race was trending our way until the plane crash, even in a Republican year. Furthermore, Wellstone's numerous dedicated supporters nationwide have not forgotten Coleman's behavior in 2002 and 2003 ("I'm a 99 percent improvement"), and will pull out all the stops to turn him out of office.

William: Was John Sununu's willingness to hold up renewal of the Patriot Act an example of his lockstep marching with Bush?

Chris: Dick Wadhams will be so strong for the GOP nominee in CO--you mean like he helped George Allen get reelected in VA in 2006? And George Nethercutt unseat Patty Murray in WA in 2004? Oh, wait. Neither of those things happened. Allen lost a safe seat, and Murray was reelected by 16 points. Hm, maybe Wadhams is as unbeatable as Bob Shrum.

Nor'easter: I thought you were busy snowstorming this weekend? ;)

I recognize Chris commenting on the Colorado Senate race. He's one of the robot followers of the Independence Institute (former president, guy by name of Tancredo) who are leaving a smokin' hole where my Colorado Republican Party used to be.

Bob Schaffer is a principled true believer (he kept his term limits pledge, unlike the aforementioned Tancredo) but isn't the brightest guy and, in his right-wing obsessiveness, is scary to all but the other true believers (who truly, deeply believe the intensity of their belief outweighs their limited numbers).

Dick Wadhams is a talented political op in the Rovian mold. He was the difference in getting a nice-guy, small town veterinarian elected to the Senate--but let's see how he does with a candidate who's more extreme than George Allen, but without Allen's subtlety of expression.

Udall is an attractive candidate who will get the nomination without opposition. He's a centrist Democrat in the Colorado tradition whose moderate views match up well with the large body of independents who decide Colorado state-wide elections. The best Chris and his Indy robots can come up with is the fact that Boulder is in Udall's district (even though the equally left-wing true believers in Boulder don't much like him).

If the Colorado Republicans do end up letting Shaffer get the nomination, it will be the equivalent of conceding the race. that is, unfortunately however, what I expect.

Some of you people are so weird. Why can't you keep a conversion on topic?

Anyway, Colorado is staying red. Udall is just too liberal for conservative Colorado. It might be close but barring a massive blue wave like we saw in '06 Schaffer is winning that race.

Just wondering: This list shows the 8 Republican senate seats most likey to switch to the Democrats.
Who would be the ninth most likely to switch?

The math on this is obvious: If the 2008 mood is as favorable as possible to the Democrats, a pick-up of nine seats in the Senate gives them a filibuster-proof majority.
To that end, the Democrats would be targeting these 8 seats (Colorado, Mew Hampshire, Minnesota, Oregon, Maine, Virginia, New Mexico, and North Carolina) plus . . . ?

Which seat is that magic Ninth Seat which would roll the Senate over to filibuster-proof Democratic control?

I say that you are a dirty, uneducated inbred hillbilly. And a fake phoney christian. Not to mention that you support a president who lied to start a war. You hillbillies need to be kept on a short leash incase you become uppity again.

'people that come to the south to change the culture should be treated as criminals and the state should be able to execute them.''

I say you're William the racist and you should be executed -- just like you would a rabid dog.

Hey southerners: States' rights to do what? States rights give states the authority to allow communities to make decisions, not the federal gov't. It says that the federal gov't's. constitution may not be good for all communities at all times. The same things aren't good for San Francisco Cali. and Savannah Ga. The people just live in different cultures and shouldn't be under the exact same rules. States rights allows states to enact values that represent their cultures. If people come there that don't like their laws and cultures Ronald Reagan said it best..."You can vote with your feet." That's what I suggest all these damn people here in NC do that don't like our sweet southern culture. Stopping for funerals, say yes sir n yes ma'am, holding the door for folks and respecting God & country. If ya don't like it, get the Hell out is my advice. In my view, people that come to the south to change the culture should be treated as criminals and the state should be able to execute them. This is my viewpoint...what say you?

'about power for special interest groups '

Really what mysterious 'special interest groups' would those be? Care to be more specific? Cause that kind of sounds like tinfoil hat time.

I agree that Imus had every right to say it. I miscommunicated that. But his bosses also had every right to fire him after his sponsors dropped out. That's what the free market is about. If you offend a large group of people, they will not buy your sponsor's products. Christians have been using this technique for some time now. Is that the 'special interest group' you're talking about?

"get over it. the central fact remains -- Imus had no right to say what he did about those young women. you're an idiot."

Wrong! Imus had every right to say it. Unless you do not believe in the Constitution, and you are one of the Thought Police facists.

The hypocrisy of the "we can say things, but you can't" philosophy overwhelms me.

You may think me an idiot, but I'm not so stupid as to realize that there's been rampant hypocrisy in this whole Imus thing.

Those offended young women managed to accept his apology, but you Nazis are still out there trying to control what anybody you don't agree with says.

I'll get over it, when you PC people finally admit that it's about power for special interest groups (make that pressure groups, not decency in how we communicate.

CASABLANCA, Morocco, April 14 (Reuters) - Two suicide bombers blew themselves up outside U.S. diplomatic offices in Morocco's commercial hub Casablanca on Saturday in the first such attack in Morocco in four years, witnesses said.
The bloodshed coincided with a U.S. embassy warning in neighbouring Algeria that armed groups might strike in Algiers again, less than a week after suicide bombs there revived fears of a return to the full-scale Algerian conflict of the 1990s.

WASHINGTON -- Money woes and Pentagon neglect are to blame for shoddy outpatient conditions and bureaucratic delays at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, an independent review has concluded.

The blistering report called for major changes in troop care and cautioned that problems probably extend to Army hospitals around the country.

"The American ethic is that America always takes care of its wounded," said John O. "Jack" Marsh, Army secretary during the Reagan administration and co-chairman of the review. "We must make certain that America continues that ethic."

Co-chairman Togo D. West, secretary of the Army and Veterans Affairs under President Clinton, blasted the Pentagon's "virtually incomprehensible" inattention to maintenance at Walter Reed as well as an "almost palpable disdain" for troop care.

"Although Walter Reed's rich tradition remains to this day unchallenged, its high reputation has not been maintained," he said.

The investigation, ordered two months ago by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, is the first Pentagon review since the disclosure of problems at Walter Reed, one of the premier facilities for treating those wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Citing lapses in leadership and oversight as main reasons for the problems, the nine-member independent group concluded that the Defense Department was, or should have been, aware of the widespread problems but neglected them..

In addition, the Pentagon made problems worse by ordering a hold-down on costs and expenses -- dubbed "efficiency wedges" -- even as Walter Reed began experiencing an influx of thousands of veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The report said the Pentagon was ill-prepared to deal with growing numbers of troops suffering from traumatic brain injury or post-traumatic stress disorder.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The fate of World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz overshadowed meetings of global finance chiefs on Saturday, as Britain said his actions had damaged the bank and critics stepped up calls for him to quit.

As the spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank kicked off, Bank staff and anti-poverty activists prepared to stage a protest calling for the resignation of Wolfowitz over his role in the promotion of his girlfriend, Shaha Riza, for which he has apologized.

Britain, the bank's second largest shareholder after the United States, said that the scandal had damaged the institution and that a decision on his fate should now lie with the bank's board.

"While this whole business has damaged the bank and should not have happened, we should respect the board's process," British development minister Hilary Benn said in a statement.

Muleman -- yeah we got some pretty egregious and shameless crooks right now. But unlike other times in our past, news of this corruption is not getting through to a lot of people.

The rightwing think tanks and Big Money that supports the network of reliably con pundits and commentators has created a parallel universe with an entirely different set of 'facts' and 'realities'. Like Fox. They simply aren't reporting all the scandals come out of the Justice Department -- it simply does not exist for them or their viewers. See no evil....And when they do hear about such things -- they just decide to ignore them. All a liberal plot, you know all bad things that hurt them are all liberal plots.

Dems are the new jews. It's all our fault. Yesterday Rush Limbaugh was telling his audience, as he often does, that they should stop reading newspapers and watching news on TV, becuase it all had a 'liberal agenda'. Donn't listen to what they say about republican candidates, don't listen to what they say about iraq, or what our government is doing.

Just listen to Rush, he says, I'm the only one with no agenda, the only one who has your, the little guy's, interesting at heart.

Unbelievable, really. But even more so the response from his callers. People phoning in, like dogs, like zombies, like trained seals, saying, 'I only listen to you Rush. I've been listening since I was 15... you changed my life. '

I really thought I was going to vomit.

Now we've learned that Wolfowitz dictated the terms of the pay raise for his sweetie. He has used his "anti-corruption" mantra at the World Bank to further the Administration's "my way or the highway mantra. Of course, he's never been held to account for his promise that Iraqi oil revenues would pay all but $50B of the Iraq War costs.
Candidates in 2008 should use him as a poster child of all that's wrong with the current bunch in power. If Susan Collins can't wrap her arms around this, hit her and hit her again with this. Same with John Cornyn and Saxby Chambliss.
American history is replete with examples of voters smelling real corruption and voting the scum out. Muleman suggests that a lot of these creeps are ripe for the picking.

ALL of the rightwing radio jocks make those kind of remarks -- like every day. That's what their audience wants to hear.

"And it gets ruined by this disgusting -- and I'll use the word 'disgusting' -- comment which doesn't belong in any polite company and certainly doesn't belong on any radio station that I would listen to," Rice told talk show host Michael Medved.

Posted by: GO CONDI. And she'll repeat the same on the Glenn Beck, Limbaugh, and Hannity, shows, since those three bobbleheads are such paragons of good manners and moderate discourse...

*** The Line: Senate Playing Field Still Favors Dems *** Note the use of *still* by Chris the Bushie. He is STILL hoping against hope that the Republicans won't get their clock cleaned in 2008.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the highest-ranking black woman in government history, said the racist, sexist comments that got radio shock jock Don Imus fired were "disgusting."

In her first public remarks on the controversy, Rice said Friday that Imus had insulted not only female athletes but all young black women by referring to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy headed hos."

"They're 18- and 19-year-old women," she said. "And what were they doing except showing that they're really fine athletes, playing under extraordinary pressure in which for them was a dream season.

"And it gets ruined by this disgusting -- and I'll use the word 'disgusting' -- comment which doesn't belong in any polite company and certainly doesn't belong on any radio station that I would listen to," Rice told talk show host Michael Medved.

It's easy to be distracted, even slightly amused, by the banal office shenanigans that make up the day-to-day coverage of the scandal. Increasingly, the Justice Department is revealed in all its wacky Dunder Mifflin glory. Alberto Gonzales is unmasked as The Office's Michael Scott--in so far over his head that he has no idea what his youthful employees are up to. With our daily focus on who was e-mailing whom and who was spending what on their fancy investitures, it's tempting to dismiss senior Justice Department staff ranking U.S. attorneys for their "loyalty" to the president as sophomoric. The Duke case is a useful reminder that the little plastic game cards being shuffled around and swapped by Kyle Sampson and Monica Goodling were, in fact, loaded weapons.

Federal prosecutors, like state district attorneys, have tremendous power and almost limitless discretion to launch investigations, to subpoena, to file charges, to question witnesses, and to drop charges when the facts don't bear them out. And if the Duke case reminds us of anything, it's that the innocent targets of such investigations and indictments have only one power: to wait it all out and hope for the best.
When politics are injected into these individual prosecutions--when officials have one eye on the law and the other on mollifying either the party bosses or local voters--it's a certainty that justice will be lost in the shuffle.

In Durham, the politics that drove Mike Nifong were complicated: Race and class and his need to pander to voters in an election year may have motivated him, in the words of Attorney General Cooper, to "push forward unchecked." But if these subtle pressures can twist a district attorney in Durham, imagine the damage to justice when a U.S. attorney is pressed by the White House, or his congressman, to haul in more death penalties, at whatever cost, or to hand down an indictment by November.

Senate Democrats have begun to scrutinize the prosecutions undertaken by some of the U.S. attorneys who kept their jobs last year, beginning with the case of a Wisconsin state worker who got an 18-month jail sentence for a corruption case. When a three-judge panel of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals dramatically overturned Georgia Thompson's conviction after oral argument last week and ordered her released immediately from prison, one of the judges opined that the prosecution's evidence against her was "beyond thin."

On the basis of that thin evidence, however, Thompson served four months in prison, lost her job, and sold her home in order to pay more than $250,000 in legal bills.

Iraq. The Defense Department announces a surprise minisurge: Active-duty soldiers will have their tours extended from a year to 15 months. Elsewhere, a suicide bomb rips through the cafeteria of Iraq's parliament building, killing eight and wounding many more. It's the worst attack yet on the Green Zone, but balding Sen. John McCain says it is not part of the "larger picture." Muqtada Sadr, meanwhile, encourages Shiite militias and Iraqi security forces to stop fighting one another--a touching call for solidarity amid so much sectarianism. Now they can focus on blowing up Americans.

The proposed revisions to FISA would also allow the government to keep information obtained "unintentionally," unrelated to the purpose of the surveillance. Currently such information is destroyed unless it indicates threat of death or serious bodily harm.

And they provide for compelling telecommunications companies and e-mail providers to cooperate with investigations while protecting them from being sued by their subscribers. The legal protection would be applied retroactively to those companies that cooperated with the government after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.'

'The woman at the center of the storm surrounding World Bank President Paul D. Wolfowitz has spent the past few months trying to get one of the signature efforts of President Bush's Middle East 'democracy' campaign off the ground.

The Foundation for the Future, as the effort is called, has made no grants and held only two board meetings since its creation 1 1/2 years ago. Though Shaha Riza, who is romantically linked to Wolfowitz, is not listed as part of the staff on the organization's Web site, she is the only person working in the group's offices, located within the Henry L. Stimson Center, a think tank. The Washington office is listed as a "branch," according to the site, which promises that soon a main office will be established in Beirut.

"It is basically just her running this thing," said Tamara Cofman Wittes, research fellow at the Brookings Institution Saban Center for Middle East Policy, who closely tracks democracy programs in the region. She said the board members had no experience in grant-making and thus had "started from zero," with no bylaws or grant-making guidelines. She said the board has had a goal of trying to make its first grant by summer, nearly two years after the organization was formed.'

The United States contributed almost two-thirds of the foundation's $56 million budget, according to the State Department, which said last night that the foundation plans to hire a chief operating officer and chief financial officer next month.

Since September 2005, the World Bank has paid Riza's salary -- which under the terms of a contract dictated by Wolfowitz included automatic raises that has brought it to $193,590 tax-free -- while she was seconded to the State Department to assist on Middle East 'democracy' issues. There, she worked under Elizabeth Cheney, who was then principal deputy assistant secretary; Wolfowitz worked for Cheney's father as an undersecretary of defense in the George H.W. Bush administration.

How scared is the White House? The White House News Network, otherwise known as the scumbuckets at Fox have totally erased all references to the exploding USA/Missing Email/Voter Fraud/Contempt of Congress/Violation of a bunch of federal laws scandals in favor of:

STRANGULATION, MURDER and MUTILATION! SEX!! BETRAYAL!!'

And Drudge happily reports on Sharpton death threats...

See William, it works! Death wishes become death threats... and eventually become death itself.

Al Sharpton may be a jerk, but you all believe he should be murdered for that, don't you? You believe in Free speech but only for people you agree with.

Why do 'conservatives' hate america so much?

I am from MN, and among most Minnesotans, it is common knowledge that Coleman got his job on a fluke. I believe that many Minnesotans always believed that he would serve his term and lose to whomever the Dems nominate. The National press gives Coleman a lot of credit because of the way the GOP has pinned quite a bit of their hopes and dreams on him. I think he just doesn't have the votes, especially not with the way the presidential race is turning out. Minnesota won't go republican, so there just won't be enough republicans out to topple the DLF presence.

'It was convenient for Sharpton and Kilpatrick to take that non-slip of the tongue and make it something other than what it actually was.'

get over it. the central fact remains -- Imus had no right to say what he did about those young women. you're an idiot. They did nothing to deserve it -- all they did was work their hearts out to achieve their dreams.

He is a cheap clown.

So what's the response of the regime to all this corruption and depravity? Here's Michael Leavitt, the secretary of HHS in his own sick words:

Medicare: 'No Need for Negotiations'

Health and Human Services Secretary Michael O. Leavitt and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Acting Director Leslie Norwalk held a briefing for reporters this morning in which they said the current program -- in which private drug plans set prices -- is working.'

Sure it is -- for them.

'The unorthodox roll call on one of the most expensive bills ever placed before the House of Representatives began in the middle of the night, long after most people in Washington had switched off C-SPAN and gone to sleep.

The only witnesses were congressional staffers, hundreds of lobbyists, and U.S. Representatives like Dan Burton, R-Ind., and Walter Jones, R-N.C.

"The pharmaceutical lobbyists wrote the bill," says Jones. "The bill was over 1,000 pages. And it got to the members of the House that morning, and we voted for it at about 3 a.m. in the morning."

Why did the vote finally take place at 3 a.m.?

"Well, I think a lot of the shenanigans that were going on that night, they didn't want on national television in primetime," according to Burton.

"I've been in politics for 22 years," says Jones, "and it was the ugliest night I have ever seen in 22 years."

http://www.cbsnews.com/...

--and that is from a republican, my friends..

'WASHINGTON, March 6 PRNewswire-USNewswire -- Brand name prescription drug prices continue to rise at about three times the rate of inflation, according to the latest AARP Watchdog Report.

AARP's Watchdog Report found that ten of the brand name drugs it tracks increased at least four times the rate of general inflation during 2006. Ambien led the pack with a 29.7 percentage increase in manufacturer price, followed by Combivent at 18.3 percent and Atrovent Inhaler at 16.9 percent.'

And remember, you're paying twice -- once in taxpayer money, from pharmaceutical subsides, and then again, at the counter -- and at higher prices than anywhere else in the entire world.

here are literally hundreds of magazines that cater to the healthcare industry. Are you surprised? Healthcare in the United States accounts for something like a 3 trillion annually.

There's a magazine called Managed Healthcare Executive. It's sub-head is For Decision Makers in Healthcare. Managed Heathcare Executive exists to enable health insurance CEOs and executives squeeze out higher profits, hence it has articles like this.

'How to effectively manage Medicare enrollments

Most Medicare Advantage and Part D sponsors share a common goal: make Medicare a more profitable line of business. To help alleviate some of the challenges associated with enrollment practices, consider the following tips:

http://www.managedhealthcareexecutiv...'

The Congressional Budget Office has reported that current reimbursement levels for Medicare Advantage are already about 12 percent higher than traditional Medicare. Bringing them in line with Medicare costs could save the federal government $160-billion over 10 years, the budget office said.

Okay, so much for the truth about Medicare Advantage.

"I can't win with you people" "What's wrong with you people" "What's the matter with you people" are phrases used by Imus all of the time, especially his on-air staff.

It was convenient for Sharpton and Kilpatrick to take that non-slip of the tongue and make it something other than what it actually was. And all of those critics pontificating from Ivory Towers who have no idea what Imus was all about, just picked up the bones thrown to them and started beating on him with them.

Including some columnists here at the Washington Post. I guess you don't have to research, verify and fact check when you write an opinion column.

The Washington Post - second only to Fox News!

Pat Robertson didn't have to run for President after being embasrassed the first time.

He found the perfect vehicle for hijacking the government. Get a dupe and let him plant accolytes throughout the government.

Sounds like what the Viet Cong did in the those "freely elected" governments which we supported for so long.

The Ho Chi Minh of American politics, Pat Robertson.

'The storm's combination of snow, rain and high wind was extremely unusual for this time of year, said Brian Korty, a National Weather Service forecaster in Camp Springs, Md.'

However, columnist Sylvester Brown, who often writes about race for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, bristles at the credit Sharpton might receive for bringing down Imus.

"Al Sharpton is a convenient diversion from what really happened to Imus," Brown said. "This was so egregious, so over the line, it would have happened anyway, with or without Sharpton."

Sharpton's involvement, along with the involvement of the Rev. Jesse Jackson, Brown said, created "an easy excuse for those who didn't want to grapple with the complicated layers of this issue, to just point at Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and say, 'It's their fault.'"

Media critic Susan Douglas, a professor of communications at the University of Michigan, agreed that Sharpton may have gotten more attention than his role merited.

"The public face of this story might look like it was Al Sharpton," she said, and at least for a few days that might have been true, due in large part to Imus' Monday appearance on Sharpton's radio show. But even there, she said it was Imus' own words, not Sharpton, that inflamed the story.

"When he said, 'I can't win with you people,' he was finished," Douglas said.

"I work the for the fed gov, in a manner of speaking" = Beltway Bandit.

Feed at the Federal trough and then complain about the ranch hand that provides the food.

The recent scandal surrounding the Justice Department's firing of several US attorneys has inadvertently revealed the dangerous influence the religious right wields over the current administration. While the media is focused on the political firings of these attorneys, the connection between the administration and Pat Robertson's Regent University -- which has seen over 150 graduates hired by the Bush administration in recent years -- is a more worrisome reality.

These extremists have long sought to merge their ideology with government policy, a reality that we understand all too well. And this serious threat to democracy has received little attention from mainstream media.

The infiltration of the federal government by large numbers of people seeking to impose a religious agenda -- which is very different from simply being people of faith -- is one of the most important stories of the last six years. It's also a story that tends to go underreported, perhaps because journalists are afraid of sounding like conspiracy theorists. But this conspiracy is no theory. Think of it -- 150 graduates from a single school, new, and best known for mediocricy.

Imagine if 150 Jews or Muslims from a single religious school were installed at Justice. What would you think then?

'There is a great debate in the 2008 campaign.

On one side stands the John McCain of the New Hampshire primary of 2000 advocating integrity in politics, religious tolerance, and mutual respect across the aisles in Congress.

His opponent in this debate, is John McCain running for President in 2008, as the friend of Falwell, and the partisan heir to Republicans Richard Nixon and Joe McCarthy.

McCain is Bush 43.5.

It is not enough to disagree with opponents, he must accuse them of surrender, defeat, and helping our enemies.

It is not enough to offer a different point of view, McCain makes fun of the facial expressions of his opponents, mocking them with the lie that they laugh and smile to help our enemies.

Sadly for America, and for McCain, the McCain of McCarthyism has defeated the McCain of the Straight Talk Express. The McCain who said American politics should be lifted to causes greater than our own, lost to the McCain who sinks our politics, because he will do anything to win.'

Read the right wing commentary today and it's all about the absurdity of firing Don Imus positioned against the poor Duke lacrosse players who were slandered and had their lives ruined (ruined is probably too strong a word here, but let's say they had a bad time of it) by the media, Al Sharpton, and an overzealous prosecutor.

But the links between the Imus furor and the Duke rape case are as thin as the thread in Al Sharpton's finely tailored suit. The real comparison is what happened at Duke and what continues to happen in Guantanamo Bay. What was wrong in North Carolina is a prosecutor and a public media (see Nancy Grace) declared several men guilty before they were found guilty in a court of law and the accused suffered. People have been in Guantanamo for years now without being accused of anything, on little or no evidence. People get all excited when rich white people are falsely accused of crimes, but many of these people also support extraordinary rendition, torture, and detaining non-combatants without trials. What happened at Duke sucks. Innocent until proven guilty is part of our constitution for a reason. It should be continually present when thinking about law and justice. It's something we've left behind in the ever accelerating race to be tough on crime and the non-winnable "War On Terror!!!". Now we have an example the privileged class can relate to. Let's look closely at the case of these wrongly accused white people from Duke University and apply the lessons we learn to the law of the land, especially the land that we occupy in Cuba.

Continuing to excavate a political mine that I thought had long been exhausted, George Bush and John McCain both repeatedly evoked 9/11 in delusional, peace-through-escalation speeches on Iraq this week.

Speaking in front of American Legionnaires in Fairfax, Virginia, the president brought to mind a played-out nostalgia band, dragging out the moldy-oldie hits from days long past.

There were the four mentions of September 11, the nod to the heroism of the passengers on United Flight 93, and the reminders of his tough-talking, dead-or-alive glory days: "I vowed that day that we would go on the offensive against an enemy... I vowed that if you harbor a terrorist you're equally as guilty as the terrorist. That's a doctrine." He even threw in a "It's hard work." I half-expected one of the Legionnaires to toss the president a megaphone so he could recreate his Ground Zero "I hear you" smash.

And, remarkably, he offered four different versions of his classic Flypaper rationale for continuing the war (c'mon, everyone, sing along, you know the words):

"We want to defeat them there, so we don't have to face them there."

"The best way to defeat the enemy is to find them overseas and bring them to justice so they will not hurt the folks here at home."

"What's interesting and different about this war is that the enemy would follow us here."

"It's in our interests....to pursue the enemy overseas so we don't have to face them here."

If the news ticker at the bottom of the TV screen hadn't been filled with stories about Imus, Gonzales' subpoena, and Anna Nicole's baby, I would have thought I was watching a presidential speech from 2002.'

'A U.S. attorney in Wisconsin who prosecuted a state Democratic official on corruption charges during last year's heated governor's race was once targeted for firing by the Department of Justice, but given a reprieve for reasons that remain unclear. A federal appeals court last week threw out the conviction of Wisconsin state worker Georgia Thompson, saying the evidence was "beyond thin."

Congressional investigators looking into the firings of eight U.S. attorneys saw Wisconsin prosecutor Steven M. Biskupic's name on a list of lawyers targeted for removal when they were inspecting a Justice Department document not yet made public, according to an attorney for a lawmaker involved in the investigation. The attorney asked for anonymity because of the political sensitivity of the investigation.

erhaps most interestingly, the later e-mails give a rare window into how a modern White House spins a scandal, with aides discussing ever evolving rationales for the firings.

The Washington Post leads with reports that American troops responded to a suicide bombing with excessive force, killing 12 civilians, including 2 children.

Even if the congressional investigation of the U.S. attorney firings yields no more evidence that the dismissals were nefarious, it will have been more than worthwhile for the window that's been opened into the internal workings of the Bush administration. The latest revelation, of course, is that top White House aides, including Karl Rove, used e-mail accounts set up by the Republican National Committee--and that some of the messages they sent--as many as five million--are missing, including e-mails that relate to the U.S. attorney firings.

This looks fishy when viewed in the bright light of the 1978 Presidential Records Act, which requires record-keeping as opposed to record-hiding-and-losing, and the 1939 Hatch Act, which limits the partisan political activity of government officials. "It's a mistake we are trying to fix," says a senior administration official. "I know the conspiracy theories will be running wild."

You don't have to wear a tinfoil hat to get conspiratorial about these e-mails, though. None other than disgraced superlobbyist Jack Abramoff explains why. In 2003, he accidentally wrote an indiscreet e-mail to Rove aide Susan Ralston (Abramoff's former assistant) on her White House e-mail account. After a White House official alerted his office that doing so would limit the political help he could get, Abramoff fired off this message: "Dammit. It was sent to Susan on her rnc pager and was not supposed to go into the WH system." That makes it seem pretty clear that at least in some cases, RNC e-mail accounts were used to stay outside the law.

The spiritual ministry department of the National Institutes of Health, which serves patients being treated in the nation's premier research hospital, is in disarray and battling a lawsuit and discrimination complaints that allege bias against Jewish and Catholic chaplains.

In February, a federal panel ordered the hospital to reinstate a Catholic priest who was wrongfully fired in 2004. In January, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had found that he was the target of "discriminatory and retaliatory animus." Three other former chaplains have said that they also were wrongfully terminated.

They have accused O. Ray Fitzgerald, a Methodist minister and the former head of the spiritual ministry department, of anti-Semitism and anti-Catholicism. They say that NIH retaliated against them when they spoke up and invented reasons for terminating them.'

pity the poor christians. always whining about how they're being picked on. boohoo.

'Bombers target Iraq bridges, shrine

Attackers blew up a car bomb on a bridge in Baghdad Saturday -- the second attack on a major crossing point in the Iraq capital in three days. Police said at least 10 people were killed. Earlier, a blast hit a crowded market near the Imam Ali shrine in the holy city of Karbala. At least 43 people died and 55 more were hurt, a hospital official said.'

'States rule. Feds should do very specific things (and I work the for the fed gov, in a manner of speaking) and nothing else.

GTFO of our lives, please.'

And that would include abortion and gay marriage, right?

'Liberals, having destroyed CA, NJ, NY, MA'

Yes, destroyed them by making them the most prosperous states with the highest per capita incomes in the country...

'liberals are like a virus or cancer,' eh? you are really sick. that's the republican party of today. blinded with rage and hate.

you are the ugly face of communism, fascism, conservatism... the sound just like Adolph Hitler... he used those kinds of words too -- and about liberals and intelectuals and jews too.

that's what you people want -- a dictator. a murderous dictator to get rid of your boogeymen, your scapegoats, the ones you blame everything on because you can't face your own miserable failure.

The barrage of TV ads from "Americans United for Change" provided a lot of free publicity for Senator Collins - she wasn't that well known by many southern Maine voters. By the election the specifics of the ads will be long forgotten - the ads were barely intelligible anyway - but certainly the name recognition will stick.

Blarg, sorry that we have this base disagreement. I think my thinking is more in line with what the founders intended, but, whatever.

States rule. Feds should do very specific things (and I work the for the fed gov, in a manner of speaking) and nothing else.

GTFO of our lives, please.

Interesting comments today. Dole in NC is one I cannot figure, after the Meet The Press fiasco, I just can't get it out of my mind every time I read or hear something about her. I have a hunch that she will not run again. La., I just can't see this guy Jindal getting very far against any dem. that gets on the ticket. I think he has been mentioned before because he has ran several times and not fared very well.

Colorado is nowhere near as conservative as Texas. Colorado went 52-47 for Bush. That is not even close to Texas. That's purple.

Schaffer is nowhere near Udall's caliber as a candidate. The guy got crushed by Pete Coors, a bad campaigner, in a primary. Udall will easily defeat him. The GOP's only chance to hold that seat is with state AG John Suthers.

Baker raised only $94K to Landrieu's million-plus. He might be interested, but right now, he doesn't look like he's got the resources.

I also think the line should consider dipping its toe below #10. Some interesting stuff going on in the cheap seats. (See Sparks, Ron.)

On Udall, ya'll should do your research. Guess who had a higher rating from the Gun Owners of America in 2005: Salazar, or Udall? Udall, by about 50 percentage points.
And a 25% rating from the National Right to Life Committee is hardly pro-life (Salazar). As for Ritter, he's hardly the NRA's best ally.
He's open to the "Boulder Liberal" rating, but his positions on guns and abortion aren't that different from Salazar. It's merely the fact that he's not from rural Colorado that will hurt him. The race shouldn't be number one on the list, but whoever's facing Udall will have a race.

And Warner would crush Tom Davis in an open seat VA Senate match-up. NoVA might like Davis, but they like Warner a whole lot more. Add that to the fact that he already has his bona fides in rural VA (cutting into the margins there) and Mark Warner would be the favorite. Not unbeatable, but the favorite.

Mark of Austin

sorry if I missed you - old people take naps -

No I believe Austin sees the LRGV as loyal and can be dismissed - hopefully it is not too late to get us back

I am a big Richardson fan for several reasons - [1] hands down he is the most qualified; [2] he is loved in West Texas and could put Texas into play - if TExas goes Dem in 2008 the election is over we win

Bobby Wightman-Cervantes

Davis - Warner a tossup? No way! In his re-election for the VA 11th CD, Davis got only 55% of the vote to his opponent's 44%, and, here's the biggie, Davis spent $3,000,000 and his opponent spent only $300,000.
Davis is not a moderate, although he plays one on TV, has a lot of baggage with his marital situation, and is not well known in the rest of Virginia. Mark Warner, on the other hand, is not only well-known throughout Virginia, he is well-liked, having a 70% approval rating.

"Liberals, having destroyed CA, NJ, NY, MA, etc, are now too irresponsible and immature to live with the mess they created, so they are jumping ship, and like the AIDS virus or cancer..."

Oh, so it's time for this again! You're starting to repeat yourself, William. Go on, tell everyone how the liberals destroyed those states. Be specific, and back it up with numbers. If you instead choose to continue comparing the majority of the country's voters to a deadly virus, I'll just accept that as your admission that you're just a bloviating moron.

"The issue is, should the Federal Gummint be able to dictate to the states where the flags should fly."

Didn't know that Federal involvement had become an "issue." It's all been local from what I've seen over the past 15 years.

As usual William is incorrect on some of his history. The Georgia State flag incorporated the Confederate Battle flag in 1956 after Brown v. Topeka Board of Ed. and a little before Eisenhower had to send the 101st Airborne into Little Rock to allow Blacks kids to attend the public High School there.

That was right around the time that Christian academies began popping-up all over the South. Christian academies? Maybe they taught the New Testament? I wonder how; but maybe they did.

Chris,

I heard you on with Hugh Hewitt the other day and you sound like a great guy. But your assessement of Colorado is so typically Beltway. You don't get it. You've bought the idea that a few key centrist Democratic wins in Colorado means the state is hereby irrevocably blue.

It's not. It's still a fairly conservative state with a well-known and well-liked conservative, in Bob Schaffer, running. Conservatism in Colorado doesn't guarantee you a win--but it sure as heck doesn't put you behind!

Dick Wadhams is a tough cookie and on his homefield I wouldn't bet against him. It's gonna be a nail-biter, but I think Schaffer wins. Udall is just too liberal for the suburban and rural voters that have gone for Salazar and Ritter.

Chris,

I heard you on with Hugh Hewitt the other day and you sound like a great guy. But your assessement of Colorado is so typically Beltway. You don't get it. You've bought the idea that a few key centrist Democratic wins in Colorado means the state is hereby irrevocably blue.

It's not. It's still a fairly conservative state with a well-known and well-liked conservative, in Bob Schaffer, running. Conservatism in Colorado doesn't guarantee you a win--but it sure as heck doesn't put you behind!

Dick Wadhams is a tough cookie and on his homefield I wouldn't be against him. It's gonna be a nail-biter, but I think Schaffer wins. Udall is just too liberal for the suburban and rural voters that have gone for Salazar and Ritter.

Hello Mountain Man -

Thank you for your take on Udall. I suspect that "Boulder liberal" is the Colorado equivalent of Texas' "Austin liberal".

University towns do that, don't they?

Are you pleased with Ken Salazar? He looks like the kind of western Democrat who could be elected in
Texas, from here.

Hello, Bobby Wightman-Cervantes -

Do you have someone in mind as a strong candidate against Sen. Cornyn?

I have said elsewhere that my Democratic friends in Austin believe that only Bill Richardson can help the down-ticket Democrats, among the Presidential candidates. Do you think that Austin perception is borne out by your sense of what is going on in the Valley?

Hey southerners: States' rights to do what?

No one ever seems to finish the sentence. Wonder why that is.

JD, that might be your issue, but it isn't mine.

William, my point is that the South has a lot more political power than any other part of the country. Particularly more power than the Northeast. So it's pretty hard to believe that you're being oppressed by us. It's just like how conservative Christians complain that they're being oppressed, even though this is an overwhelmingly Christian country. You just like playing the victim.

And it's a hell of a coincidence that all the states' rights defended by the South involve the oppression of blacks. The Confederacy was about defending the right to hold other people as property. And then Southerners became upset that the government was taking away their states' rights, at the same time that the government was passing and enforcing civil rights legislation. But you insist that Southern pride is in no way related to racism.

Muleman suggests that we lock Wolfowitz and Sharpton in the same room and, you know, see what happens.

JD, that might be your issue, but it isn't mine.

William, my point is that the South has a lot more political power than any other part of the country. Particularly more power than the Northeast. So it's pretty hard to believe that you're being oppressed by us. It's just like how conservative Christians complain that they're being oppressed, even though this is an overwhelmingly Christian country. You just like playing the victim.

And it's a hell of a coincidence that all the states' rights defended by the South involve the oppression of blacks. The Confederacy was about defending the right to hold other people as property. And then Southerners became upset that the government was taking away their states' rights, at the same time that the government was passing and enforcing civil rights legislation. But you insist that Southern pride is in no way related to racism.

"she remains a significant political force in North Carolina."

Is this a joke? Seriously.

JD, unfortunately, states' rights no longer exist in this country.

The federal government is in complete control of everything. States rights are only a facade.

States no longer even control their own land. The FedGov can go in and steal it to make it a "national park" or whatever.

Pieces of dubious legislation such as the "general welfare clause", the "necessary and proper clause" and the "interstate commerce clause" have been grossly and despicably misinterpreted to give the Federal government control over everything.

Even on issues like gun rights, the fedgov can override the states and pass "assault weapon bans".

What really needs to happen is we go back to an Articles of Confederation type system.

Then, meddling leftists won't be able to force their weird ideas on our states.

Let them destroy their own states, and don't allow them to move to our states.

Unfortunately, that is what is happening now.

Liberals, having destroyed CA, NJ, NY, MA, etc, are now too irresponsible and immature to live with the mess they created, so they are jumping ship, and like the AIDS virus or cancer, moving to conservative states like NH, PA, MO, MT, VA, NC, etc to destroy them too.

And after they do so, they will move on to other states.

Blarg, please don't get sidetracked. The issue isn't whether the flag represents racism, sexism, or a favorite sports team.

The issue is, should the Federal Gummint be able to dictate to the states where the flags should fly. Obviously, there's no compelling (and defined in the constitution) interest for the Feds to do that. The FBI isn't the 'feelings police', nor should they be worried if someone's sensibilities are offended (which would clearly happen in some cases).

Blarg, I can certainly see why you might assume that the flag was a "racist" reaction to the civil rights movement but that is not the case.

Some states (including MS I think) adopted the Battle Flag as part of their state flags in the late 1800s, far before the Civil Rights movement.

In GA, the Confederate Flag was added to the state flag in 1951 or 1953, before Brown vs. Board.

The Confederate Flag may have increased in popularity during the civil rights movement but that was because the Southerners felt their state rights were being violated, and wanted to show their support for states' rights and Southern pride, not racism.

And yes, the civil rights era involved a LOT of violations of states' rights, regardless of whether the ends justified the means.

According to the law, the states' rights of southern states were violated then (especially under LBJ), and these violations continue to this day.

Again, that was an example of liberals unable to restrain themselves from forcing their beliefs on other states.

One example of how the states' rights of the South are still violated is that Southern states have to submit plans for redistricting to the Justice Department, while other states do not.

That is a clear violation of states' rights.

Liberals just don't care because black majority districts mean Democratic congresspeople (like Cynthia McKinney.)

And the comment you made about how Southern states cannot be oppressed and violated by Southern presidents was borderline retarded, no offense.

So, according to your logic, an Arab dictator cannot really oppress his people since he is Arab, too?

Louis XVIII of France was really not oppressing his people since he was also French?

Your reasoning doesn't even make sense, and is completely rediculous.

Everyone, including you, knows that once Carter, Clinton, LBJ, etc got into office, they were do longer loyal to the South, or to conservative values.

I note that the Senate's most ardent lackey of our history's worst president isn't mentioned: Mitch McConnell. I hope this parasitic barnacle stays glued to Bush as both sink into ignominious obscurity. But, I have full faith that the rubes of the Bluegrass state will return Mitch for another 6-year term so he can hype the cause on everyone's front burner: tort reform.