 |
 |
   Dan Savage, the brilliant and foul-mouthed sex columnist, has become one of the most important ethicists in America. Are we screwed?
 The federal government is supposed to issue new rules about debt levels for students in for-profit colleges. In the meantime, the states are working on their own regulations.
 Washingtons budget hawks want to decimate the federal workforce to shrink the deficit. It will have the opposite effect.
 There arent nearly enough counterterrorism experts to instruct all of Americas police. So we got these guys instead.
|
   |
|
|
March 27, 2006
By: BUSH AND BLAIR....Anyone who's paid even the slightest attention to George Bush's personality understands that he values loyalty above all else. But there's always been a catch: although he values loyalty to George Bush, it's never been a two-way street. It's not wise to expect anything in return. I've always wondered just how long it would take until Tony Blair finally blew his stack over this, but the man seems to have superhuman patience and has never publicly revealed any cracks in the facade of his eternal friendship with the president. Lately, though, as Alex Massie reports in TNR, other pro-American Brits have begun asking the question that one of them finally voiced publicly during a recent visit to America: "What do we get out of it?"
Lately, Massie, says, two new slights have taken center stage. The first is the American refusal to pass a bilateral extradition treaty even though the British approved their end of it three years ago. The second is American refusal to allow technology transfers related to Britain's agreement to buy 150 Joint Strike Fighter planes. Blair has raised this issue with Bush several times, but Bush has apparently declined to spend any of his precious political capital on the issue. It sure is a special relationship, isn't it? Very, very special. —Kevin Drum 1:53 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (71)
Comments
Hey a lapdog is what it is. Blair chose to be that lapdog so he should not complain at all. I guess Blair now regretted the old days when Bill Clinton personally helped him out with the Irish mess. "It sure is a special relationship, isn't it? Very, very special." Reminds me of this, though I think the relationship is more like Satan's and Saddam's in South Park, with Blair as the former and Bush the latter. Posted by: Uli Kunkel on March 27, 2006 at 2:01 PM | PERMALINKI've always wondered just how long it would take until Tony Blair finally blew his stack over this, but the man seems to have superhuman patience and has never publicly revealed any cracks in the facade And the compromising pictures don't hurt either. Posted by: ckelly on March 27, 2006 at 2:01 PM | PERMALINKTo be (un)fair to Blair, the "special relationship" has almost always worked exactly like this. Suez, anyone? Posted by: craigie on March 27, 2006 at 2:01 PM | PERMALINKIt's not about his presidency or the people working in his administration. It's about the man, and the plain and simple fact is that George W. Bush is an asshole. Posted by: SteveK on March 27, 2006 at 2:01 PM | PERMALINKTony's not the first one to find out the hard way: sometimes shepherds have camcorders, and Bush knows a lot of shepherds. Posted by: shortstop on March 27, 2006 at 2:02 PM | PERMALINKI have to believe there is alot more to the technology transfer issue than Drum or Massie mentions. Same with the extradition treaty. Blair has proven to be a trusted friend and ally. Posted by: Bark At The Moon on March 27, 2006 at 2:03 PM | PERMALINKIn case my reference to Suez was too oblique, here's a little history lesson Posted by: craigie on March 27, 2006 at 2:06 PM | PERMALINKThe world is monopolar now, with no near-term threats to the US' hegemony. So, there are two ways to get a top seat at any table in the international arena. One is to be the cheif policy opponent, but still overall ally, of whoever's in power. That's France's take. The other is to sit always at the right hand of the hegemonic power. Britain doesn't have the diplomatic strength to displace France from the "and yet" seat, so it has nothing to gain from giving up its position in the ear of power. Even if they're rarely listened to, they're always heard, and that offsets the shame of the sycofancy. The same can't be said for most countries. Posted by: dunno on March 27, 2006 at 2:06 PM | PERMALINK> I have to believe there is alot more to the It is quite a big issue. See recent issues of Aviation Leak for details, but basically the Brits invested $1.5 billion upfront in the F-35. That money plus their promise to buy a certain number was one of the key factors in allowing the JSF to go ahead. Now the US DOD has unilaterally cancelled the alternate engine selection (needed for both competitive reasons and so that Rolls Royce UK got a share of the action) and is refusing to transfer to the UK the information on coatings and software that they need to set up thier own maintenance bases. Needless to say they are a bit unhappy. Cranky Posted by: Cranky Observer on March 27, 2006 at 2:07 PM | PERMALINKThe reluctance of Bush to catch bin Laden is the most telling aspect of his presidency. Because if that happens, the "war on terror," which facilitates evertything they do, will come to an abrupt end. Posted by: HeavyJ on March 27, 2006 at 2:12 PM | PERMALINKWe got it, craigster. We read a lot. Honest. Posted by: shortstop on March 27, 2006 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINKSometimes I think what we get out of it is that the Americans won't be even worse; but that really doesn't explain why we put money and effort into agreements we ought to know by now the Americans will not honour. As craigie says, this goes back a long way, and I think a lot of the overt contempt Americans have for what they call "Brits" (the sort of contempt you regularly see from right wing Americans on fora like this one) comes from the disgust a user feels for the rubes he uses. Posted by: derek on March 27, 2006 at 2:19 PM | PERMALINKAs with so much else, this can be explained by one word: blackmail Bush has something on Blair, and it is what is holding him in check. Posted by: hopeless pedant on March 27, 2006 at 2:19 PM | PERMALINKWhat are the examples of President Bush not showing loyalty to someone who has shown loyalty to him? Everyone had to part ways with a friend in some situations, but I have never heard that criticism of President Bush. Anyone know what Kevin is talking about? Posted by: brian on March 27, 2006 at 2:26 PM | PERMALINKbrian - You can start with Abramoff, and work your way back in time from there. Posted by: craigie on March 27, 2006 at 2:30 PM | PERMALINKHere is another reason I call Kevin Drum "The Harry Reid of the Blogosphere." I googled "150 strike fighter planes" and found lots of articles on the issue. There are multiple issues involved, including EU requirements, Parliament changing requirements, etc. Negotiations are on-going and nobody thinks the deal will fall apart. But that doesn't prevent Kevin Drum from jumping to an un-warranted conclusion: "Bush is bad." Posted by: Bark At The Moon on March 27, 2006 at 2:31 PM | PERMALINKNoriega had a special relationship with Bush Sr. too. Not that there is any chance of Tony meeting a similar fate. Posted by: lib on March 27, 2006 at 2:31 PM | PERMALINKBark At The Moon, hate to break it to you, but bold assertions that "Bush is Bad" is an unwarrented conclusion are even less impressive now than they ever were. Bush's approval ratings are down to cultists like you. He has lost all credibility with the American people, and it's never, ever come back. Posted by: Gregory on March 27, 2006 at 2:42 PM | PERMALINKWhy has Blair been used so badly by Bush? Possible answers: 1) Stockholm syndrome. Blair now identifies with his captor. 2) Blair wasn't really used - it was his idea too. Everyone seems to assume that this whole Iraq scheme was somehow foisted on Blair. That Blair is just smarter. Maybe he's not. Maybe he has a Messiah complex and wanted to charge in - and was looking for the superpower to give him the muscle to do it. In other words just because he has that cool, educated sounding English accent doesn't mean he isn't a fool and kind of scummy. 3) He was just suckered. Blair just assumed that he'd get a return - and he didn't. 4) Denial - after making a bet of his complete legacy and his place in the history books on this alliance with Bush - he just denies that it's a disaster. As the betrayls stack up: Afganistan, Gitmo, contracts, etc. - he just won't admit that he was taken. And to make it worse, that the whole world knows he was a fool. How many people do we know who would not fight admitting that to themselves? 5) He's paid off. How many contracts and consulting agreements have Blair and his cronies gotten out of the various deals? Don't know, but I'd be curious. These are all possibilities. But the one thing that we do know is that the vast majority of the British think Blair's a complete scumbag now. Posted by: Samuel Knight on March 27, 2006 at 2:42 PM | PERMALINKBest line in Massie's piece: "Balie isn't bush's poodle; he's his whipped cur." Posted by: brewmn on March 27, 2006 at 2:47 PM | PERMALINKsorry! Just trying to help! I know, baby. Well, I either have the flu or malaria, so I'm packin' it in. Everyone keep patiently explaining to Bark and brian that hating Bush is a natural, healthy human emotion now experience by fully 70 percent of the American population. Posted by: shortstop on March 27, 2006 at 2:49 PM | PERMALINKtnr: On a range of issues, the Americans have upset the British, politely listening to their concerns and then, more often than not, simply ignoring them.
the u-s death toll and debt total is much higher here... from 9-11 to iraq to katrina....routinely ignoring advice to the contrary... is the hallmark of the bush admin. we told you so
Bush screws the U.S. on a regular basis. What makes the brits think they should be treated any better? Posted by: has407 on March 27, 2006 at 2:57 PM | PERMALINKshortstop: Everyone keep patiently explaining to Bark and brian that hating Bush is a natural, healthy human emotion now experience by fully 70 percent of the American population. *sigh* Why does fully 70 percent of the American population hate America? . . . other pro-American Brits have begun asking the question that one of them finally voiced publicly during a recent visit to America: "What do we get out of it?" Isn't the global prestige of being America's little buddy enough? Bush screws the U.S. on a regular basis. What makes the brits think they should be treated any better? At least with the US he pretends he cares. While Britain is just the hooker he picks up every month or so. Britian is our European off shore base/"carrier" much like Japan is our off shore base/"carrier" in eastern Asia Forward Power Projection ya know... Saudi Arabia served that function in the Central Theatre until recently Empires do these kinda things ya know Of course, as shortstop mentioned, those videos from "friendly" shepherds via the CIA/NSA don`t hurt "The wind blows over the surface of the lake. In this way, the effects of the invisible are made visible." - I Ching Posted by: daCascadian on March 27, 2006 at 3:12 PM | PERMALINKI have a few of questions for any participants currently residing in the UK. How are the Downing Street memos playing across the Atlantic? How are the UK people and parliament reacting to the fact that there prime minister actually conspired with the US President to create and manufacture a war? Is there a UK equivalent of impeachment or at least censure? As an American I've gotten used to Bush lies and our congress' inaction in regards to those lies. I'm beginning to wonder on the UK's parliaments inaction in regards to Blair's lies. I also beginning to feel sorry for the british people, it seems that along with destroying the USs integrity and his own legacy, Bush has also done the same for Tony Blair and the United Kingdom. F, The Labour Party can pull Blair at any time, by mounting a challenge to his leadership. Alternatively, the sitting government can be forced to call a general election with a vote of no confidence in the commons. As to how it's playing in the UK, I don't know - I live in NYC! Well 70% of americans are idiots,they hate america,That 70% is in bed with the terrorists.Bush should arrest them all,Chicken shit pincko commies. Posted by: Right minded on March 27, 2006 at 3:19 PM | PERMALINKF: Read The Guardian. It hasn't played well for a long time. This issue is truly the albatross that's sunk Blair's credibility with all parties and the voters. Britain didn't have a 9/11 to squeeze popular opinion, and the London bombings came too late to figure into a justification for the war. Personally, I believe Blair was totally sincere in his support for the war, in a much more thoughtful and historically grounded way than Bush ever was. I chalk it up to the legacy of the British Empire, sadly enough ... This was a way for Blair to take part in another noble but thankless burden of a superior civilization ... End result: The corruption of hubris, as always. Bob Posted by: rmck1 on March 27, 2006 at 3:26 PM | PERMALINKI've always wondered just how long it would take until Tony Blair finally blew his stack over this, but the man seems to have superhuman patience Blair always struck me as the kind of Brit who will take an infinite amount of shit in public and do nothing beyond bitching about it in private ... ... until he gets raving drunk and tries to bite off your nose. Yes, very special relantionship indeed. By the way, what's the female for "poodle"? Posted by: Fifi on March 27, 2006 at 3:52 PM | PERMALINKBlair has been promised a seat at the table of the war-mongering Carlyle Group, where he can make large sums of bloodmoney for very little work, just like Jimmy Baker, John Major and the Bush family. And who said war did no good for anyone? Posted by: Stephen Kriz on March 27, 2006 at 3:55 PM | PERMALINKThe thing which has really stung recently in the UK is the extradition business. As the treaties currently stands US courts can basically demand to have British citizens dragged in front of them, and the British authorities will arrange it without further ado, whereas US citizens are still protected from British courts by the multiple defenses of full extradition procedures. This is really, really humiliating in a way that is easy to explain to the man on the street. Posted by: JohnTh on March 27, 2006 at 4:05 PM | PERMALINKI don't know about Kevin's credibility on the fighter plane issues, but I find it interesting that no one here can substantiate Kevin's criticism that loyalty with Bush being a one way steet. Give me a break on Abramoff, I don't think there is any indication of a significant relationship. It seems like Kevin's assertion is another example of Bush hatred causing otherwise smart folks to assume criticism is true without the need for supporting facts. Posted by: brian on March 27, 2006 at 4:09 PM | PERMALINKIt sure is a special relationship, isn't it? Very, very special. Lap dogs don't complain. Their job is to lie snugly atop one's penis... and purr. Posted by: koreyel on March 27, 2006 at 4:21 PM | PERMALINKbrian, here's the deal: believe it or not, some of us have better things to do with our time than hunt around and provide you cites to make up for your blinkered ignorance. the fact that bush shows no loyalty back is something that leaps out of his entire frickin' life story. without even thinking hard about it, i can point out that lindsay, diiullio, oneill, blair, ted kennedy, the democratic members of congress in 2002, and lots of others showed loyalty to bush and got the kissoff in return. try to be better informed on your own, why doncha, instead of assuming you've scored some impressive point when people simply ignore a foolish remark of yours. Posted by: howard on March 27, 2006 at 4:27 PM | PERMALINKbrian: Just ask Silvio Berlusconi, who was last caught on his knees with Blair playing Russian Blowjob Roulette (each get 30 seconds before the dick switchoff) with Bush in an East Wing laundry closet ... Seriously -- Berlusconi has been fudge packed even worse with Blair, considering how much less significant Italy is as a player (their troops are in no combat roles). And if you know anything about the size of Il Duce's ego and how slavishly he's copied Karl Rove, you can imagine this has caused the li'l hair-implanted, facelifted and platform show-wearing bambino a few good cases of post-Chianti agita ... Posted by: rmck1 on March 27, 2006 at 4:31 PM | PERMALINKwith Blair = than Blair howard: Thank you for that takedown of brian. These morons think everyone is as ill-informed as they are. And it's not like providing them with facts will do anything to change their addled minds anyway. I don't think Bush sucks solely because I hate the man. I see the destruction his polices have wreaked on the Middle East as well as on the middle and working classes here. I don't need to hate him simply because he's a lying asshole. Posted by: brewmn on March 27, 2006 at 5:03 PM | PERMALINKAmazing that During this Blurt, not once ...once did human life come up. "As an American I've gotten used to Bush lies and our congress' inaction in regards to those lies. I'm beginning to wonder on the UK's parliaments inaction in regards to Blair's lies." It actually currently suits most of the UK politicans to leave blair where he is. He's so unpopular the tories want to keep him there to disgust the public. The labour party are keeping in power for the moment so that Brown can pick up the honeymoon surge in popularity closer to the next election when he decides when he wants to take over. Blair in the Uk these days cuts a rather pathetic figure,widely despised, openly mocked and clearly a lame duck stumbling around pretending he's still somehow relevant. As Cameron crushingly said of him in the House of Commons "he was the future once". Realistically, Blair has effectively ended the old unquestioned diplomatic support the USA used to get from the UK. No PM will ever again risk allying himself so closely with a US president without hard and fast guarantees about payback. To be (un)fair to Blair, the "special relationship" has almost always worked exactly like this. Suez, anyone? thanks for that link..Hey Lets go back further and include the French Lords as well =) 1. Balfour Declaration, 2 November 1917 * UN partition plan, 1947, Resolution 181 * Before the partition plan, Palestinians owned/controlled 90 per cent of the land in historic Palestine *First Arab-Israeli war, 1948, taking more land than provided under partition * Israel declares itself a state, 1948, on 78 per cent of historic Palestine *Three quarters of a million indigenous Palestinians displaced/dispossessed in 1947-48 brewmn, thanx. it's interesting, innit? in a nation of 300m, of course most are poorly informed, but that a certain percentage of the thousands who post on political blogs are ill-informed and lazy is breathtaking.... Posted by: howard on March 27, 2006 at 6:01 PM | PERMALINKhttp://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002236470 The Brits are starting to realize that many American troops are acting out "Jarhead." What a wonderful war. Posted by: Tom Nicholson on March 27, 2006 at 7:09 PM | PERMALINKI don't come around here too often, try to be respectful when I do, and am normally pretty heavily attacked when I raise a question. Today, I ask what Kevin is talking about and for some examples when he criticizes President Bush for one way loyalty. Your man Howard becomes a hero here for attacking my "ignorance" and then he cites Ted Kennedy as an example of someone who was loyal to President Bush and did not receive loyalty back. Priceless. Posted by: brian on March 27, 2006 at 7:12 PM | PERMALINKBrian, Ted Kennedy helped Bush get the Medicare Prescription Drug program through the Senate, avoiding a filibuster. And then it got completely rewritten in conference committee, to something Kennedy would have had nothing to do with. This was Bush's program, and Bush's people who completely screwed over Teddie. Would you call that loyalty or betrayal? You read this blog a lot, it seems. At least, you post comments a lot, more than I do. You seem reasonably intelligent and articulate. How could you not know this? It makes me wonder... Posted by: Doctor Jay on March 27, 2006 at 7:56 PM | PERMALINKbrian, ted kennedy put his enormous credibility in democratic circles on the line to support, across partisan lines, bush's no child left behind, because bush promised him that he would fund NCLB at specific levels. As soon as the bill passed, Bush welshed on the deal. that's what i call expecting loyalty in one direction - getting kennedy's help in getting the bill passed - and providing disloyalty in the other direction. that you don't know that is exactly your problem. instead, you provide a piece of knee-jerkism, on the expectation that it wasn't even possible that ted kennedy could be an example of how the Dear Leader fucks over everyone once they're through being useful to him. so now you've been educated a touch, not that i expect your thanks. Posted by: howard on March 27, 2006 at 7:56 PM | PERMALINKin short, brian, doctor jay and i, in zero seconds flat, exposed your lack of relevant knowledge. imagine that.... Posted by: howard on March 27, 2006 at 7:57 PM | PERMALINKBut, knowing nothing is really kind of ... Liberating!! Keep on schmuckin', brian. Posted by: YELLOW in front, BROWN in back on March 27, 2006 at 8:39 PM | PERMALINKI have yet to observe any conservative of note for whom loyalty was a two-way street. Call it a conservative character defect, aka love of self-interest above all else. Posted by: Advocate for God on March 27, 2006 at 8:43 PM | PERMALINKbrian: I don't come around here too often, try to be respectful when I do, and am normally pretty heavily attacked when I raise a question. Because your questions are full of unproven or false premises? Posted by: Advocate for God on March 27, 2006 at 8:45 PM | PERMALINKbrian: Give me a break on Abramoff, I don't think there is any indication of a significant relationship. Or perhaps that your comments demonstrate a blind loyalty to Bush (BIS - Bush Infatuation Syndrome) that forces you to deny even the most obvious of facts. Call it a conservative character defect, aka love of self-interest above all else. Arrested development. Posted by: YELLOW in front, BROWN in back on March 27, 2006 at 8:54 PM | PERMALINKOkay, you guys believe Teddie Kennedy,the most fiercely partisan democrat of the last 30 years, was loyal to George Bush. Then, after Bush supposedly abused his loyalty on No Child Left Behind, Teddie came back and was loyal again on medicare reform. I'm sure it all makes sense to you, but I don't get it. You guys have lots of criticisms of George Bush. Some are valid, even if a a bit overstated around here. But, bearing in mind I don't even think the lack of loyalty criticism is a big deal against a president even if true (blind loyalty, which I bet you guys in the past also have accused Bush of, would seem to be a bad thing in a president). I just don't see the basis to say he is not loyal to those who are loyal to him. Posted by: brian on March 27, 2006 at 9:59 PM | PERMALINKoh yawn, frickin' yawn brian: "teddy kennedy, the most fiercely partisan democrat of the last 30 years." straight out of the standard right-wing cliche book. in reality, teddy kennedy has worked closely with a variety of very conservative senators on different issues because, unlike the bush regime and its fellow travellers, teddy kennedy believes that the reason to be in washington is to advance the public good. if that means sometimes working with ideological opposites, he's prepared to do so. george bush, of course, is only interested in rewarding his base and his cronies, and the only times he has any interest in working with dems are on issues where rove tells him that it would be nice to erase the democratic edge, like education and medicare. teddy kennedy is merely a small example of a much larger phenomenon: you choose to reject abramoff. you choose to ignore lindsay, o'neill, and diullio. you choose to ignore the way that bush, after getting every single thing he asked for from the dem congress chose to invent a bu(sh)it issue (union rights in the dhs) so that he and his fellow thugs could hammer the dems in 2002. and that's merely top of head stuff: there's all kinds of other examples. learn something about bush and you learn about a man who has no loyalty to anyone other than his most immediate circle of hacks and enablers. keep your head in the sane and you come up with remarks like "you just don't see the basis" of the claim. it's your choice. Posted by: howard on March 27, 2006 at 10:07 PM | PERMALINKAs has been mentioned, Britain has devolved into a vassal, or client state of the U.S. Blair collaborated with Bush to maintain the "special relationship." In so doing, he relied on Bush's good will and integrity. Right. As has also been mentioned, the fact isas demonstrated by the JSF fiascothe U.S. will use Britain any time it damn well pleases. And Britain will keep coming back for more. Lesson learned, children, one that Tony Blair knows well. When you make your nation profoundly dependent upon another nation's good will, military might and/or investment, you lose some of your autonomy. BushCo wants to build the U.S. military up so much because of the fear of losing autonomy. Unfortunately, they forgot about the economic side of the equation. There will come a time when our Chinese masters tell us there can be no further foreign adventures. We will ultimately be China's Britain. All hail George the Second, who is of course, loyal to no one but himself. Posted by: Nixon Did It on March 27, 2006 at 11:28 PM | PERMALINKHoward, Okay, Teddie Kennedy is good because he works with Bush on No Child Left Behind and Medicare reform, but Bush is all bad/all the time. I think you're talking about politics, not loyalty. Posted by: brian on March 27, 2006 at 11:31 PM | PERMALINKBlair, like a bunch of Australians, is a wannabe Yank: no pride, no principles, no intellectual integrity. Posted by: HerMajesty'sLoyalCanuck on March 27, 2006 at 11:58 PM | PERMALINKas a matter of fact, brian, teddy kennedy was stupid to work with bush on anything. the amusing thing, though, really, is that you can't let teddy kennedy go. as i've pointed out to you, he's merely a minor example of a tendency that is obvious throughout bush's political life. go study up some and report back when you've learned a few things. Posted by: howard on March 28, 2006 at 12:09 AM | PERMALINK"But that doesn't prevent Kevin Drum from jumping to an un-warranted conclusion: 'Bush is bad.' " Yes, what a bizarre and wholly unique conclusion to draw. Just him and all the historians of whatever is left of human life on this planet -- considerably shortened by the actions of his quail-blasting pals. Oh right, I almost forgot: Clinton got a blow job. Posted by: Kenji on March 28, 2006 at 1:34 AM | PERMALINKbrian: I just don't see the basis to say he is not loyal to those who are loyal to him. Well, brian, I just don't see the basis to say Clinton had sex with Monica Lewinsky! There! Because I've said "I don't see it" that must mean that it is absurd to suggest it. Conservatives who say Clinton did have sex with Lewinsky and that he was bad for doing so must just be full of partisan hate and mean when they say that that Clinton never did anything good. Oops! Maybe it's your doofus logic that gets your comments such disdain? Posted by: Advocate for God on March 28, 2006 at 9:39 AM | PERMALINKWhat are the examples of President Bush not showing loyalty to someone who has shown loyalty to him? Katherine Harris. Posted by: tam1MI on March 28, 2006 at 12:45 PM | PERMALINK"What do we get out of it?" A Presidential Medal of Freedom. Posted by: cl on March 28, 2006 at 2:05 PM | PERMALINKWhat are the examples of President Bush not showing loyalty to someone who has shown loyalty to him? Harriet Miers. General Eric Ken Shinseki. Colin Powell. Michael Brown. Paul O'Neill. Christine Todd Whitman. ------------------------------ Granted, Bush has shown loyalty to the dictator Musharraf and the dictatorial Saudi royal family, as well as to Chalabi, the man who lied to America about Saddam's WMDs. He's shown loyalty to the lying and incompetent Rumsfeld. He's shown loyalty to the lying and incompetent Rice. And that's what it takes to get "loyalty" from Bush: abject blind loyalty and no f*ckups so major that they directly impact his approval ratings or the ability to funnel $$$ into the GOP campaign war chest. Posted by: Advocate for God on March 28, 2006 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINKhere href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/instant-approval-creditcards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/airline-milescards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/business-credit-cards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/gas-credit-cards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/low-insterest-creditcards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/american-express-creditcards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/bank-ofamerica-creditcards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/chase-credit-cards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/citibank-credit-cards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/columbus-credit-cards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/discover-credit-cards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/hsbc-credit-cards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/USbank-credit-cards.html"> href="http://www.creditcardswanted.com/calculator-mortgage.html">calculator Master card Master Cards and Mastercards best offers Chase master card You can search, compare and apply for Low Interest Credit Reports credit Affiliate programs are href="http://www.affiliateprogramswanted.net">web affiliate programs href="http://www.affiliateprogramswanted.com">affiliate program href="http://www.affiliateprogramswanted.com/affiliate-resources.html">affiliate Online travel reservation, travel href="http://www.travelsuper.com">discount hotels New York href="http://www.travelswanted.com/san-francisco-hotels.html">san francisco hotels href="http://www.travelswanted.com/new-york-hotels.html">new york city hotels href="http://www.travelswanted.com/toronto-hotels.html">toronto hotels href="http://www.travelswanted.com/dubai-hotels.html">dubai href="http://www.travelswanted.com/venice-hotels.html">venice hotels href="http://www.travelswanted.com/thailand-hotels.html">thailand hotels href="http://www.travelswanted.com/palm-springs-hotels.html">palm springs hotels href="http://www.travelswanted.com/mexico-hotels.html">mexico href="http://www.travelswanted.com/manhattan-hotels.html">manhattan hotels home security home security Article search Article search News articles News articles Health articles Health articles Science articles Science articles Free articles Free articles Find articles Find articles Business articles Business articles Technology articles Technology articles Psychology articles Psychology articles Nutrition articles Nutrition articles Chemistry articles Chemistry articles Science news articles Science news articles Marketing articles Marketing articles Health and fitness articles Health and fitness articles Fitness articles Fitness articles Education articles Education articles Medical articles Medical articles Sports articles Sports articles Computer articles Computer articles Research articles Research articles Management articles Management articles Article submission submit your articles free Child development articles Child development articles Food articles Food articles Internet marketing articles Internet marketing articles Economics articles Economics articles Business management articles Business management articles New articles New articles Physics articles Physics articles Top news Top news Top gear Top gear Top news story Top news story Top story Top story Top products Top products Top movies Top movies Top search Top search Top shop Top shop Top home based business Top home based business Top sites Top sites Top models Top models Top stuff top stuff Top search engine Top search engine Top news Top news Top news Top news Top gear Top gear Top news story Top news story Top story Top story Top products Top products Top movies Top movies Top search Top search Top shop Top shop Top home based business Top home based business Top sites Top sites Top models Top models Top stuff top stuff Top search engine Top search engine Top news Top news Free news Free news Myspace layouts Myspace layouts 
May 2011
April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 |
|
|
    |
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly
|
||||||||
