Obama Gets Cool Indian Name

©2008 Garling Gauge. All Rights Reserved..

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/GarlingGauge/~3/294439075/

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

The Death of the Permanent Republican Majority

Well, that Permanent Majority sure didn’t last long.

Tuesday’s special election in Mississippi, which yielded an eight-point victory for a Democrat in an overwhelmingly Republican district, has signaled to all observers what we’ve known, or at least hoped for, for years; Republicans are doomed.

This has been the case for quite some time-the 2006 elections certainly seemed to indicate serious trouble for the Republican Party-but Mississippi pulled the curtain on the current sad state of the GOP. In the aftermath of Travis Childers’ election, it has become impossible to ignore or deny the fact that the Republican Party is on the verge of disaster.

The GOP had absolutely no legitimate excuses for losing this election, as DavidNYC wrote on Wednesday. They had a decent candidate (in their fashion), running in a strongly red district, they spent vats of money, used all kinds of popular surrogates which we couldn’t match, and engaged in the same tired old "Liberals are EVIL!" scarecrowery that they've practiced for twenty years.

None of it worked, apparently. Not only did they lose the seat, they got beaten quite badly. They tried everything to hang on to a seat that should never have been competitive in the first place, and they failed in grand fashion. It is the perfect indicator that the Republican brand is in historically dire straits-they’re in the worst position they have seen since 1974, perhaps since 1964, perhaps since 1932- and the nation is poised for a genuine Democratic ascendancy.

And everybody knows it.

The traditional media has noticed; indeed, as as DemFromCT notes, they can’t get enough of this new narrative about the diseased Republican Party.

And the Republican Party has most definitely noticed. NRCC Chairman Tom Cole, who will presumably take the brunt of the blame for GOP losses this fall, commented

"I think obviously when you lose three of these in a row you have to go beyond campaign tactics," Cole said, adding that it brings up the question: "Is there something wrong with your product?"

This is a rather remarkable statement, considering that just a few short years ago, Republicans truly believed that this "product" would enable them to build a Permanent Republican Majority, ultimately restricting Democrats to the status of a regional party.

Cole is far from alone in noting the grand failure of selling traditional Republicanism. Rep. Mark Kirk, a moderate representing a Democratic-leaning district (whose reelection bid is in serious trouble), feels the same way.

The GOP’s loss in Mississippi on Tuesday underscored for many Republicans that the party’s old playbook — one that relies heavily on branding Democrats as liberal tax-raisers, rallying around social issues such as abortion and guns, and using the president and vice president as campaign surrogates — isn’t working any more.

"The playbook hasn’t worked in my district ever," said Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), who has been pushing his party to adopt an agenda geared toward more moderate suburban voters for the past three years. "The politics of the 1980s when that playbook was written is out of date."

Even rock-ribbed conservatives, like rising GOP star Eric Cantor, understand the party’s need to rebrand itself.

Cantor acknowledged that efforts to brand a candidate as "too liberal" or "too out of sync" won’t cut it with voters.

"What does work, though, is a realization that the paradigm has been shifted," Cantor said. "This country is tired of excuses and doesn’t want to hear about ‘too liberal’ or ‘too this’ or ‘too that.’ What they want to hear is solutions."

The paradigm has shifted, indeed. We are entering a new era in American politics, and the Republicans have to figure out how to live in it. Their old ideas, old tactics, and stale brand are hopelessly out of place.

Republican Rep. Tom Davis, one of the better strategic minds in the GOP, has gone so far as to raise the spectre of a permanent GOP minority:

Don’t just put a new wrapper on the product and hire a new sales crew.  Let’s revamp, consistent with our principles and remember that this election is about independent voters.  Even if we get every Republican out to vote, we lose without Independents.  Forget the Democrats.  They’ve been waiting to get back since the Florida recount.  It’s all about the Independents, or we drop to a 170-180 seat permanent minority.  Yes, we’ll be comfortable in our caucus, but we’ll be irrelevant for the next decade.

It’s particularly noteworthy that during their 12-year reign in Congress, from 1994 to 2006, the Republicans were never able to make the Democrats into a "170 or 180 –seat permanent minority". If the Democratic Party was indeed at its lowest ebb during the Bush administration, we’re actually in pretty good shape indeed.

So the GOP looks to John McCain as their savior now...a man whose entire electoral viability is centered around being seen as a "maverick", an atypical Republican.

The rise of McCain as their champion is not without irony, since the 71-year-old Arizona senator has quarreled with his own party for years on issues as diverse as immigration, campaign finance reform and global warming.

But it is precisely that independent streak that is drawing Republicans to his coattails, hoping he can cleanse them of the stain of gridlocked Washington.

Eric Cantor, Republican chief deputy whip in the House of Representatives, told reporters that the McCain brand was healthier than that of his party.

"John McCain is a demonstrated vote getter among independents, and his message and what he will be able to do in this election is extremely important."

Frankly, the only chance John McCain has in this election is to keep selling the nonsense that he isn’t a normal Republican (and it is nonsense)...yet the party establishment is looking to him to help avoid disastrous downticket losses. McCain's job is to save the party...by running away from the party. The Republican brand is so toxic, at this point, that the only chance for GOP success is to eschew the brand of their own party label.

So, what the hell happened to that Permanent Majority? As DemFromCT wrote this morning, the true beauty of the special elections in Mississippi and Louisiana is that the Republican Party, the folks who once had designs on a Permanent Majority which would relegate us forever to the status of a regional party, have ultimately succeeded in transforming themselves into a regional party.

Their own hubristic eagerness to demonize anything and everything Democratic has ultimately backfired; it is the Republican party which is the extremist party now, and the Democratic party which is the coalition party.

Chris Cillizza breaks down the recent AB/WaPo poll:

Not surprisingly, Obama holds his largest lead over McCain (18 points) in the Northeast -- an area that has become increasingly dominated by Democrats in recent elections.

But, Obama also holds a lead in the traditional battleground area of the Midwest -- where Obama takes 54 percent to McCain's 41 percent -- and in the Republican-leaning territory of the West where Obama holds a double-digit lead at the moment. And, even in the South, where Republicans have dominated at the federal level for much of the past four decades, Obama is competitive; McCain takes 49 percent to 45 percent for the Illinois senator.

While McCain trails by double digits in three of the four regions of the country, he actually far over performs his own party's showing in the Post poll.

Asked which party they trusted to "do a better job of coping with the main problems the nation faces over the next few years," voters across the country opted for Democrats by wide margins.

In the Northeast, Democrats outpaced Republicans by 29 points while the margin was 26 points in the Midwest. The news wasn't much better for Republicans in the West (Democrats +18) or the South (Democrats +15).

It is the Democratic party which is making inroads into the West and South, while the Republicans have now failed to hold seats in successive special elections deep within the heart of their Southern stronghold. Even rural voters, long part of the GOP base, are abandon the party:

Less than six months from the November election, Sen. John McCain is tied with Sen. Hillary Clinton among rural voters in battleground states while the Arizona Republican holds a nine point lead over Sen. Barack Obama.

Republican extremism has driven away a good percentage of the voters who gave them their narrow victories over the past 15 years. It’s easy to say that they should moderate their image going forward, and that probably is what they should do. Unfortunately, they’re hamstrung by their base.

Many things have gone wrong for Bush, but the underlying problem is his relationship to the constituency that elected him. Bush's debt to his big donors and to religious conservatives has boxed him in and pitted him against the national consensus on various issues. His extremism is undermining Rove's realignment.

The problem has become clear with Bush's difficulties in filling Sandra Day O'Connor's slot on the Supreme Court. The Harriet Miers nomination was an attempt to satisfy both the militant conservative base and the eternally moderate American electorate. With the Alito nomination, Bush has acknowledged that splitting this difference is impossible. Faced with a choice, he has chosen, once again, to dance with the ones who brought him. But by appointing a superconservative, Bush risks propelling his increasingly beleaguered administration even further toward the right-hand margin—a place where his party cannot win future national elections.

The Republicans are in thrall to their hard-core right wing base, the Norquists and Dobsons of the world, and this prevents them from recapturing the political center, as DHinMI wrote in his piece on Tom Davis memo. Ironically, Davis’ own U.S. Senate bid was thwarted by the right wing of the Virginia Republican Party, who apparently preferred nominating the weak but reliably "conservative" Jim Gilmore to one of their smartest and wisest strategists.

Since the 1990's, the Republicans have been willing hostages to their base.  Republican office holders are unwilling to go against their base, because they know they will be attacked by their base, and quite possibly targeted by fundie groups and Club for Growth, and most likely draw an extremist primary opponent (like the ones who've defeated Republican incumbent moderates Wayne Gilchrest and Joe Schwarz, and who blocked Davis' own path to the Republican nomination for Senate in Virginia).  

I don't have any sympathy for the Republicans.  But I do believe it must be horrible knowing that if they don't eschew the extreme right positions they've adopted over the years, they will get slaughtered in the general election, but breaking from the extreme right means they will not make it through party primaries.

The GOP has fallen this far for a number of reasons, but chief among them is their failure to adequately court middle-class voters who aren’t completely hostile to science. Unfortunately for them, that comprises an incredibly large swath of the country. For some time, they were able to win enough of these voters to hold a majority in Congress and eke out two incredibly narrow presidential-election victories, but they were never included in the coalition.

It’s easy to forget that the Democratic Party was already experiencing a resurgence prior to September 11, albeit not on the grand scale we’re seeing now. Bush, of course, lost the popular vote in 2000, an election which saw the Democratic Party regain a majority in the U.S. Senate. Democrats also managed to gain seats in the House in three successive elections after the 1994 debacle.

The Republican seizure of the national security issue after 9/11 bought them time as a party, but it was hardly a permanent fix. For the GOP to hold national-security voters, two things were necessary; first, the issue had to remain the top voter priority, and second, the Republicans had to actually maintain their credibility on it (which, of course, they did not).  

In all honesty, it’s likely that Republican dominance would have fallen even earlier if they hadn’t managed to seize the national-security issue after 9/11. Their mistake, however, was believing that national security alone would keep middle-class voters in their column. Unfortunately for them, their credibility on national security is spent, thanks in large part to the Iraq fiasco.

Now, in increasing numbers, these voters are finding a home in the Democratic Party. This is not because the party has moved appreciably to the center. Rather, it has become the party of the left and the center, the party for everyone who isn’t either insanely wealthy or part of the religious right.

Another component of the Republican fall is their eagerness to practice the worst kind of divisive regional politics. We’ve seen it in their most recent ads in Louisiana and Mississippi, assailing "San Francisco" liberal values. Have you ever seen a Democratic ad criticizing "Alabama values?"

Then there’s Dick Armey’s foul gem from 2004, assailing my hometown:

The state is also a recurring villain among Republicans, a view distilled in a wisecrack by a former House majority leader, Dick Armey of Texas, when Democrats announced that their 2004 convention would be held in Boston.

"If I were a Democrat," Armey said, "I would feel a heck of a lot more comfortable in Boston than, say, America."

Strange, but I can't remember Ted Kennedy ever saying that Dallas isn't part of America. We don't do that sort of thing. Republicans do. Creating this us-and-them regional dynamic no doubt helped the Republicans lock down their Southern base, but it also prevented them from expanding into other regions of the country. It’s instructive that the party which wished to create a permanent majority thought it would be a good idea to do so by writing off entire sections of the country, and it’s no wonder that Chris Shays is the last Republican representative from New England.

I think the Republican dream of a permanent majority was always hubris. Their coalition was never that broad, and never that strong, even when they managed to win. And they didn't do a damned thing to expand beyond that coalition, to win new voters into their country by attempting to find common ground with centrists. At the height of Republican supremacy, 59 million Americans voted for John Kerry in 2004, and the GOP made no effort to court any of those voters into joining them.

One final note on the late Republican Permanent Majority. Karl Rove sought to be the new Mark Hanna, William McKinley’s political strategist in the 1896 presidential election. Hanna’s great achievement was to craft a Republican coalition in 1896 which reduced Democrats to being a Southern regional party, a status they enjoyed essentially until 1932.

Rove and his partners in crime have essentially done the same thing as Hanna did...for the Democratic Party.  

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/293113535/492

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

'We mourn the dead from Iraq'

This report by Joy First of Madison WI is among posts on the Iraq Moratorium website from participants in Moratorium activities this month:

We Mourn the Dead from Iraq ? 9th Iraq Moratorium

As part of the Iraq Moratorium, eight activists in Madison, WI participated in a solemn vigil at Hilldale Mall on May 16, 2008, calling for an end to the war and occupation in Iraq. This was, in the words of Gandhi, ?an experiment in truth? as we pushed to see how far we could go in speaking out against the utter devastation and the crippling suffering of the people of Iraq. Two of us had been in court the day before and were found guilty of trespassing after we were arrested for speaking out against the war at Hilldale Mall in February.

Three of us wore paper mache masks of Iraqi women and long dark gowns and we carried paper mache babies, one who was severely hurt. The masks sat on the top of our heads with scarves over the back of the masks that hung down and came around covering our faces. We could only see faintly as we looked through the light-weight fabric over our face. The expressions on the faces of the masks, the Iraqi women, were haunting.

The other five people in our group handed out leaflets about the suffering of Iraqi women, and carried signs saying ?We mourn the dead from Iraq? as we walked in a slow and solemn procession through the mall. We planned to stay there and march for one hour from 5:30-6:30 pm unless we were arrested before then. There were not a lot of people inside the mall, but those who were seemed very interested in our procession and gratefully accepted a leaflet. A good number thanked us for being there or made other positive comments. It was a very powerful experience, very sad, wearing the masks and carrying the babies who were hurt. I have been spending a lot of time with my grandchildren, including my newest granddaughter, Linnea, just one week old on the day of our action, and I was feeling very emotional thinking about the suffering of the children of Iraq.

Mall security asked us to leave and said we could march outside (which was surprising because I believe that is still private property). We went outside because there were a lot of people eating at outside seating at several restaurants adjoining the mall and we were able to walk by them and hand out leaflets.

When we walked back inside the mall, we met the police and they told us we must leave. We decided to go outside again and the police told us we could stay there as long as wanted, but if we came back inside, there would be a physical arrest. I asked the police if this wasn?t private property outside the mall, and the police said it was not, but I believe they are wrong about that. They explained a physical arrest would mean they would handcuff us, transport us downtown, book us, and we would have to pay bail to be released. We were surprised to hear this. We follow the principles and guidelines of Gandhi, Martin Luther King and others doing nonviolent civil resistance to speak out against the war crimes of our government. The police in Madison have always arrested us, wrote a citation on the spot, and released us. When we asked why they would respond with a physical arrest, they said that when the bad behavior continues, they have to take us in. Bad behavior??!!?? Us??!!?? I wonder when someone in law enforcement will have the guts to arrest Bush and his cronies for their bad behavior ? war crimes against humanity. We walked for a few more minutes and at 6:30 we left the mall. However, we plan to return and continue our commitment to work for peace, calling attention to the devastating human suffering resulting from the crimes of our government.

Read The Full Article:
http://ooibc.blogspot.com/2008/05/we-mourn-dead-from-iraq.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Jesus Really Digs John

Pastor Steven L. Anderson
Faithful Word Baptist Church

Dear Pastor Anderson,

I'm considering putting together an organization for God-fearing young adults who support John McCain for president. I'm calling it "Jesus Really Digs John" to give it that young person appeal. I'm hoping it'll take the edge off the whole age thing--you know, make McCain appear to be just as "groovy" as Jesus.

I'm looking for an energetic, youthful-looking pastor--a man who isn't afraid to proclaim God's written word--to lead it. It's not easy finding someone like that. After searching for weeks I was ready to give up, but then God intervened by leading me to the most important YouTube video I'll ever see. It's the one where you condemn Old Europe for promoting the practice of "sitzpinkling" with these words:

In Germany, they have signs that prohibit men from peeing standing up! ? I was told that no man in Germany pees standing up. That?s where we are headed in this country my friends. We have a bunch of pastors who pee sitting down. We have the president of the United States who probably pees sitting down. We got a bunch of pastors and leaders who don?t stand up and pee against the wall like a man. That?s what?s wrong with America. 400 years ago, pastors used to stand up and preach that A MAN NEEDS TO BE A MAN!!!! The editors of the NIV and the new King James all pee sitting down! I?ll tell you something, I?m not going to pee sitting down! I?m going to Germany in about a month, and you?d better know I?m going to stand up everywhere I go!

Praise the Lord! If you have the balls to walk into Germany and pee standing up, you have what it takes to lead Jesus Really Digs John. Heck, I'd even go so far as the say you have what it takes to be McCain's Secretary of State. Condi Rice doesn't pee standing up--or maybe she does; it doesn't matter, because she isn't out there making it an important piece of our foreign policy. You can do that!

And it's really about much more than just peeing from a standing position. There is also your series of sermons declaring in-vitro fertilization to be like "Nazi eugenics" and your essay on sodomy which finally puts to rest the notion that most pedophiles are heterosexual by noting, "It is clearly seen in the Bible that homosexuals are perverted in other ways and are always bisexual."

I hope you'll accept the position. I'll be happy to advise, but you'll have control of everything including fundraising. Please pray about it and get back to me as quickly as possible.

Heterosexually yours,

Gen. JC Christian, patriot

A helmet tip to reader Dan.


video details and more



Read The Full Article:
http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2008/05/jesus-really-digs-john.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Republicans To Campaign As Democrats

Following up on D-Day's article on this past week's string of progressive victories, which Paul[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/OpenLeft-FrontPage/~3/293122463/showDiary.do

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Gas Prices, Gas Bags, & The Gas Chamber

No doubt the current energy crunch is a complex equation. A number of factors likely contribute to the rising price of gasoline in the United States. As I understand it, they include the rapidly expanding consumer demand (including China and India), the fact that the U.S. hasn’t built a new refinery in three decades and couldn’t process more oil even if it were made available, regulation on emissions and an awareness of environmental concerns that have made it more difficult to maintain existing refineries (let alone construct new ones), and the prohibition on exploration in oil rich areas in the interest of preserving pristine national treasures.

While these and other factors contribute to the rising prices at the pump and expand our dependency upon foreign oil, understanding the more obscure factors and motivations may be an equally essential component in achieving a comprehensive understanding of where we’re at and what we can do to move closer to energy independence.

I want to focus on the motivations and manipulations that contribute to the crisis. Capitalism is premised upon the willingness of free market participants to exhibit ingenuity in the hopes that it will result in prosperity (profits). Hence the risk reward construct is a fundamental aspect of our economic system. At the same time, supply and demand can impact the price one is able to charge for a product as well as the profit margin one can make on the sale of that product. As such, businesses can be motivated to limit production if it enhances demand and therefore improves profitability. The less competition that exists, the more likely a company is able to manipulate supply and demand without concerns for a loss of market shares.

So how does this apply to the oil industry in the United States? Let me count the ways. First, it is far easier to manipulate supply and demand of a limited resource than the provision of a service. There is no doubt that oil is a limited resource that cannot keep apace with the demand and that means it is a finite product. Those who trade in oil realize that profitability can be manipulated by controlling the supply. Granted, there are provisions that penalize or criminalize some of the manipulations that could take place. At the same time, there are environmental restrictions that afford the cover needed to effect the manipulation of supply.

So how is this achieved? One obvious excuse is OPEC and the willingness of those nations with the lion’s share of oil production to keep supply low enough to insure sufficient demand and therefore maximum profit. Since the United States is limited in the action it can take against OPEC, U.S. oil producers can cruise along in OPEC’s cash rich wake without reproach.

Another method involves the high costs of exploration and extraction as well as the subsequent cost of refinement. Hence, the oil companies can cite the billions of dollars they sink into finding and removing more oil and it would be very difficult for the government to quantify the levels that would equate with intentional and measurable manipulation. The fact that all of the elements associated with the industry trigger environmental oversight provides additional cover for companies to limit supply.

That brings us to the limited refining capacity. Time and again we hear that the complications and the costs of building and bringing a new refinery on board have been prohibitive…or at the very least…difficult to overcome and a clear disincentive to attempt. Therefore, the expansion of refining capacity has been primarily limited to the expansion of existing facilities.

Oil companies can site the environmental restrictions, the resistance of communities to allow a refinery in their back yards, and the ever changing environmental requirements that require them to spend huge sums of money updating existing facilities as reasons for failing to expand refining capacities commensurate with demand. Clearly, this provides them with the argument to defend the reduced supply and the rising costs that accompany the growing demand.

Lastly, oil companies can also argue that without the ability to tap into known sources of additional oil as a result of limitations on exploration, it doesn’t make economic sense for them to sink billions into refining capacity. They simply have to assert that expanding refining capacity to eclipse exploration potential is a self-defeating endeavor. In so arguing, they hamstring the government’s ability to prod them into further refining capacity or to assert malicious manipulation.

Where does this leave us? Well, to a large degree it leaves the consumer between a rock and a hard place. To a lesser degree, it leaves the government with little recourse, under the existing laws, to force oil companies to expand supply. Lastly, it leaves the oil companies in the enviable position of watching OPEC limit supply and therefore elevate the price of oil and the profit that can be made on each barrel. It also enables them to limit their own refining capacities and to contend that it is not only harder and harder to find new sources of oil - they are often off limits.

Looking at the possible motivations and manipulations in chronological context, I think it is reasonable to speculate the following. The oil industry has sought the ability to retrieve huge quantities of oil from protected regions for decades. To date, they have been relatively unsuccessful in achieving that objective. Realizing as much, they elected the fallback position to limit their production capacity, wait until such time as world demand eclipsed supply, rake in the profits that result from the constrained supply in the meantime, and then watch as the American public is squeezed so badly that they will call for the government to ease environmental restrictions and allow oil companies to remove huge quantities of oil from previously restricted areas. I can’t prove it but I think it’s certainly a plausible explanation.

To a large extent, all of the above requires some level of government complicity. While where we’ve ended up may not have been strictly the result of informed consent, it is a testament to all that is wrong with naively supporting “free market” capitalism…especially when the players are actually engaged in nothing more than an attempt to corner the market so they can insure that they are free to hose the American consumer without recourse or recompense. Anyone seeking a better understand of the degree to which the political process may have allowed corporate interests to overtake the public’s welfare need look no further.

Then again, speaking of naivete, so much for believing that we’re moving beyond the use of the “gas chamber” in the United States. I could be wrong, but I’m sure that the subliminal suggestion we’re hearing from off in the distance is telling us, “Don’t forget folks…the next time you fill up…deep breaths, deep breaths.”

Cross-posted at Thought Theater

Read The Full Article:
http://allspinzone.com/wp/2008/05/18/gas-prices-gas-bags-the-gas-chamber/

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

NBC Reporter Spars with Bush Over Iraq, Iran

This is must-see TV: NBC correspondent Richard Engel's interview with President Bush today in Sharm al Sheikh, Egypt.

Read The Full Article:
http://www.iraqslogger.com/index.php/post/5838

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Brazil donates to China's Earthquake Victims

The Brazilian government will donate 3.500 cans of instant noodles, 300 packs of dried cookies, 300 packs of rice, 200 tents, 2.500 military blankets and 7.488 common blankets. Here's some info : Brazil sends humanitarian assistance to China


Also, the International Olympic Committee is donating 1 million China's earthquake victims. Here's a newlink on Yahoo : IOC gives $1 million to China earthquake aid.

Alot of countries around the world sending assistance. I hope they can rescue as many as possible.

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AfricanAmericanOpinion/~3/293212682/brazil-donates
-to-chinas-earthquake.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Roundup Review: The Bush/McSame Trainwreck In
Their Failed Obama Attack

[W]e shall never negotiate out of fear, and we shall never fear to negotiate. - John F. Kennedy,[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/OpenLeft-FrontPage/~3/293115360/showDiary.do

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Unfit Troops Deployed and Still the Law Denies
LBGT to Serve

It was recently reported by USA Today that since 2003 43,000 troops have been deployed in support[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://www.everydaycitizen.com/2008/05/unfit_troops_deployed_and_stil.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!