And let's not forget the McCain-Feingold (anti-free speech, incumbant protection) campaign finance law.  That was when I started getting suspicious of McCain. Especially after he started getting the favorable press coverage.

They insist it has to be Iraq. Why is that? 

This one's easy...let me do it...

...because it advances the story!  And they are 'managing' the news!

I know you're being sarcastic...

Good Orderly Direction

Red, if I may suggest a fun evening activity for you, please go to time.com, and check out their archives.  Specifically, search for articles from late 1942 to 1945.  I think you'll be amazed at how closely the reporting of this period matches the reporting of today.  If you want to cheat, and not take the time to read through those articles, I'll give you a few of the highlights:

From Nov. 1942: "The public has been misled all along on the status of our military and naval operations in the Pacific," said Melvin Joseph Maas. "Unjustified optimistic releases created the impression that all was proceeding well in our war with Japan. . . . Defeats and disasters have been . . . announced as successes and victories for our forces."

From Oct. 1942: "When Franklin Roosevelt castigated his aides in the Government last week for making pessimistic speeches, he named no names. But the speeches were all on the record. Ever since straight-talking Elmer Davis, head of the Office of War Information, said in his famed August "ankle-deep" statement that the U.S. "could lose this war," Administration officials had talked cold—and bitter—turkey".  And "So far we've lost nearly every major struggle. If we continue to lose a little while longer, it will be too late to save ourselves, America and civilization. We've lost ships by the hundreds, men by the thousands. We've lost the freedom of the seas. We've lost everything except a smug sense of complacency."

From Apr. 1943: For Germans, the Battle of the Atlantic could mean at most the difference between losing this year and winning a temporary stalemate—a stalemate which might give them time to deal with the Russians, time to perfect their continental defenses, time for their Pacific ally to draw off American strength. But the delay and loss meant a great deal to the Allies. Upon this battle turned the whole timing of the difficult, not-yet-begun European campaign, and therefore of the Pacific campaign, which must wait until Hitler is beaten.

From Jan. 1944: But in 1943 Roosevelt's political control of the U.S. had been reduced to a lower margin than in any other year of his three terms. The nation endorsed his plans for war & peace (as far as they could guess them)—but not necessarily himself.

So as you can see, the sentiment during WWII was much the same as it is now.  The President is losing the war, the enemies are winning, we don't support the President, yada, yada, yada.  And we all know how that war ended up.

Bruzilla:

I concur with your assessment.

In a related note, this weekend I got a call from the Arizona Republican Party asking me to provide the Arizona Senators with campaign funding "To stop Harry Reid."

I miffed the representative calling me when I informed him that while I will be happy to vote for any Republican candidate in the upcoming presidential election, I will no longer vote for either John Kyle or John McCain due to their recent postions on key issues such as amnesty.

I informed him that he should pass along that the Republican Party should begin contemplating the fact that unless a brave Republican runs against either in the primary, they will lost both senate seats when they both come up for the next election cycle.

The represntative quickly disconnected me after telling me to please reconsider my positions.

SPQR,

Normally, I make a point to welcome new members here at NB. However, in your case, I shant put forth the required effort, as if your above post is any indication of your intelligence, I seriously doubt you will be with us for very long.

First of all, exactly what "crimes" have been committed by Mr. Rollins (other than the fact that he advances ideas with which you clearly do not agree)?

Second, who, exactly, are the "criminals" that employ this man and sign his paychecks, as I was not aware that he was now working for Bill & Hillary Clinton.

Help Fred defeat the RINOs, along with the Hitllary-Obama Axis, & win the White House in '08.