Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Culture of Corruption Between Michelle Malkin, Michael Gaynor, and Anita Moncrief
Chicago Sun Times ^ | 10/24/2009 | Mike Volpe

Posted on 10/24/2009 8:33:16 AM PDT by fiscon1

Let's try a thought experiment. Imagine we are about four years ago. The leak that Bush was using warrantless wiretaps had just occurred recently. Now, imagine that a spy begins to leak information but to only two sources for the most part. One source is Markos Malitsos of the Daily Kos. The other is a relatively unknown left wing blogger. Imagine that initially the unknown blogger leaked their name recklessly. Then, despite this initial breach of trust, both Kos and this unknown begin to not only write about the story but begin to write endlessly about this leaker and present them in a glowing manner. They do this only at about the time when this source, who was initially a conservative, suddenly becomes a liberal. Meanwhile, the unknown blogger will often quote Kos when making their case about how great the leaker is. At the same time, while Kos uses this leaker as a source, he also allows him to be a blogger on his own site. Not only do Kos and the other blogger write endlessly about how great this leaker is, they also often attack the leakers enemies, real and perceived. Eventually, it gets so bad that Kos begins to quote the unkown blogger when attacking the leakers' enemies. Worse than all of that, while they always write glowingly about the source, they usually don't disclose a piece of information about them that paints them in a bad light.

(Excerpt) Read more at suntimes.com ...


TOPICS: Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: acorn; corruption; malkin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 next last

1 posted on 10/24/2009 8:33:16 AM PDT by fiscon1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fiscon1

Ok, imagine... now... suppose... then... now... and then....

Can’t follow mind-warp trail, losing ability to concentra, umm, concentrate.


2 posted on 10/24/2009 8:39:42 AM PDT by flowerplough ( Pennsylvania today - New New Jersey meets North West Virginia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1

Way too much gobbledygook to read, and way too poorly written. What little I did read, the guy comes across as petulant and self important.


3 posted on 10/24/2009 8:40:09 AM PDT by bcsco (Hopey changey down the drainey...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

Thanks! You saved me from clicking on the full article, as my head was already swimming!


4 posted on 10/24/2009 8:43:38 AM PDT by basil (It's time to rid the country of "Gun Free Zones" aka "Killing Fields")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
"Mike Volpe "?

Never heard of him. Is he colluding with the Chicago papers? That in itself is quite an indictment. And cause for concern about a direct link to the corrupt Chicago (Hate) White(y) House.

5 posted on 10/24/2009 8:43:55 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: basil

The Internet has created a sub-culture of people who think they’re writers, when all they do is put their thought processes on paper, and their thought processes are scrambled eggs...


6 posted on 10/24/2009 8:46:57 AM PDT by bcsco (Hopey changey down the drainey...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

I’ve seen any number of threads linking to articles of his. I’ve never been impressed, and this just confirms my judgment. The guy can’t write but thinks he can, and he seems to love what he mistakenly believes are hit pieces on conservatives. Instead, he comes across as uninformed and unbearable.


7 posted on 10/24/2009 8:49:28 AM PDT by bcsco (Hopey changey down the drainey...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

no, blogburst is a service that sells blog entries to newspapers all over the country. The Sun Times paid to have it published on their site. So, this “gobbly goock” was good enough for them, though they’re going out of business. Still, I suspect that if this was about a liberal it wouldn’t be “gobby gook”.


8 posted on 10/24/2009 8:51:45 AM PDT by fiscon1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: basil
Thanks! You saved me from clicking on the full article, as my head was already swimming!

Your read the whole thing?

You need a double shot (if you imbibe, that is) lol

Me, with my little ol MBA, could not get past the first 6 lines without throwing my hands up and saying: WTF???

And even then, I think I'll have a couple of shots of Crown Royal.

Hey its a cold, damp, rainy, dreary day here in Vermont (NO GOREBUL WARMING FOR US) and any excuse is better than none!!!

9 posted on 10/24/2009 8:52:06 AM PDT by Conservative Vermont Vet ((One of ONLY 37 Conservatives in the People's Republic of Vermont. Socialists and Progressives All))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1

“In fact, one person familiar with things she said at the time said that if Gaynor knew everything she said about him at the time he’d never work with her.”

Good grief! Is ths what passes for journalism at the Sun-Times?


10 posted on 10/24/2009 8:53:30 AM PDT by ElayneJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1

Wow! What an interesting article. I think what the author is saying is that Nixon was right to target the Washington Post after Woodward and Berstein made a national hero out of an anonymous source, “Deep Throat” and went on to write a book about it and even made a movie about themselves. And they were “journalists” not just a “blogger” like Malkin.


11 posted on 10/24/2009 8:54:13 AM PDT by HospiceNurse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
For instance, I am not good enough to be in their Green Room)

Ah, so that is what this is all about, Volpe. You love to bash on conservative bloggers for nonsensical reasons. Probably out of raw jealousy, if this telling admission is any indication.

12 posted on 10/24/2009 8:57:35 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1

Volpe’s spiel reminds me of Navin R. Johnson:

“And that’s it and that’s the only thing I need, is this. I don’t need this or this. Just this ashtray. And this paddle game, the ashtray and the paddle game and that’s all I need. And this remote control. The ashtray, the paddle game, and the remote control, and that’s all I need. And these matches. The ashtray, and these matches, and the remote control and the paddle ball. And this lamp. The ashtray, this paddle game and the remote control and the lamp and that’s all I need. And that’s all I need too. I don’t need one other thing, not one - I need this. The paddle game, and the chair, and the remote control, and the matches, for sure. And this. And that’s all I need. The ashtray, the remote control, the paddle game, this magazine and the chair.
[walking outside]
And I don’t need one other thing, except my dog.
[dog barks]
I don’t need my dog.


13 posted on 10/24/2009 8:58:12 AM PDT by savedbygrace (You are only leading if someone follows. Otherwise, you just wandered off... [Smokin' Joe])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
Still, I suspect that if this was about a liberal it wouldn’t be “gobby gook”.

Poor writing is poor writing no matter what the politics involved. And you have a history of bashing Hot Air for all kinds of nonsensical reasons. And on your post, you showed why - they won't publish you. So you write this nonsensical screed in a fit of pique.

Get lost. FR is about building conservtism, not tearing down conservatives.

14 posted on 10/24/2009 8:59:53 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Vermont Vet
And even then, I think I'll have a couple of shots of Crown Royal.

I'll join you later, but with my 2 fingers of Elijah Craig :).

It's cold and rainy here in Northern Illinois as well, but again, I don't need excuses. That Elijah will go good while I get dinner ready for when the wife gets home from work (I'm retired).

15 posted on 10/24/2009 9:00:00 AM PDT by bcsco (Hopey changey down the drainey...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Vermont Vet

I’ll remember that the next time you are fawning over a Michael Yon piece which is of similar length.


16 posted on 10/24/2009 9:01:08 AM PDT by fiscon1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1

This is some odd attempt to say Michelle is, in a minor way, aiding someone whose allegations against ACORN, although tacitly legit in the eyes of ACORN’s own lawyer, are possibly trumped up a little, but there’s no way to know.

At least that’s what it seems from the blogger’s own words.

Crazy!


17 posted on 10/24/2009 9:04:19 AM PDT by ConservativeMind (I love it every time a POS dies at the hands of a victim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
I’ll remember that the next time you are fawning over a Michael Yon piece which is of similar length.

Michael Yon is coherent. You are not.

18 posted on 10/24/2009 9:05:07 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1

Who is this author? He can’t write himself out of a paper bag yet has the arrogance to hate on Malkin. His logic doesn’t even follow a coherent path.

That is kind of funny though, thanks for posting.. it is fun to see how the left gets their panties in a wad over Malkin and company.


19 posted on 10/24/2009 9:11:25 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
Headline?

Guinness World Record
Most Words Typed Before Passing Out Drunk
"Kind of hard to understand but few spelling errors."

20 posted on 10/24/2009 9:11:28 AM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Vermont Vet
Me, with my little ol MBA, could not get past the first 6 lines without throwing my hands up and saying: WTF???

LOL, I couldn't have said it better myself.

21 posted on 10/24/2009 9:13:48 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
The Sun Times paid to have it published on their site.

It is pretty obvious that it was for following that liberal rag's agenda of trashing people like Malkin versus the quality of the article. Thanks for posting though, you gave us a laugh.

22 posted on 10/24/2009 9:21:11 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

No, it’s Malkin’s attempt to prop up a source by willfully excluding pertinent information about her. Whether Moncrief is telling the truth or not is beside the point and none of us know if she is. Malkin is required by journalistic ethics to state each and everytime that Moncrief falsely applied for a Project Vote credit card, used it illegally and was fired for cause by Project Vote, and only after all that happened did she become a whistle blower. If she does that, Moncrief becomes a lot less credible. That’s the substance of the problem.

Furthermore, her and another blogger act as attack dogs for Moncrief’s enemies. They quote each other in support of Moncrief and in attacking Moncrief’s enemies. What isn’t mentioned in the piece is that Malkin suddenly began writing about Moncrief, in glowing terms, two months before her book came out and Moncrief is the central source for Chapter 8 of the book. Of course, she never mentioned that in any of her writings prior to the book.


23 posted on 10/24/2009 9:23:45 AM PDT by fiscon1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
From one of your subsequent blog entries:

They don't know who Anita Moncrief is. It's entirely improper to identify her as a whistle blower and not identify her theft. That must be done each and every time because you don't know how much your audience knows.

That would be akin to saying every article about someone has to mention everything they have ever done.

This is one of the most lame-arsed line of attacks I have ever seen. And all because Malkin won't publish you on Hot Air. What a whiner. I can see why she won't even bother responding to your lame attack.

24 posted on 10/24/2009 9:27:40 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

yes, because we all know how notorious the Sun Times’ anti Malkin agenda is. So, that must be it. Yeah, that must be why they did it. Having it published in the Sun Times is as good a defense of the article as everyone here saying they think it was poorly written. That’s about where it’s at.

Laugh all you want it doesn’t bother me. Most articles get a handful of comments, this one seems to be drawing a lot of attention.


25 posted on 10/24/2009 9:28:43 AM PDT by fiscon1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
Most articles get a handful of comments, this one seems to be drawing a lot of attention.

Considering that every last comment, other than your own, drips with derision, I'd hardly consider that to be a compliment to your blogging skills.

26 posted on 10/24/2009 9:30:18 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
No, it’s Malkin’s attempt to prop up a source by willfully excluding pertinent information about her.

No, it's about your petulance about Malkin not allowing you on Hot Air. Hence your attacks on Malkin and your previous bashing of Ed Morrisey for purely nonsensical reasons.

27 posted on 10/24/2009 9:31:26 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1

Actually, poorly written is only the heart of the matter, although it does contribute a lot to the lack of a coherent argument.

However, having it published in the Sun Times - BLOG section and reading some of the other comments so the background becomes clear does make one word come to mind.

Tool.


28 posted on 10/24/2009 9:33:11 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

If you don’t think that her stealing and misusing a credit card from the very place she now accuses of wrongdoing is pertinent, then I can’t help you. That’s incredibly vital. It’s the main reason why outside of Malkin almost no one will speak to her. It’s why Beck and no one on Fox News will have her on. It’s not only pertinent but it goes directly to her credibility. It’s not as though Malkin doesn’t say Moncrief’s favorite color. She doesn’t mention that the person accusing Project Vote of wrongdoing before they “discovered” the wrongdoing, first they applied falsely for a credit card, then used it for personal items, then had Project Vote fire them, then they turned around and accused Project Vote of wrong doing. That paints a much different picture than saying Anita Moncrief is a whistle blower.


29 posted on 10/24/2009 9:34:41 AM PDT by fiscon1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

You have mail... :)


30 posted on 10/24/2009 9:36:44 AM PDT by bcsco (Hopey changey down the drainey...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1; mnehring
OMG, I just spotted this doozy:

Did she start with herself first? Of course, everyone should see the biggest irony of all by now. Malkin has made a killing on the book, Culture of Corruption. The same person that condemns President Obama for a culture of corruption is embroiled in her own. Nothing she accuses Obama of doing is any worse than the complete and total culture of corrupton she's engaging in herself.

You can't be serious. Because Malkin doesn't mention a stolen credit card by a whistleblower, she's just as corrupt as the Obamas and the Obama Admin.

You either are a complete and utter fool or a depraved hack who will attack your betters because they won't let you into their circle. Probably both.

31 posted on 10/24/2009 9:37:57 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
If you don’t think that her stealing and misusing a credit card from the very place she now accuses of wrongdoing is pertinent, then I can’t help you.

No,the issue is that you are such a jealous idiot that you try to draw moral equivalence between that and the wrongdoings of the Obama Admin. That's no my words. That's yours. And given your admission that Malkin won't publish you on Hot Air, it reveals what you are about. Petty jealousy.

That’s incredibly vital. It’s the main reason why outside of Malkin almost no one will speak to her. It’s why Beck and no one on Fox News will have her on.

Funny, I did a Google search, and without even trying I found that she was on Hannity bac in September. Here's a hint - lying about someone in your blogs is a far worse journalistic offense than what you are complaining about with Malkin.

She doesn’t mention that the person accusing Project Vote of wrongdoing before they “discovered” the wrongdoing, first they applied falsely for a credit card, then used it for personal items, then had Project Vote fire them, then they turned around and accused Project Vote of wrong doing. That paints a much different picture than saying Anita Moncrief is a whistle blower.

So tell us, then - when a mobster turns states evidence, does that mean his testimony is worthless?

Using your logic, it would be.

Here's a hint - instead of trying to make yourself look bigger by attacking Malkin and Ed Morrisey, make yourself better instead. Trust me, you have a long, long, long ways to go to reach that point, so you'd better get started.

32 posted on 10/24/2009 9:43:03 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

If you don’t think that her stealing and misusing a credit card from the very place she now accuses of wrongdoing is pertinent, then I can’t help you. That’s incredibly vital. It’s the main reason why outside of Malkin almost no one will speak to her. It’s why Beck and no one on Fox News will have her on. It’s not only pertinent but it goes directly to her credibility. It’s not as though Malkin doesn’t say Moncrief’s favorite color. She doesn’t mention that the person accusing Project Vote of wrongdoing before they “discovered” the wrongdoing, first they applied falsely for a credit card, then used it for personal items, then had Project Vote fire them, then they turned around and accused Project Vote of wrong doing. That paints a much different picture than saying Anita Moncrief is a whistle blower.


33 posted on 10/24/2009 9:48:16 AM PDT by fiscon1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1

Posting the same jibberish twice doesn’t improve it, moron.


34 posted on 10/24/2009 9:49:53 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

I never said she shouldn’t user her, but she needs to mention everything. If someone is using a mobster as an informant, do you think it would be proper not to mention that.


35 posted on 10/24/2009 9:50:02 AM PDT by fiscon1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
If someone is using a mobster as an informant, do you think it would be proper not to mention that.

Actually yes, to both protect the informant from retribution, to make sure what they are informing is the issue, not the informant, and to keep the ankle biters from going after the informant.

Welcome to the ankle biter category.

36 posted on 10/24/2009 9:53:34 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

I didn’t say anything about Obama. I have posted plenty of anti Obama articles. Because Malkin writes against Obama, that gives her the right to dismiss basic journalistic ethics. It doesn’t. She can’t simply dismiss pertinent information about a source. She can’t. You can’t be allowed to call someone a whistle blower everytime you talk about them but then not mention that the same person stole and misused a credit card and only after they were fired did they become a whistle blower. Remember, Moncrief didn’t report on any corruption while collecting a pay check from Project Vote. By that, it looks a lot more as though Moncrief has an axe to grind. If Malkin still believes her that’s fine, but it’s not her job to misconstrue. If she wants to use her information, she can but she must give the whole story so that the audience can decide whether or not to believe it. That’s what she must do.


37 posted on 10/24/2009 9:55:22 AM PDT by fiscon1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
I never said she shouldn’t user her, but she needs to mention everything. If someone is using a mobster as an informant, do you think it would be proper not to mention that.

Using your standard, any article about that person should mention their entire criminal history. That's stupid.

You are making a mountain out of a molehill, apparently out of your own personal vendetta against Hot Air for not publishing you. And attempting to draw moral equivalence between this and the corruption in the Obama Admin is jawdropping. You really are an ass - given the poor quality of your writing, as many others have noted, you need to spend more time improving yourself and less time bashing successful bloggers. Tearing down successful people and playing moral equivalance games is the hallmark of a petty liberal. Which you have revealed yourself to be.

38 posted on 10/24/2009 9:55:44 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Vermont Vet; basil
The author is upset about the "cosy" relationship between ACORN-whistleblower Anita MonCrief and Michelle Malkin.

Whatever.

39 posted on 10/24/2009 9:59:19 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (Public healthcare looks like it will work as well as public housing did.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
And you know what is really telling? I've said multiple times that this is your personal vendetta against Hot Air for not publishing you. And you have never addressed that or denied it.

Quite telling.

40 posted on 10/24/2009 10:00:20 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
You can’t be allowed to call someone a whistle blower everytime you talk about them but then not mention that the same person stole and misused a credit card and only after they were fired did they become a whistle blower.

Well then, since you're playing the roll of whistle blower on Michelle Malkin, perhaps it would behoove you to be up front with everyone here about yourself. Hold yourself to the same standard you want to hold everyone else to. I think you know what I'm referring to...something you haven't announced as yet in this thread.

41 posted on 10/24/2009 10:00:28 AM PDT by bcsco (Hopey changey down the drainey...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
It is pretty obvious that it was for following that liberal rag's agenda of trashing people like Malkin versus the quality of the article.

I guess he's trying the David Frum/David Brooks path to fawning acceptance by the MSM - bashing conservatives. The only problem is, he forgot to learn how to write and express a coherent thought along the way.

42 posted on 10/24/2009 10:03:11 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
Malkin is required by journalistic ethics to state each and everytime...

Come on now, when's your statement forthcoming?

43 posted on 10/24/2009 10:12:23 AM PDT by bcsco (Hopey changey down the drainey...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Theft and fraud is a mountain out of a mole hole. You certainly don’t need to say it gratuitously. Yet, Moncrief is leveling serious charges against Project Vote, so it’s absolutely relevant that before she figured that out she committed fraud upon them and she stole from them. Of course, that’s a big deal.

She used a company credit card she wasn’t supposed to and she used it for personal items. Then, she was fired, which we can all agree was perfectly appropriate.Then, she became a whistle blower. I am not even talking about how she took a company computer and printed out proprietary information about Project Vote and shared it with the media without authorization.

If you are simply writing about her, you don’t have to mention it. If you are saying Anita Moncrief claims that project vote shared email info with Obama but don’t mention her whole history with Project Vote then of course you are willfully not including pertinent information.

All right, my internet is horrible. I am going to watch my alma mater in football. You all can continue this debate on your own.


44 posted on 10/24/2009 10:16:25 AM PDT by fiscon1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

He sounds like those liberals in the Clintoon administration who didn’t want to use CIA sources who had questionable backgrounds- only church ladies were allowed to be sources.


45 posted on 10/24/2009 10:17:36 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1

So, you want Malkin to find an ACORN informant who didn’t have any criminal issues.. good luck with that.. an ACORN church lady. I wonder if the author has anything he isn’t disclosing?


46 posted on 10/24/2009 10:18:55 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
All right, my internet is horrible. I am going to watch my alma mater in football. You all can continue this debate on your own.

What, you're going to leave without coming clean yourself? Even though it's patently obvious...

47 posted on 10/24/2009 10:19:01 AM PDT by bcsco (Hopey changey down the drainey...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: fiscon1
All right, my internet is horrible. I am going to watch my alma mater in football. You all can continue this debate on your own.

Bawk, bawk, bawk. Still no correction of your statement that Malkin doesn't appear on Fox News recently. No denial that you are pursuing this attack on Hot Air because they won't post your blog junk.

48 posted on 10/24/2009 10:19:39 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
only church ladies were allowed to be sources.

And that depends on the church lady. What he doesn't appreciate is that for corruption to be made public, the people most likely to do so are themselves likely tainted. That's why they know of it in the first place.

49 posted on 10/24/2009 10:21:17 AM PDT by bcsco (Hopey changey down the drainey...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: mnehring; fiscon1
I wonder if the author has anything he isn’t disclosing?

Football is more important than coming clean. This by someone upset because someone he has issues with doesn't acknowledge what HE believes to be salient. So, he leaves to watch football, allowing his own disclosure problem to go unanswered.

50 posted on 10/24/2009 10:26:07 AM PDT by bcsco (Hopey changey down the drainey...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson