Countdown to November 7th:

[Ninong]

The latest TV ad from the RNC is a real gem. Be afraid, be very afraid.

If you vote for the Democrats, you will die. Democrats support Al-Qaida. A vote for the Democrats is the same as a vote for Sammy bin Laden. BTW, is Sammy still holed up in Pakistan? Is anybody still looking for him? This ad will remind people that the Bush Administration is all talk and no results. It might scare 6-year-olds and those who read at that level but most people know that the Bush Administration has a cut and run policy in Afghanistan, a do nothing policy in North Korea and a stay the course and lose policy in Iraq.

I understand the RNC's next ad will feature a vision from one of Dante's levels of hell with the message that if you vote for a Democrat, you will burn in hell forever with all those godless liberals.

Karl Rove and Kenny Mehlman's Gay Organization for Power is getting desperate! The GOP needs fear to win. They have nothing else left. All they're doing is drawing attention to their incompetence on national security.

[Ninong]

The Grand Old Pedophiles are now accusing the Democrats of supporting pedophiles!

Some of their attacks are so outrageous as to be laughable. I can only assume that they're still playing to their fundamentalist wing-nut base because no reasonably sane person can follow their logic.

Pat Buchanan, Nixon's former speechwriter and revered xenophobic elder statesman from the Nazi wing of the Republican Party, has accused Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) of associating with pedophiles because she rides in the annual Gay Pride parades in San Francisco and members of NAMBLA were also present in those parades. So any politician who rides in a Gay Pride parade supports pedophiles. What about politicians who cover up inappropriate activities involving members of their own political party? Or, to use Pat's guilt by association analogy, wouldn't all members of Congress be guilty of supporting pedophilia if it turns out that any member of Congress is guilty of inappropriate behavior with minors? What about Rudy Giuliani? What about Michael Bloomberg? Last time I heard they were Republicans, right? They not only participate in New York City's Gay Pride Parade, they also host a reception at Gracie Mansion. I guess they're both gay! They're not, of course, but they are following a tradition started in 1978 by New York's most famous gay mayor, Ed Koch.

In Ohio, the Republican candidate for governor, Kenneth Blackwell, has accused his Democratic challenger, Ted Strickland (a Methodist minister), of being a friend of NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) and of associating with a man convicted of exposing himself to children. It turns out that the convicted man was one of hundreds of campaign volunteers, not someone Strickland knows personally. I still can't figure out the NAMBLA connection unless it involves a congressional vote on which Mr. Strickland abstained. I think they have used that one against other Democratic candidates around the country. I don't know of a single politician, or any public figure, from either political party who has ever said anything in support of NAMBLA, just as I don't know of any politician in the past three or four decades who has anything nice to say about the Ku Klux Klan.

Blackwell's conduct in this campaign has been so despicable that Ohio newspapers that originally endorsed him are now writing editorials unendorsing him: "Personal attacks of dubious accuracy should have no place in a political campaign. As Strickland said, 'Mr. Blackwell, you should be ashamed of yourself.'" Check it out here.

In California, Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA), who is under investigation in the Abramoff mess, has argued that since his opponent, Charlie Brown, is a member of the American Civil Liberties Union, and since the ACLU has in the past defended NAMBLA's free-speech rights, he is tainted by association. "It is astounding," Mr Doolittle said in a recent press release, "that anyone could defend a group dedicated to aiding and abetting pedophiles." Mr. Doolittle forgot to mention that he once acted as a character witness for a dentist friend convicted of sexually assaulting six of his patients while they were under anesthesia!!!

However, none of the above examples, absurd as they are, can hold a candle to what Republican candidate Vernon Robinson in Winston-Salem, North Carolina has pulled out of the bag. Robinson has accused his opponent, incumbent congressman Brad Miller, of wanting to import homosexuals to the United States and spending tax-payer dollars on filthy scientific studies on sex.

"Instead of spending money on cancer research," a recent campaign ad ran, "Brad Miller spent your money to study the masturbation habits of old men ... Brad Miller even spent your tax dollars to pay teenage girls to watch pornographic movies with probes connected to their genitalia. Brad Miller pays for sex, but not for body armour for our troops."

Evidently if you look hard enough, you will find some weird studies performed by the National Institutes of Health and Mr. Miller has cast a vote on appropriations for the National Institutes of Health. In a campaign mailer, Mr. Robinson even sought to drop hints questioning his adversary's sexuality, referring to him pointedly as "childless." Mr. Miller has since pointed out that the reason he is childless is that his wife had a hysterectomy 20 years ago.

[Ninong]

Mark Foley's not the only one who invites guys out for ice-cream!

El Presidente Bush took time out of his busy schedule to share a tender moment with Rep. Don "The Pennsylvania Strangler" Sherwood (R-PA). In times like these, we can't be choosy about whom we support.

Later, El Jefe meandered down to Virginia to offer his support to Sen. George "Macacawitz" Allen (R-CSA). Sen. Allen's first choice, Mel Gibson, wasn't available. He was busy attending a rally for Rep. J. D. Hayworth (R-AZ).

__________________________________________________ _____________
"Is our children learning?" (Cont'd.):

"The goals of this country is to enhance prosperity and peace."—George W. Bush, Speaking at the White House Conference on Global Literacy, New York, Sept. 18, 2006

[Ninong]

We're making "wonderful progress in Iraq." It's too bad the biased liberal media insists on telling us how many more of our brave young men and women were killed over there each day. I mean, after all, enough is enough. Who wants to hear stuff like that over and over again?

"Why should we hear about body bags and deaths? It's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?" -- Barbara Bush to Diane Sawyer on Good Morning America, March 18, 2003.

[Ninong]

Some of these Republican Congressmen are jumping the gun. They could at least wait until after November 7th to change course. Then they could blame El Presidente's incompetence for causing them to lose the House. And if they happen to lose the Senate, too, they will really go postal on him.

However, Rep. John Sweeney (R-NY) isn't waiting until after the elections to abandon the Decider in Chief:

Rep. John Sweeney (R), 6/8/06: "Zarqawi represents the insidious forces that we are fighting in the War on Terror. This is a critical example of why we must stay the course and finish this mission."

Rep. John Sweeney (R), 10/18/06 : "I think that the strategy of 'staying the course' is not a strategy at all. It doesn't work."

[schrocat]

Some of these Republican Congressmen are jumping the gun. They could at least wait until after November 7th to change course. Then they could blame El Presidente's incompetence for causing them to lose the House. And if they happen to lose the Senate, too, they will really go postal on him.

However, Rep. John Sweeney (R-NY) isn't waiting until after the elections to abandon the Decider in Chief:

Rep. John Sweeney (R), 6/8/06: "Zarqawi represents the insidious forces that we are fighting in the War on Terror. This is a critical example of why we must stay the course and finish this mission."

Rep. John Sweeney (R), 10/18/06 : "I think that the strategy of 'staying the course' is not a strategy at all. It doesn't work."

Nice.
"Flip flopping" is a high crime with that crowd.

He better watch his back.

[Ninong]

Nice.
"Flip flopping" is a high crime with that crowd.

Maybe, but partying with the boys is in vogue right now. Sweeney is the one with the tie. No, they're not congressional pages, they're young Republicans. Don't miss the little Grover Norquist lookalike in picture #5 (the short kid with the glasses).

No, I have no idea why they all look wasted.

P.S. -- Don't ask me to explain picture #1.

[Ninong]

In concert with our trusted ally, Mr. Nouri al-Maliki, the Prime Minister of the Green Zone, we have taken new steps to reduce the number of civilian casualties in Iraq. We expect these new measures to result in an immediate lowering in the number of innocent civilians killed in the unrest there that is caused by "a few dead-enders" who are in their "last throes."

UNITED NATIONS, Oct. 19 -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's office has instructed the country's health ministry to stop providing mortality figures to the United Nations, jeopardizing a key source of information on the number of civilian war dead in Iraq, according to a U.N. document.

[Ninong]

Kenny Mehlman is sick and tired of all these GOP candidates trying to tell him how to run their campaigns. After all, as Karl Rove's hand-picked acolyte, he's had the best dirty tricks training in the world. Rove, you might remember, was trained by none other than Richard Nixon's Svengali, Donald Segretti.

Anyway, it seems that the Republican senatorial candidate in Tennessee is asking Kenny to please pull the tacky attack ad the RNC is running down there against Harold Ford, Jr.

Republican Bob Corker said the 30-second commercial is not reflective of the type of campaign he wants to run. The RNC is standing by the ad, said spokeswoman Camille Anderson.

“It’s tacky and over the top,” said Todd Womack, spokesman to Corker. “It’s not an ad that we would have put on the air.”

Kenny knows best. Just shut up and do as you're told.

[Ninong]

Kenny's just full of them. Three New York TV stations refused to air the outrageous, false ad. The Republican candidate called the NRC and demanded that they pull the ad. They refused! They told him they're not allowed to "coordinate with candidates."

The ad is stupid and false but Kenny Mehlman is running it anyway. Why is the GOP so obsessed with kinky sex? They will do anything, absolutely anything to hold onto power. Or, to put it another way, they will do whatever it takes to prevent the Democrats from gaining subpoena power.

Another 18 days of outrageous, false, defamatory attack ads that are so despicable that even the Republican candidates themselves are demanding that they be withdrawn.

P.S. -- If the GOP loses big -- and it looks like they might -- Mehlman will be out.

[SPasse]

Hi All,

Well the Republicans did it to themselves.

As a fiscal conservative, social liberal (mostly) I can honestly say that Bush has put people like me in a fine moral dilemma.

I think that the Democrats probably will take back the House but probably not the Senate, and the prospect of the nature of the Democratic Party that will be running the show in the House, gives me no reason to rejoice.

President Kennedy is surly spinning in his grave at the thought of the party that inherited the mantle that he bore…

When the House does become democratically controlled, look for an endless series of impeachment attempts; and that is going to tear apart this country, just like the pose Viet Nam/Watergate era did. Unfortunately for the US, our current enemies on the world stage will ruthlessly exploit the resulting quagmire.

Maybe its time to start a new political party after all; I have heard various talking heads wax philosophical on the concept of starting an alternative political party. Their consensus is that such an endeavor is the mark of an egomaniac. I am not so sure at this point.

Regards,

Scott

[Ninong]

As a fiscal conservative, social liberal (mostly) I can honestly say that Bush has put people like me in a fine moral dilemma.

It seems you're not alone. Nine Republican politicians in Kansas have switched parties and are now running as Democrats against the Republican incumbents.

Dick Armey, former Republican Majority Leader in the House, accused Congressional Republicans of “blatant pandering to James Dobson” and “his gang of thugs,” whom Mr. Armey called “real nasty bullies” — arguments he reprised on the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal and in an open letter on the Web site organization FreedomWorks.

In an interview this week, Mr. Armey said catering to Dr. Dobson and his allies had led the party to abandon budget-cutting. And he said Christian conservatives could cost Republicans seats around the country, especially in Ohio.

“The Republicans are talking about things like gay marriage and so forth, and the Democrats are talking about the things people care about, like how do I pay my bills?” he said.

Mr. Armey also pinned some of the blame on Tom DeLay, the former Republican House majority leader, who “was always more comfortable with the social conservatives, the evangelical wing of the party, than he was with the business wing.”

Mr. Armey, who identifies himself as an evangelical, said he was tired of Christian conservative leaders threatening that their supporters would stay away from the ballot box unless they got what they wanted. (P.S. -- He's more than simply an evangelical. When he was in Congress, he was pushing for prayer in public schools and the teaching of creation science as an alternative to real science in biology classes.)

“Economic conservatives,” he argued, were emerging as the swing voters in need of attention, in part because they had become more likely to vote Democratic in the years since President Bill Clinton was in office. “A lot of people believe he brought us from deficits to surpluses, and there is a certain empirical evidence there,” Mr. Armey acknowledged.

I think that the Democrats probably will take back the House but probably not the Senate...

I think the Democrats are a cinch to take back the House. The only question is whether they gain 20 seats or 30 seats. They're a cinch to pick up at least four seats in the Senate but they have a reasonably good chance to pick up six or seven. It all depends on whether they can hold New Jersey while picking up Virginia and Missouri. Rhode Island, Ohio, Montana and Pennsylvania are a lock for the Democrats. Connecticut will almost certainly stay with Lieberman (Party of One) and he has pledged that he would NEVER switch parties even if the GOP offered him chairmanship of a key committee. Let's hope he's telling the truth for a change. Tennessee is a longshot but it's still a possibility for the Democrats.

...and the prospect of the nature of the Democratic Party that will be running the show in the House, gives me no reason to rejoice.

If you're worried about Nancy Pelosi, I can tell you right now that she is not as far to the left as John Kerry or Teddy Kennedy in the Senate. In fact, the knock on her in San Francisco is that she's too much a part of the establishment. They say the same thing about Diane Feinstein, too. Pelosi is wealthy, although not nearly as wealthy as Feinstein. As far as Bay Area national politicians go, Barbara Boxer is by far the most liberal and she was reelected two years ago in a landslide. Of course you can't read too much into that because Schwarzenegger is about to cruise to reelection in November in spite of the fact that his approval numbers were in the low 40's just a year ago. He did an almost complete makeover, abandoning a lot of his typical GOP ideas in favor of a much more middle of the road position on almost everything. He even hired the former state chairman of the Democratic Party as his chief of staff. And then he has his star power and charisma and that's good for at least 10 points right there.

I won't get into the individual ranking members who will be in line to take over the key committees because I think a couple of them may be what you're concerned about but I doubt that they will stray too far from Speaker Pelosi's line.

When the House does become democratically controlled, look for an endless series of impeachment attempts; and that is going to tear apart this country, just like the pose Viet Nam/Watergate era did.

We aren't going to see any impeachment attempts unless there is sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction in the Senate. We are going to see the House exercise it's Constitutional oversight responsibility. We are going to see investigations into Cheney's energy policy and into the manipulation of intelligence in the run-up to the war.

Even if the Democrats should somehow manage to take control of the Senate, you still won't see any impeachment attempts unless the case is as solid as it was against Nixon. Young people today have no idea how despised Richard Nixon was by both parties just prior to his disgraceful resignation. When he polled the Senate, he discovered that the vote for conviction would be 96-4 (and two of the four were Southern Democrats).

I think what we will see when the Democrats take control of the House is the immediate passage of a new higher national minimum wage. That will pass in the Senate, too, even if the GOP ends up with 50-52 seats. There are at least five or six Republican Senators who would vote for an increase in the minimum wage.

I think we'll see a slight change in the top tax bracket but probably not all the way back to where it was before Bush's tax cuts. The estate tax will be reworked and it will end up as a compromise closer to what the Democrats were willing to accept the last time around. There were at least four or five moderate GOP Senators who would have preferred that over what Bush was pushing. You won't have the complete elimination of the estate tax if the Democrats control either house of Congress. If I'm not mistaken, they were willing to raise the deductible from the then $1 million to $5 million and lower the rates from the outrageous 50-55% to a graduated scale that started at the same as the prevailing long-term capital gains rate and then rose gradually from there. In any case, if you raise the deductible to $5 million, less than 1% of estates will be taxed.

No matter what happens in the November elections, we will see a change in policy in Iraq. Jim Baker's report, which is being held up until after the elections, concludes that a military victory is NOT an option. This is what the military commanders have been telling us for the past year now. The reason a military victory is not an option is because Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney screwed up so badly that there was NEVER any real possibility of a military victory. They abandoned all of the ammo dumps to the insurgents as they rushed towards Baghdad. Once they got to Baghdad, they allowed mobs to loot anything they wanted, including the national museum and all of the art museums, etc. The only ministry they secured was the oil ministry. Rumsfeld said they were just celebrating their freedom! You can look it up if you want. He also said something along the lines of, "Gosh, golly, I think I've seen that same vase a couple dozen times now." That was a reference to a video clip of a huge vase sticking out the open trunk of a car that the cable networds liked to show over and over again.

Once the Iraqis saw that they could loot and plunder at will, the game was over. We needed several hundred thousand troops to maintain order in Iraq just as Gen. Shinseki testified that we did and not the ridiculous number Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld insisted on.

Our troops are nothing more than targets in Baghdad right now. If we send in more troops, the insurgents will just have more targets to shoot at. We control nothing in Iraq except the ground we're standing on at the moment. We have totally abandoned al-Anbar province, which is more than a third of the country to the insurgents. The militias are totally out of control and al-Maliki says he has no intentions of even thinking about disarming them before next spring. We even have the two main rival Shiite militias (Badr and Mahdi) fighting each other for control. And the Interior Ministry (which controls the national police and the hospitals) is totally corrupt. They allow Sunni patients to be taken out of hospitals in the middle of the night and executed.

The only way out of Iraq is to begin an orderly withdrawal along the lines that John Murtha has proposed, which means starting immediately and finishing by the end of next year. It's now up to the Iraqis themselves to decide what sort of government they want. They will probably divide the country into three autonomous regions. If that's what they want, then that's what they'll get. We can't turn them into an American style democracy because it's too late for that now. We have screwed things up so badly that there is nothing we can do now to turn back the clock. John McCain wants to send in more troops. That won't work unless he's thinking of sending in 300,000 more troops. And our casualties would triple.

Eighty percent of the Iraqis want us to leave their country immediately! Sixty percent of Iraqis want us DEAD! That's according to an official U.S. State Department survey. But "we're making wonderful progress in Iraq."

Maybe its time to start a new political party after all; I have heard various talking heads wax philosophical on the concept of starting an alternative political party. Their consensus is that such an endeavor is the mark of an egomaniac. I am not so sure at this point.

Third party candidates have not done well over the past hundred years or so. I think we are blessed that we have a two-party system. Just look at countries like Italy and Israel if you want to see what happens when you get more than two parties. Minor parties (which are almost all radical) end up with disproportionate power because they can cut deals with one of the major parties.

[SPasse]

George,

Fair enough - for now… ;)

But multiparty systems just make their "deals" in a different forum. The same process goes on between the players in a two party system.

Just for fun, I am working on a political "Platform"

… and I don't mean a torturous tomb like the democratic and republican platforms.

I think if you can't have a platform that fits on one or two pages, you are just creating a document that "the average Joe" will not read.

Regards,

Scott

[Ninong]

Remember Gingrich's Republican Contract with America?



The same people who swore on a stack of Bibles that they would balance the budget and "replace career politicians with citizen legislators" thanks to the term limits they promised to abide by ARE STILL THERE and the budget is running record deficits.



Even Holy Joe Lieberman, a former Democrat, who swore on a stack of Bibles (first five books of the Old Testament only) back in 1988 that he would NOT serve more than three terms is RUNNING FOR A FOURTH TERM even though he was NOT nominated by his party.

Politicians will NOT voluntarily leave office. Anyone who thinks they will go peacefully is in for a big surprise.

And anyone who believes everything they put in their party platforms is in for a rude awakening.

[SPasse]

George,

"And anyone who believes everything they put in their party platforms is in for a rude awakening."

That is my point, a platform should be simple enough that "at least as a stated set of goals" that it can be "believed/supported" by the party faithful.

Regards,

Scott

[Ninong]

The majority of Americans support Speaker Pelosi's plan for the first 100 hours of the new House:

"Most worrisome for the president, should the Democrats retake one or both houses of Congress, the American public supports their proposed “First 100 Hours” agenda. An overwhelming majority says allowing the government to negotiate lower drug prices directly with pharmaceutical companies should be a top priority for a Democratic Congress (74 percent, including 70 percent of Republicans); 68 percent want increasing the minimum wage to be a top priority, including 53 percent of Republicans; 62 percent want investigating impropriety by members of Congress to be a top priority; and 58 percent want investigating government contracts in Iraq to be a top priority. Fifty-two percent say investigating why we went to war in Iraq should be a top priority (25 percent say it should a lower priority and 19 percent say it shouldn’t be done.)"

[Ninong]

How could we go from "making wonderful progress" to "arrogance and stupidity" in Iraq in a matter of days? Maybe his Arabic was a little rusty? He probably meant to say "wonderful progress" and it came out as "arrogance and stupidity."

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A senior U.S. diplomat said the United States had shown “arrogance” and “stupidity” in Iraq but was now ready to talk with any group except Al-Qaida in Iraq to facilitate national reconciliation.

In an interview with Al-Jazeera television aired late Saturday, Alberto Fernandez, director of public diplomacy in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs at the State Department offered an unusually candid assessment of America’s war in Iraq.

P.S. -- Rumsfeld is not going to like this. No wonder he refuses to take Condi Rice's phone calls.

P.P.S. -- Wasn't it just last week that Deputy Leader Dick told Rush Limbaugh that the Iraqis were "doing remarkably well?" The electricity is on for an average of only 2.4 hrs/day in Baghdad. Two-thirds of the population does not have access to safe drinking water, but they're doing remarkably well under the circumstances.

[Ninong]

That is my point, a platform should be simple enough that "at least as a stated set of goals" that it can be "believed/supported" by the party faithful.

My favorite party platform by far was the 2000 Texas Republican Party platform. That one was a riot! I think I quoted most of it in threads in this forum about five years ago but I don't know if the threads are still stored.

That was back when Gov. George W. Bush was the leader of the Texas Republicans. Their platform (which is no longer available on their website) was the most outrageous piece of crap I have ever read in my life. It was a perfect example of the arrogance, dogma and ignorance that typifies today's Republican Party, or, to be more accurate, it is typical of the radical wing that is in temporary control of today's Republican Party.

[Ninong]

Check it out. That's the ad the Republican National Committee is running against Harold Ford in Tennessee. His Republican opponent, Bob Corker, has demanded that the RNC pull the ad. The RNC has refused! They said they stand by the ad and will continue to run it. Corker should just shut up and do as he's told.

You can read more about the ad and Corker's attempts to get the RNC to cut it out here.

Corker just doesn't seem to get it. To him, it's just a job that's at stake, to Mehlman it's a possible jail sentence that awaits if the Democrats get subpoena power. These guys will do anything to stay in power. Anything!

[Ninong]

How could we go from "making wonderful progress" to "arrogance and stupidity" in Iraq in a matter of days? Maybe his Arabic was a little rusty? He probably meant to say "wonderful progress" and it came out as "arrogance and stupidity."

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A senior U.S. diplomat said the United States had shown “arrogance” and “stupidity” in Iraq but was now ready to talk with any group except Al-Qaida in Iraq to facilitate national reconciliation.

In an interview with Al-Jazeera television aired late Saturday, Alberto Fernandez, director of public diplomacy in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs at the State Department offered an unusually candid assessment of America’s war in Iraq.

P.S. -- Rumsfeld is not going to like this. No wonder he refuses to take Condi Rice's phone calls.

P.P.S. -- Wasn't it just last week that Deputy Leader Dick told Rush Limbaugh that the Iraqis were "doing remarkably well?" The electricity is on for an average of only 2.4 hrs/day in Baghdad. Two-thirds of the population does not have access to safe drinking water, but they're doing remarkably well under the circumstances.

Looks like somebody's about to get fired or transferred to a very undesirable post. :eek3:

According to a follow-up by CNN today, the Bush Administration does NOT agree that they have been guilty of "arrogance" and "stupidity" in their Iraq policy.

Diplomat: U.S. arrogant, stupid in Iraq

A senior U.S. State Department diplomat told Arab satellite network Al-Jazeera that there is a strong possibility history will show the United States displayed "arrogance" and "stupidity" in its handling of the Iraq war.

Alberto Fernandez, director of the Office of Press and Public Diplomacy in the Bureau of Near East Affairs, made his comments on Saturday to the Qatar-based network.

"History will decide what role the United States played," he told Al-Jazeera in Arabic, based on CNN translations. "And God willing, we tried to do our best in Iraq."

"But I think there is a big possibility ... for extreme criticism and because undoubtedly there was arrogance and stupidity from the United States in Iraq," the diplomat told Al-Jazeera.

"I can only assume his remarks must have been mistranslated. Those comments obviously don't reflect our policy," a senior Bush administration official said. (See! I told you that would be their defense. He meant to say "wonderful progress" and it was mistranslated as "arrogance and stupidity.")

Fernandez told CNN that he was "not dissing U.S. policy."

"I know what the policy is and what the red lines are, and nothing I said hasn't been said before by senior officials.

"Nothing I said during this interview broke new ground," the diplomat told CNN.

Fernandez's comments came as President Bush gathered his senior generals to discuss changes to strategy in Iraq, where violence has spiked in recent days.

CNN's Jomana Karadsheh, Mohammed Tawfeeq and Arwa Damon contributed to this report.


Of course it's been said before by senior officials but that was behind closed doors, you idiot. This is the same as David Kuo telling the Christian fundamentalists that Karl Rove says they're all a bunch of losers and whackos. You're not supposed to say that in public.