Hmmm: Huck’s former research director hints at Romney scandal set to break soon; Update: Research director responds; Update: Push polling?
posted at 11:59 am on January 3, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Riehl makes the same connection I did — to those mysterious rumors of a major candidate being “Swift-Boated” at a presser on Monday, the day before New Hampshire. Rick Moran seized on that phrase yesterday and concluded the target must be the veteran, i.e. McCain. Maybe not.
The e-mails about the presser came for a spokesman from an outfit calling itself … “Revelation Press.” Here’s the money part, in case anyone wants to do any sleuthing:
One candidate is about to be challenged – with hard and cold facts, presented cogently by an author, former TV business news editor, decorated military hero and college political science instructor who shares this candidate’s party affiliation – and who has known the candidate personally since their college days.
C’mon — are there really any skeletons in Mitt Romney’s closet? What, did he once have a sip of beer or something? If it really was that major, the campaign would have divulged it themselves long ago and spun it away before the primaries. Also, why wait until the day before New Hampshire to drop it? Why not do it yesterday and take him out before Iowa?
Here’s the new ad, by the way. The people seem … so natural.
Update: Hold the phone. PoliGazette spoke to Joe Carter, the former research director, and was told that the Romney scandal he has in mind is unrelated to the Monday press conference. Which means two scandals, potentially. And Huck’s team knows about both.
Update: Patrick Ishmael notes that Denny Weddle and Associates, the sponsor of Monday’s Revelation Press presser, has worked with military types before. Maybe Moran was right about it being McCain?
Update: Joe Carter e-mails this along:
Let me add a few points of clarification:
1. I don’t know anything about Monday press conference other than the PR email I got on it. I have no idea whether it is about Romney or some other candidate.
2. None of what I know was acquired through my connections to the campaign. The stuff I found out (whether its true or not) came through my sources as a blogger.
3. I don’t know if the Huckabee campaign knows about this stuff or not (though, I doubt they do).
Update: John Hawkins is hearing from a source that the Monday scandal may have to do with those anti-Mormon push polls.
Update (Bryan): Maybe I’m alone on this, but to drop this hint of a scandal on the day before the Iowa caucuses as Carter has, strikes me as nasty. We know he’s a Huckabee supporter, and we know he despises Romney, but because he hasn’t shown his cards on this “scandal” we have no way of knowing whether he really has something or is just blowing smoke.
I don’t like it.
Update (Bryan): Joe emailed to say that he agrees with my update above, and will apologize for passing along a rumor without providing any details. I’ll link to his apology once it’s up. I take him at his word, which has always been good in the past.
Update: Here’s Joe’s apology.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Romney on the ropes. He had to hit back some way.
I dunno maybe Huck thinks if he sinks womney he has a clear shot at the nomination ?
William Amos on January 3, 2008 at 12:02 PM
ARG, beginning the last day of 2007 and completed yesterday: Huckabee 29, Romney 24, Thompson 13, McCain 11, Giuliani 8, Paul 6.
bnelson44 on January 3, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Jeez, maybe the whole Joseph Smith thing isn’t real.
JiangxiDad on January 3, 2008 at 12:04 PM
Why not just come out with it, if it’s so strong?
I cannot believe Huckabee’s campaign actually has the chutzpah to accuse someone else of being fundamentally “dishonest.” Geez.
Slublog on January 3, 2008 at 12:06 PM
Why does that sound like something Huck’d be involved with?
amerpundit on January 3, 2008 at 12:08 PM
Touch the screen and be healed brother…
DfDeportation on January 3, 2008 at 12:08 PM
I am against this kind of attack crapola before I even hear it, and I am not even a Mitt supporter.
I think increasingly this kind of “gotcha surprise” is gonna backfire bigtime with the electorate, which will see thru it as just Attack Politics Gone Wild.
And we’ve got another 10 months of this garbage. Ugh.
Always Right on January 3, 2008 at 12:09 PM
He was smoking!!
Sincerely,
Marci, Jan, and Cindy Brady
thirteen28 on January 3, 2008 at 12:09 PM
err, Marcia
thirteen28 on January 3, 2008 at 12:09 PM
I really doubt there are any scandals in Romney’s personal life, so if there is one, I’d expect it to be more along the lines of shady business dealings. But I agree completely that if somebody had dirt on Romney (or any of the others, for that matter), it would have been released before Iowa.
flipflop on January 3, 2008 at 12:10 PM
Or is this another example of the Huck campaign acting in a very Clintonian fasion? Hillary used this same tactic months ago against Obama, remember? She floated out the rumor that she had dirt on Obama but then said that she was too clean a campaigner to release it. The Huckabee campaign is no stranger to similar tactics either. We know that. He had a commercial that was just too mean to show, but not too mean to show to an entire room full of reporters.
I personally find it more believable that the Huck campaign would float out a rumor about a Romney scandal on the verge of breaking THE DAY OF THE IOWA CAUCUS then I do about the possibility that Romney so much as had a sip of beer when he was 20yrs old.
Is it possible that Mitt has some skeletons in the closet. I guess so, but I would be far less surprised then Huckabee simply taking another page out of the Clinton playbook.
Zetterson on January 3, 2008 at 12:10 PM
I like the hit piece ad. McCain HAS had his chance and he would rather hob knob with his lib friends than work hard to protect the citizens of this country.
Mojave Mark on January 3, 2008 at 12:11 PM
hey AP when do you make your predictions for tonight?
zane on January 3, 2008 at 12:12 PM
Mitt Romney once only tithed 9.99999999% of his income instead of 10%.
BKennedy on January 3, 2008 at 12:12 PM
Maybe Romney has a $400 Dollar haircut bill in his past ?
William Amos on January 3, 2008 at 12:12 PM
They’re not so bad. I’m pretty sure all of us well-educated internet-savvy folks could muster up some telegenicness for our favorite candidate if we were so inclined. Besides, there’s a drawback if the people in the ads seem too “simple,” you know?
Enrique on January 3, 2008 at 12:14 PM
its that good old time southern gentleman arkansas politics mannn.
ernesto on January 3, 2008 at 12:14 PM
Shady business dealings aside the only possible thing I have heard about is some sort of campaign wrongdoings in Michigan by Romney’s people…but I would think that could easily be passed off on the campaign staff…
DCJeff on January 3, 2008 at 12:16 PM
Maybe it’s Huck that’s about to be exposed. I can’t see a fellow BYUer sinking Mitt. HBS guy? unlikely. Harvard Law…possibly.
TheBigOldDog on January 3, 2008 at 12:17 PM
I think we can all agree on this. If nothing breaks. If it turns out there are no skeletons in Romney’s closet. Weeks go by and nothing comes out. If that happens then this is the lowest, most dispicable form of dirty politics. Floating a rumor about a possible scandal the day of the Iowa caucus when, in fact, there is no truth to it is dispicable. IF that is what is happening here then Mike Huckabee is a devious, corrupt dispicable campaigner.
And the worst part of this will be not just how this haunts the Romney campaign today. Every day the press will wake up in the morning and float the question out there, “is this the day when we find out about that big Romney scandal?” This is going to have a lingering effect and will act as an anchor on his campaign. If there really is something out there then fine, but if there isn’t then this is dispicable and disgusting.
Zetterson on January 3, 2008 at 12:18 PM
In that case it’ll have little impact on Huck’s candidacy. He’s Christian, you know.
amerpundit on January 3, 2008 at 12:20 PM
I think I just realized why I dislike Romney so much. One was the Issue of the WOT where romney seems far too weak. When he answered that he would have the White House Lawyers investigate what the US could do if attacked sounded so Obama like I cringed.
But now I see a bigger reason because he comes across as the Republican version of Silky. Hes too slick and too wealthy to come off as just “Folks”. Its like listening to Silky tell about his life story when you know in the back of your mind that he has had a better life than 90% of other Americans.
Its the real sense of disingeniousness that rings in Silky that I also find prevalent in Mitt.
William Amos on January 3, 2008 at 12:20 PM
Color me skeptical. Huck doesn’t have the staff or the resources of a Clinton, though he seems to demonstrate the same political tendencies. To wit, it seems far more likely that he is manufacturing controversy as opposed to having dug up something that has otherwise not yet appeared.
Spirit of 1776 on January 3, 2008 at 12:25 PM
SECOND LOOK AT MCCAIN !
William Amos on January 3, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Two Romney scandals? Maybe he smoked his only cigarette while simultaneously drinking his only beer.
thirteen28 on January 3, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Are we potentially looking at Mitt as this campaign’s Gary Hart?
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on January 3, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Too bad Fred is not as good a campaigner as the Huckster because, as we have learned in the past few days, that is what is really important when choosing a candidate.
Bill C on January 3, 2008 at 12:28 PM
RWNH has more updates from yesterday. Looks like their could be a link to the SwiftBoaters in the last campaign.
With updates.
broker1 on January 3, 2008 at 12:29 PM
William Amos, of course I understand why Edwards is disingenuous. He’s a wealthy trial lawyer engaged in a constant class warfare political game. He actually has the malkins to step up and say he’s one of them, his parents worked in a mill, etc. Blech.
But Romney? Why? He’s polished, sure. His hair is perfect. Sure. He’s wealthy. Sure. But he’s not constantly engaged in a class warfare game. He’s not out there preaching that he’s just one of the folks. He’s running as a wealthy, successful businessman who became wealthy because of his ability to lead and systematically solve problems. Why do we, especailly Republicans have a problem with this? Is it just a feeling you get when you listen to him? Is this feeling a result of substance or style or what? Is it a regional thing? I just don’t get how you compare those two guys. It just doesn’t seem fair to me.
Zetterson on January 3, 2008 at 12:30 PM
Today’s rassmussen nation wide poll
Date 1/3/08
Giuliani 13%
Huckabee 16%
Thompson 13%
Romney 18%
McCain 17%
Clinton 41%
Obama 24%
Edwards 17%
William Amos on January 3, 2008 at 12:30 PM
Related?
Key Romney South Carolina Operative Being Tied to 2000 Dirty Tricks Vs. McCain?
bnelson44 on January 3, 2008 at 12:30 PM
Maybe it’s Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul…
SouthernGent on January 3, 2008 at 12:30 PM
Here’s the guy who sent the emails out:
TheBigOldDog on January 3, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Yeah I know they are two different guys. But that is the gut impression I get from Romney. And I dont think Im alone in that.
Take for example the illegal immigrant issue and Romney’s gardener. While it seems romney is pushing for better immigration laws that lapse shows that he doesnt understand the difference between real life and policy. While again that isnt completely fair it just gives off the vibe that Romney is a bit too sheltered to understand how policy effects lives.
William Amos on January 3, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Maybe they’ll hint at the scandal(s), then decide not to talk about it on principle, before talking about it to the press.
CP on January 3, 2008 at 12:35 PM
I would also say that if it is a scandal big enough to make Mitt withdraw before SC he would not have entered the race in the first place.
Spirit of 1776 on January 3, 2008 at 12:39 PM
Holy crap, Rush just went off on a caller that claimed Huckabee was Ronald Reagan. First quote:
“How dare you!”
Classic
broker1 on January 3, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Forming opinions based on gut feelings is something liberals are generally known for. You know Rush’s saying, “conservatives think, liberals feel.”
How that Romney gardener “scandal” means anything is beyond me. He hired a legit company to do yard work in the middle of a campaign for president. He’s supposed to be dropping by his house checking the legality of each and every person on his property between trips to Iowa, NH, South Carolina, etc? I wonder if the Boston Globe has been staking out John Kerry’s house on the other side of town for the previous 6 years? I kind of doubt it.
Zetterson on January 3, 2008 at 12:43 PM
At least the source isn’t the Politico
Capitalist Infidel on January 3, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Don’t quote me on this but I heard that Mitt once dropped a pen and when he bent down to pick it up he glanced at the butt of a woman that was not his wife. /joking
A Mitt scandal almost certainly would involve Bain Capital. Probably moving jobs overseas is my guess. I love that I have a website that keeps me abreast of the latest silly rumors. Other than TMZ, that is.
Bill C on January 3, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Geez I simply stated that it helps form my opinion not that my entire opinion is based on that.
I already stated that I dislike Mitt on the WOT. He is too weak on that issue. And he has his record in Massachusetts which counters his current rhetoric that he is talking about on immigration.
You dont pass legislation that you disagree with just because the system is set up against you. Bush is proof of that now. Preventing the government from doing this is as important as making the government do things. Mitt was far too willing to cut deals on important issues just to get laws passed.
I dont want a deal maker in the White House. I want a principled leader. Romney comes across as the former
William Amos on January 3, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Maybe it has to do with the fact that Romney isn’t pro-life….when he established abortion as a “healthcare benefit” in his own government-run healthcare plan. with a $50 co-pay for abortions with us footing the rest of the bill (after his pro-life conversion, mind you).
jjjen on January 3, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Zetterson on January 3, 2008 at 12:43 PM
Agree.
People keep trying to play gotcha with Romney. Success used to be a great part of the American Dream. Somehow today it tarnishes one. Sad.
MarkB on January 3, 2008 at 12:54 PM
That stuff was completely hashed out during his run for Governor. That’s the first thing the Moonbats and their Union muscle went after.
TheBigOldDog on January 3, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Romney has the “Nicotine Demon” and The Huckster’s there to heal him.
DfDeportation on January 3, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Watch out for the Mormon Jihad. It’s right around the corner…
DfDeportation on January 3, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Ok gotcha. Fair enough. I was just a little put off by the Silky comparison I think. I wouldn’t even compare McCain or Huckabee to Silky and they both suck.
Zetterson on January 3, 2008 at 12:56 PM
The key to finding the target is to find this person:
TheBigOldDog on January 3, 2008 at 12:57 PM
I’ll take your word for it. Winning a campaign as a Republican in Mass. can’t be easy. Let’s just hope he was lying about his real views then and not now.
Bill C on January 3, 2008 at 1:00 PM
Oh, I think I got it TheBigOldDog! Romney might have received a B+ one time in his life. It must have been given to him by this professor! The horror.
I wonder when Huckabee is going to wink at the camera and tell everybody that he’s not sure what the scandal consists of but gay sex might or might not be it.
Zetterson on January 3, 2008 at 1:03 PM
Welcome to the Republican version of the Special Olympics boxing competition- lots of swinging, few punches connecting, and no matter who scores the knockout blow, the winner is still “challenged”.
Hollowpoint on January 3, 2008 at 1:11 PM
He had the media (Boston Globe for example), the Libs and the Unions digging on him 7/24. They turned up squat.
The more I dig into this the fishier it is. It Seems this Toor guy sent these email invitations to bloggers along with a link to a surrey asking them if they’ll be attending. Why would anybody with anything real have to go that route? Fishy…
TheBigOldDog on January 3, 2008 at 1:16 PM
Huckabee is the worst kind pf politician…he is the wolf in sheep’s clothing. At least the dem’s say right out loud they want to raise taxes, give benefits to illegals, and allow unfettered abortions and the killing babies as they are coming out of the womb.
Huck pretends to be a “moral leader” while backhandedly promoting religious bigotry and promoting dirty politics.
Romney, however, admits he was wrong on abortion…don’t we all want someone who says “Yes, I was wrong” or do we want someone to spin us into never-never-land? And Romney, oh no, he looks/acts/counds presidential and has business sense – what is wrong with those qualities? I want someone who will represent our country with honor and dignity.
The presidency is all about character, and Romney is a man of character.
JustTruth101 on January 3, 2008 at 1:17 PM
It’s amazing to me that anybody could swallow the Huckster’s snake oil routine, but plenty of suckers obviously are, just because he knows how to “speak the language of faith”. Apparently for them it’s way more important that someone sound like a Christian than actually act like one.
This latest bit of cuteness from Huck’s campaign is just another example of him giving real Christians (i.e., people who aren’t complete frauds and hypocrites) a bad name.
ReubenJCogburn on January 3, 2008 at 1:35 PM
TWO POINTS!:
First, this is when GWB as “party leader” needs to step in and tell all the GOP candidates to knock this kind of crap off. It should be followed up with real consequences vis-a-vis RNC funding for any candidate whose staff gets caught doing this stuff.
Somebody is sending evangelicals threatening letters if they support Huckabee and LDS scripture-laden fake Christmas cards supposedly from Romney. The “rats” have no motive to do this kind of stuff right now so it probably is somebody from the GOP side (my money is on the shifty Paul crowd but it could be any of them).
Secondly, this points out why there is merit in nominating people with public experience. The vetting process in running multiple campaigns tends to vet all the dirt before it becomes an issue. Hillary’s scandals would be all warmed over dirt from her years under the failed administration of her serial rapist husband. Obama’s scandals are fresh for 2008 as he finally would be forced to answer straightforward questions about his background and faith.
highhopes on January 3, 2008 at 1:37 PM
Nothing, if they’re backed up by a conservative record and policies. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case with Romney.
Were it only about his abortion flip-flop, it wouldn’t be a big deal. However, he’s completely reinvented himself and his positions specifically for an election campaign- I’m not sure that such blatant opportunism is a positive character trait.
Hollowpoint on January 3, 2008 at 1:38 PM
Here’s some good info on Daryl Toor from The Pink Flamingo blog.
Haven’t had time to go through it all yet.
Buy Danish on January 3, 2008 at 1:54 PM
I screwed up the link. Sorry! The Pink Flamingo
Buy Danish on January 3, 2008 at 1:55 PM
Being Mormon, maybe he’s got more than just the one wife. And being from Mass. maybe the other one or two are men … kidding.
BowHuntingTexas on January 3, 2008 at 1:57 PM
Could it be about how he dodged the draft so he could convert the French to Mormonism? While a funny sentence (anything with the French is), I’m not sure it’ll exactly “Swift-Boat” him.
Mark Jaquith on January 3, 2008 at 2:02 PM
Pink Flamingo found one book a Revelation Press published, an anti-Bush tome, Christian Words, Unchristian Actions: George W. Bush and the Desecration of Christianity in Modern America
Publisher: RevElation Press, LLC
Author??
Heh. What a PaulNutty way to spell a company name.
The Amazon review describes the leftist views of the author who is a “conservative Christian Attorney”, is against the Iraq War, torture, compassionate conservatism, blah blah blah, but I can’t find an author’s name and there’s only one copy of the book available.
Buy Danish on January 3, 2008 at 2:08 PM
Yep. Teeming hordes of clean-cut eagle scouts descending on unsuspecting peoples’ homes…mowing the lawn, painting the fences….
sulla on January 3, 2008 at 2:11 PM
highhopes:
Good grief… got a link for that? I hadn’t heard of it before.
Laura on January 3, 2008 at 2:16 PM
It’s off Drudge. Here’s the link.
Slublog on January 3, 2008 at 2:26 PM
Thanks, Slublog.
Laura on January 3, 2008 at 2:34 PM
I can’t help but think that this is somehow related to Huck’s pulled attack ad on Romney. Remember that weird “no executions” bullet point? Hmmmmm…
Big S on January 3, 2008 at 2:35 PM
I’d be willing to bet it turns out to be ridiculously petty and beneath anyone except an honorless desperate sharleton accomplishing nothing except to stain the party itself. Fulfilling the dems rhetoric about the corrupt rich republicans. Wanna bet?
Griz on January 3, 2008 at 2:45 PM
I think that no executions thing was an attempt to say that under Romney there were no Death Penalty executions. Huck didn’t mention that there is no Death Penalty in Massachusetts.
Romney actually tried to re-instate it as Governor, but it was defeated by the Liberal legislature.
The bill, House 3834, was referred to the Joint Committee on the Judiciary. Hearings were held on Thursday, July 14, 2005. The bill was defeated 53-100 in the House of Representatives on November 15, 2005.
This info is actually from an anti-death penalty website.
Buy Danish on January 3, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Maybe– it’s about the “anti-mormon” calls? Has anybody noticed that all the “dirty tricks” seem to have been directed at Mitt? What if it turns out that the Romney campaign did’em??
Just askin’.
Ex-tex on January 3, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Contrary to popular belief, it was Mitt’s dealings in closing down a business in some other state that the pasty bloated drunken slob Kennedy used to beat him in 94. It isn’t like that is a revelation. Could they bring it back to life? I’m sure there have been people affected negatively by Bain Capital over the years. And shady businessmen are as despised as lobbyists, lawyers, and senators.
csdeven on January 3, 2008 at 3:02 PM
Rosie agrees!
That scenario would be in synch with the thinking behind this book, except that the author is a lawyer:-)
Buy Danish on January 3, 2008 at 3:15 PM
I don’t either. This campaign is getting pretty nasty.
bnelson44 on January 3, 2008 at 3:21 PM
Bryan – you’re not alone. It’s a pretty underhanded move.
Slublog on January 3, 2008 at 3:23 PM
From The Page:
amerpundit on January 3, 2008 at 3:26 PM
What’s Al and Jesse got to do with it?
ScottG on January 3, 2008 at 3:27 PM
Oh, come on. When they release the negative content, they’re accused of negative campaigning. When they withhold the negative content, they’re accused of negative campaigning. It’s like they can’t use negative content in campaigning without being accused of negative campaigning! Don’t you know that Huckabee’s soul would never let him engage in such politicking?
No, you’re not alone.
calbear on January 3, 2008 at 3:27 PM
Bryan,
It’s not like he’s on-air talking about it. He made a post on his blog. He’s smart enough to know that if he really wanted to make some noise he would have needed to plant it days ago.
EduardoOTI on January 3, 2008 at 3:38 PM
It’s all over the blogs today, the day of voting.
davenp35 on January 3, 2008 at 3:43 PM
There were also these calls made by a pro-Huckabee group, who claim not to be affiliated with Huck’s campaign.
I certainly hope that Mitt was not involved with the anti-mormon calls. I find it very difficult to believe that a well-organized, disciplined campaign like his would do something that stupid.
Buy Danish on January 3, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Who cares if he’s not “on-air?” This intertube thingy has a pretty large reach, and like davep35 says, this little stinkbomb is all over the political internet.
It was a nasty move by Carter.
Slublog on January 3, 2008 at 3:45 PM
I’m an ardent supporter of the power of blogs, but I think you guys are overreaching on this one quite a bit.
EduardoOTI on January 3, 2008 at 3:47 PM
Huh. Really? On the day of the caucus when all the pundits are looking for that little extra insight, that little tip that puts them ahead Carter drops this like blood on the water for the sharks. You’re probably right. He was probably trying to bury it. Either that or he was doing the “Lord’s work” as seen by Pastor Huck.
Iowa has given us a real gift (read as “blessing” for all Huck supporters) by showing us who Huck really is. I was favorable disposed to him, though anti his positions until his rise up to the top. Not so now.
Spirit of 1776 on January 3, 2008 at 3:51 PM
So you think Carter’s behavior is acceptable for a supporter (and former staffer) of the guy who’s running a “positive campaign?”
Slublog on January 3, 2008 at 3:52 PM
He put it out there, without any details whatsoever, knowing people would read it and spread it. You don’t put a post out hoping no one will see it or only a few people will and will stay hush about it.
amerpundit on January 3, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Exactly.
I wonder how many hits this nothing of a blog post that no one was supposed to see has gotten.
Buy Danish on January 3, 2008 at 4:04 PM
These comments/questions from the Evangelical Outpost blog are interesting and Joe Carter responds.
To Joe Carter -
Joe Carter’s response –
I have to say that I was under the impression that the media/blogosphere was unable to keep a secret. But this rumor has managed to circulate widely behind the scenes while getting almost no coverage on the blogs. I was shocked by how many sources had heard it yet were keeping it under wraps.
Indeed, I have reflected on that question. In fact, I only bring it up because the story hasn’t broken already and deserves to be aired. It has the potential to change the race significantly and show should be cleared up before any of the caucuses/primaries even begin.
Now the rumor could be completely wrong and it could turn out that the investigation ends up hurting Huckabee rather than Romney. If that is the case, then Huckabee should drop out of the race. I put honesty and integrity ahead of partisanship and this incident, while not exactly earth-shattering, cuts to the heart of that. It will also show once again that the cover-up is often worse than the crime.
Buy Danish on January 3, 2008 at 4:22 PM
Arrgh. I keep forgetting to eliminate that extra Http today. Link to blog.
Buy Danish on January 3, 2008 at 4:24 PM
So, Huckabee will do anything to win. He really is a democrat, isn’t he?
Rational Thought on January 3, 2008 at 4:35 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »