Progressive Calendar 12.20.06
From: David Shove (
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 03:24:26 -0800 (PST)
             P R O G R E S S I V E   C A L E N D A R    12.20.06

1. Racial equity rpt 12.20 12noon
2. Labor caroling    12.20 12noon
3. Best books/2006   12.20 12noon
4. Bridge vigil      12.20 4:30pm
5. Living wage       12.20 5:30pm

6. Eagan peace vigil 12.21 4:30pm
7. Northtown vigil   12.21 5pm
8. Intersex/fruit    12.21 7pm
9. Metsa/music/food  12.21 7pm

10. Green Party/MN     - Sentencing of Dean Zimmermann
11. Dave Bicking       - Zimmermann sentencing
12. Alexander Cockburn - Democrats prepare to fund longer war
13. ed                 - Roll rich man up hill  (poem)

--------1 of 13--------

From: Unny Nambudiripad <unny [at]>
Subject: Racial equity rpt 12.20 12noon

We are holding our next roundtable on The Minnesota Legislative Report
Card on Racial Equity.  It will be held on Wednesday, December 20 at Noon
at the office of the Alliance for Metropolitan Stability, 2525 Franklin
Avenue East, Suite 200.

The report card, published by the Organizing Apprenticeship Project,
assesses the performance of the Minnesota Legislature and the governor
during the 2005-2006 biennium on policies that address and strengthen
racial equity and opportunity in the state. It also assesses legislative
efforts that strengthen American Indian tribal sovereignty.

Jermaine Toney from the Organizing Apprenticeship Project will lead this
engaging discussion about race and public policy.  Please follow this
link: for more
details, and please let me know if you can attend.

Unny Nambudiripad Organizer, Alliance for Metropolitan Stability Phone:
612-332-4471 / Fax: 612-338-2194 unny [at] / 2525 Franklin Ave E, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN

--------2 of 13--------

From: Minneapolis Central Labor Union Council <betsy [at]>
Subject: Labor caroling 12.20 12noon

Join with Local 9 members for some singing (see attached flyer) with
Caroling to Remove the Cap - Because Santa's workshop can't make toys
without the elves .

We'll sing some holiday songs that have been slightly re-done to reflect
not only the joy of the season, but our strong desire to remove the wage
cap that we've been living with for four long years.
Wednesday, Dec. 20th at 12 ( Noon )
Minneapolis City Hall Rotunda by the Father of Waters statue
Wear your hat and scarf
Song sheets will be provided
Singing on-key not required [whew!]

--------3 of 13--------

From writeonradio [at] Tue Dec 19 22:22:24 2006
Subject: Best books/2006 12.20 12noon

Wednesday December 20th
Noon. Central Book Chats. Librarian Erin Zolotukhin-Ridgway will close
out the year with a discussion of the best books of 2006, and takes a
sneak peek at some 2007 titles. St. Paul Central Library, 90 W. 4th St.,
St. Paul.

--------4 of 13--------

From: wamm <wamm [at]>
Subject: Bridge vigil 12.20 4:30pm

Vigil to End the Occupation of Iraq: December is Critical!
Wednesday, December 20, 4:30 to 5:30 p.m. (this is an ongoing vigil) Lake
Street/Marshall Avenue Bridge, spanning the Mississippi River between
Minneapolis and St. Paul. Come to Marshall Avenue (St. Paul) side of the
bridge so that we can greet you.

--------5 of 13--------

From:"Ryan Greenwood" <Ryan [at]>
Subject: Living wage 12.20 5:30pm

Saint Paul Living Wage Public Hearing
Wednesday December 20th 5:30pm
Saint Paul City Council Chambers 3rd Floor
15 Kellogg Blvd West, Saint Paul

Background: After a two year campaign, TakeAction Minnesota and the Saint
Paul Living Wage Coalition are close to passing a strong Living Wage
Ordinance in the Saint Paul City Council. But we need your help to pass
it! Our proposed living wage ordinance would;

Cover companies that get significant subsidies or contracts from the City
of Saint Paul

Make those companies pay a living wage of $12.52/hr or enough to feed a
family of four without foodstamps

Minneapolis and over 100 cities around the country already have a strong
living wage law. By passing a Living Wage Ordinance over the next couple
of weeks, Saint Paul will join them in making sure that your taxdollars do
not subsidize poverty wage jobs. Large businesses will be speaking out
against a strong living wage law, so we need a strong community turnout to
make sure your council members know that Saint Paul supports a Living
Wage! With questions contact: Ryan Greenwood, TakeAction Minnesota,
651-379-0742 or Ryan [at]

Companies who recieve your tax dollars should pay their workers enough to
feed their families!

[No, actually it is the duty of all the rabble (us) to support the
glorious golden leisure class in the no-tomorrow manner to which they have
become addicted.  Anything less, and they will get pissed, really pissed.
You don't want to be around when a billionaire vents one billion dollars
worth of pissed-off-ness. Billionaires are like parking meters - keep
filling the slot, or it's the impound lot for you. FEED ME!! they cry.
(They like young virgins best.) -ed]

--------6 of 13--------

From: Greg and Sue Skog <skograce [at]>
Subject: Eagan peace vigil 12.21 4:30pm

CANDLELIGHT PEACE VIGIL EVERY THURSDAY from 4:30-5:30pm on the Northwest
corner of Pilot Knob Road and Yankee Doodle Road in Eagan. We have signs
and candles. Say "NO to war!" The weekly vigil is sponsored by: Friends
south of the river speaking out against war.

--------7 of 13--------

From: EKalamboki [at]
Subject: Northtown vigil 12.21 5pm

NORTHTOWN Peace Vigil every Thursday 5-6pm, at the intersection of Co. Hwy
10 and University Ave NE (SE corner across from Denny's), in Blaine.

Communities situated near the Northtown Mall include: Blaine, Mounds View,
New Brighton, Roseville, Shoreview, Arden Hills, Spring Lake Park,
Fridley, and Coon Rapids.  We'll have extra signs.

For more information people can contact Evangelos Kalambokidis by phone or
email: (763)574-9615, ekalamboki [at]

--------8 of 13--------

From: Lydia Howell <lhowell [at]>
Subject: Intersex/fruit 12.21 7pm

Intersex and Identity on Fresh Fruit. Join Dixie Treichel and John
Townsend on KFAI RADIO'sFresh Fruit Thursday, December 21 from 7 pm to 8
pm for a special show exploring intersexuality with guest Dr. Sharon E.
Preves, noted Sociologist, Hamline University Professor, and Author of the
book Intersex and Identity: The Contested Self.

KFAI RADIO 90.3 fm Mpls 106.7fm St Paul

--------9 of 13--------

From: Lydia Howell <lhowell [at]>
Subject: Metsa/music/food 12.21 7pm

THUR.DEC.21:Paul Metsa's HOLIDAY Show & Food Drive

8th Annual Holiday on Ice Cubes
Thursday, Dec. 21
Columbia Grounds Coffee Shop, 3101 Central Av. NE (612-781-7873)
Paul Metsa and Friends brought to you by

This is Paul's 8th Annual Food-fundraiser for the NE Seniors Foodshelf. It
will feature an intimate setting with Paul and some friends playing
acoustic music from 7-10pm. Donations of food and money welcome. Always a
great time.

--------10 of 13--------

Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 21:40:04 -0600
From: Rhoda Gilman <rhodagilman [at]>
Subject: Sentencing of Dean Zimmermann

Green Party of Minnesota
Green Party of the 5th Congressional District

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Dave Bicking, Green Party of Minnesota Spokesperson, (612) 276-1213
Neil Cunningham, Fifth Congressional District Spokesperson, (612) 722-0626


The Green Party of Minnesota is saddened by the sentencing of our former
Minneapolis City Councilperson Dean Zimmermann to 30 months in federal

Zimmermann has had a lifelong passion for helping people in need, both
personally and through his activism. He was involved in the Civil Rights
movement during the 60ıs, in the movement against the Vietnam War, and in
the formation of co-ops in Minneapolis.

The Green Party remains appreciative of his decision to continue his
activism by having represented our party as a candidate and as a City
Council member. He has shown no signs of personal ambition; it is
unthinkable that he would participate in corruption for personal gain. The
FBI set-up is the culmination of over 40 years of FBI surveillance of
Zimmermannıs political activities. We trust that Zimmermannıs imprisonment
will not end his ability to continue his commitment to working for a just

Dean Zimmermann made mistakes while subject to the multiple
responsibilities of holding office, working with constituents,
campaigning, and fundraising not only for his own campaign but also for
pressing issues of justice. He deserved more help from the Green Party and
his other supporters in keeping city business separate from fundraising.

The Green Party has worked for over 20 years for clean and fair elections,
public funding of campaigns, and strict regulation of lobbying, so that
any qualified person can run for public office without the need for
massive financial support. We believe that elected officials enter into a
solemn trust to maintain the highest possible ethical principles and to
avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest. As a party, we are
committed to developing rules of conduct that will ensure this and will
support Green candidates and officeholders in making the right decisions.

We reaffirm our belief that Dean Zimmermann had no intention to solicit or
take bribes. This personal and political tragedy will not negate the
legacy of his decades of service. Our hearts go out to Dean and his
family. We look forward to the day when he will rejoin us in our work.

--------11 of 13--------

Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 15:50:50 -0600
From: Dave Bicking <dave [at]>
Subject: Zimmermann sentencing

I've just returned from the courthouse where Dean received his sentence
this afternoon.  He was sentenced to 2-1/2 years, with a recommendation
that it be served at the federal prison in Yankton, SD.  That is the
prison Dean had requested.  His imprisonment will be followed by 3 years
of supervised release, meaning mandatory drug testing, no gun possession,
inspection of financial records, cooperation in collecting DNA, etc.
Dean will also have to re-pay the $6000 that he was given by Gary Carlson
for the re-districting lawsuit.  Of course, Dean no longer has that money
- he has given it to the lawsuit fund that it was intended for.

He will be voluntarily surrendering himself on Monday, Jan 29th.  That is
about 2 weeks later than would be normal, giving some additional time for
his hand to heal from his recent injury.

The sentencing guideline was calculated to be 30 to 37 months, based on a
variety of factors, and the judge chose the lower limit.  The prosecution
asked for 36 to 48 months.

Dean's lawyer read excerpts from a sample of letters that were sent to the
judge.  They were very moving, and Dean really appreciates the letters you
all have sent on his behalf.  I believe there were over 130.

Dean made a brief statement before the sentence was imposed.  He thanked
his friends and family for their support.  He apologized to his family and
his friends for his failure to be vigilant and on- guard, leading him to
be hooked into this situation.  He also apologized to future generations
for having his work cut short, due to his failure to be alert.

When asked by a reporter outside whether he had done anything wrong, Dean
replied, "If you mean did I break the law or do anything immoral or
unethical, absolutely not.  What I did wrong was not to protect my back."
When asked if he thought this was an FBI set-up, he replied, "Absolutely.
The whole thing was set up by the FBI."  [quotes may not be exact]

And that is exactly what the situation is.  Dean is innocent.  He did not
break the law, no matter how much the FBI tried to induce him to.  But the
FBI took the worst-looking videotapes and took a flimsy case to trial, and

Any sentence would have been unjust, even a short community service.
Dean is innocent, and he has already been badly hurt by this.  Also, the
FBI tampered with our democratic process - it is likely that Dean would
have won re-election otherwise.  And I can assure you that Mpls would have
a much better City Council if Dean had won!

Two and a half years is a lot of time in prison.  We should continue to
support Dean as he makes this great sacrifice that is the direct result of
all the good work he has done during his life.

I'll have much more to say soon, along with my reactions.  Just wanted to
get this note out to you right away. --Dave Bicking

--------12 of 13--------

Harry Reid: More Troops to Iraq!
Democrats Prepare to Fund Longer War
December 19, 2006

This last Sunday Harry Reid, the incoming Democratic majority leader in
the US Senate, went on ABC's Sunday morning show and declared that a hike
in U.S. troops in Iraq is okay with him.

Here's the evolution of the Democrats' war platform since November 7,
2006, the day the voters presented a clear mandate: "End the war! Get out
of Iraq!" and took the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives away
from the Republicans.

So somewhat to their surprise the Democrats recaptured both the Senate and
the House. Then they went to work - to obliterate the mandate. The first
thing they did was reject Jack Murtha, the man who said "Quit Now" in
2005. They voted down Murtha as House majority leader and picked the
pro-war Steny Hoyer.

Then Nancy Pelosi, chose Silvestre Reyes as House Intelligence Committee
chairman. Reyes promptly told Newsweek, "We're not going to have stability
in Iraq until we eliminate those militias, those private armies. We have
to consider the need for additional troops to be in Iraq, to take out the
militias and stabilize IraqI would say 20,000 to 30,000 - for the specific
purpose of making sure those militias are dismantled, working in concert
with the Iraqi military."

Reyes comes to his important post with an open mind, meaning an empty one.
He knows nothing of the region. This became clear in his brief parley with
a reporter from Congressional Quarterly who had the impudence to ply him
with questions at the end of a tiring day when men of mature judgment head
for the bar. CQ's man asked Reyes if Al Qaeda was Sunni or Shiite.

Reyes tossed a mental coin. "Predominantly - probably Shiite." Wrong, of
course, since Al Qaeda is Sunni, of a notoriously intolerant strain. It's
as if Reyes had called the Pope a Presbyterian.

Then the pesky newshound probed him on the matter of Hezbollah.
"Hizbollah. Uh, Hizbollah" Reyes answered irritably. "Why do you ask me
these questions at 5 o'clock?"

Back in 2003 Reyes, a Vietnam vet, was opposed to the war. Give him clout
as Intelligence Committee chair and he starts citing John McCain
approvingly, even upping the mad Arizonan's troop-boost call by 10,000.

Next, the Democrats in the Senate gave unanimous confirmation to Robert
Gates as defense secretary. Gates has a career record as one who slants
intelligence to suit his bosses' political agenda. Recently, as president
of Texas A&M, he deep-sixed affirmation action as college policy. The
Democrats in the Senate could have stretched out the hearings, grilled
Gates closely on his plans, taxed him with his grimy past as Bill Casey's
second-in-command in the Contra-gate Era. Special Prosecutor Lawrence
Walsh said flatly in his memoirs that Gates was not truthful in his 1991
confirmation hearings about his role.

Next, House Democrats welcomed the Iraq Study Group report of James Baker
and Jim Hamilton by promptly reaffirming the Palestinian Terror Bill
2006", written by AIPAC.

Then, on December 17 the Democrats' Senate leader, Harry Reid, said it was
okay with him to send more troops to Iraq. This was the same Sunday
morning that Colin Powell, appearing on CBS, said a troop increase "cannot
be sustained" and that the thousands of additional U.S. soldiers sent into
Baghdad since the summer had been unable to stabilize the city and more
probably could not tip the balance, Powell said.

Yesterday, it was instructive to go to the Democratic websites in the wake
of Reid's statement. Nothing on Daily Kos, nothing on Truthout, nothing on
any of them. They had many words about Republican warmongering, about
McCain's call for more troops. About Reid, one of the top Democratic
leaders, about the evolving Democratic posture - nothing.

Now let's go to a Republican, U.S. Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon. While
the Democrat Reyes was calling for a troop hike, Smith was proclaiming,
"We have no business being a policeman in someone else's civil war. I
welcome the Iraq Study Group's report, but if we are ultimately going to
retreat, I would rather do it sooner than later." Not cut and walk. Cut
and run.

At least Gordon Smith can publicly concede that as things stand, the Iraq
mission is a disaster, and quitting time is here. No prominent Democrats
in Congress but Jack Murtha can bring themselves to do that. (I include
here Senator Slither, otherwise known as Barack Obama, who trims to every
shift in the wind.) The language is always of pleasing schedules, in which
a (fictional) entity called the Iraqi Army, at the disposition of an
(imaginary) power called the Iraqi government, can be welded into an
(entirely fantastical) nonsectarian force by (as yet unavailable and
putatively suicidal) US military trainers.

Suicidal? A poll cited by the Iraq Study Group found that 61 percent of
Iraqis believe that it is appropriate where possible to attack the US
occupying troops. Since the poll included Kurds, who are less hostile to
the US presence, we can assume that the percentage of Sunnis and Shiites
who think it a patriotic act to shoot or blow up a US soldier is well
above 61 percent. Now imagine yourself as a US trainer embedded in an
Iraqi unit, the vast majority of whose members believe it right and proper
to kill you. "Suicidal" seems to be the correct term. These calls for a
bigger US training force are complete hokum.

You would have thought that Democrats would rush to hang their hats on the
the bipartisan ISG report, calling for cut and walk. But the long-awaited
report is dead shortly after arrival. There aren't more than a handful or
so of Democrats who are going to be caught in the same room as a report
that calls for the return of the Golan Heights to Syria and dares to raise
the issue of the right of return of Palestinians to their homeland.

In America these days persons in political life can describe reality only
if they are self-employed, with a guaranteed independent income and above
75 years of age. Jimmy Carter and James Baker are two prime examples of
this truth. Otherwise fantasy rules in Congress and the press, which has
consistently misrepresented the extent of the disaster in Iraq, preferring
to promote fatal illusions about a viable central government and fantasies
of the US being able to shape a new model army of Iraqis.

Since the elections of November 7, elite liberal consensus, as represented
by the Democratic leadership and major opinion formers such as the editors
of the New York Times, has rallied to the notion of a "surge" in U.S.
troops in Iraq. "Surge" is a handy word. It has the timbre of forceful
majesty, of mighty ocean rollers roaring onto a beach. It also has the
promise of withdrawal, since what surges can also recede.

A faction among the U.S. commanders in Iraq has been promoting the surge
option to useful journalists such as Michael Gordon of the New York Times.
(Today, the Washington Post reports that inside the Pentagon growing
opposition to the surge scenario - presumably on the reasonable grounds
that there aren't the troops to mount the surge and it would do nothing to
alter the situation anyway.)

Indeed, no reporter has played a more assiduous role in fostering this
"surge" option than Gordon, a man who somehow skipped free of the
misreporting charges that finally caught up with his former colleague
Judith Miller, even though he shared a byline with Miller in the very
worst report, the claim that aluminum tubes were hard evidence of Saddam's
WMD program.

In the past months, in the Times and on CNN Gordon has been laying down a
propaganda barrage against speedy withdrawal and for a hike in US troop
numbers in Iraq. When Murtha ran for the House majority leadership
position, the New York Times front-paged two stories by Gordon attacking
Murtha's advocacy of rapid withdrawal, and promoting a troop increase.

At the Washington Post, which editorialized against Murtha's bid, David
Ignatius has similarly been fostering the impression of feasible options
in Iraq. "With enough troops and aggressive tactics," Ignatius wrote
earlier this year, "American forces can bring order to even the meanest
streets." In Iraq, in March of this year, Ignatius, claimed to find
"unmistakable signs here this week that Iraq's political leaders are
taking the first tentative steps towards forming a broad government of
national unity that could reverse the country's downward slide." His keen
eye detected a "new spirit of accord."

So here we have the Times's and Post's lead reporter/commentators on the
war diligently promulgating the core fantasy: that the United States has
options beyond accepting defeat. The vast majority of Iraqis want US
forces out. Militarily, the United States has been defeated.
Diplomatically it is isolated. Politically it is immobilized.

From the Republican defeats at the November 7 polls through to the
publication of the Iraq Study Group report, there was a window for
Washington to commence diplomatic operations to get out with all speed.

That opportunity has almost gone. Now a decisive moment approaches. The
Democratic leadership - Pelosi, Reid, Emanuel, Biden - is recommending
that the Democrats in Congress vote to approve the supplemental budget
appropriation early next year, probably $160 billion, which will give Bush
enough money to keep the war going till he leaves town.

Enough Democrats have always been available to push these appropriations
through, sometimes by huge majorities or, in the Senate, unanimous
agreement. Here's the record of shame:

By 2004, when it was clear a disaster was unfolding and after Iraq's
alleged WMDs had been exposed as frauds invented by US and British
intelligence agencies and the press: HR 4613 - Final House Vote July 22,
2004: 410-12. Final Senate Vote July 22, 2004: 96-0.

In 2005, by which time it was clear that the US attack had spawning civil
war, plus staggering corruption - HR 1268: Final House Vote May 5, 2005:
368-58. Final Senate Vote May 10, 2005: 100-0. HR 2863: Final House Vote
December 19, 2005: 308-106. Final Senate Vote December 21, 2005: 93-0.

By 2006 the American people were turning decisively against the war.
Bush's ratings were among the lowest in presidential history. Up came HR
4939: Final House Vote June 13, 2006: 351-67. Final Senate Vote June 15,
2006: 98-1. HR 5631 - Final House Vote September 26, 2006: 394-22. Final
Senate Vote September 29, 2006: 100-0.

Years ago, my father used to tell me that when it came to assessing the
likely policy of the British Labor Party, the best approach was to figure
out the worst option available, and then proceed under the assumption that
this was the course the Party would adopt. Here in the U.S. I've always
applied this useful journalistic rule to the Democrats, with unfailing
success. Never for a moment, after November 7, did I doubt that Reid and
the others would do the wrong thing.

As we warned after the election, the role of the Democrats will be to ease
through a troop increase This prediction has turned out to be 100 per cent

Now comes the chance to see whether the antiwar movement, the progressive
Democrats, will meekly toe the line, even as some start wasting their time
promoting a Kucinich bid for the Democratic nomination, which will exactly
the same effect as did his bid in 2004. It was clear from the outset that
the only substantive function of Kucinich's run was to try to preempt
defections to a Third Party candidate such as Nader. Then, in Boston,
Kucinich toed the line and fell in behind Kerry. Once again doomed to
fail, he'll do the same thing in 2008.

On this site, last week, Mike Ferner wrote:

This February, the peace movement's choir, of which you are one, will up
the ante of protest. Voices for Creative Nonviolence, joined by Veterans
For Peace, have initiated the "Occupation Project" to occupy the hometown
offices of Representatives and Senators who have voted money for the war.
All this clearly adds up to a historic opportunity.

Last week I spoke in Marietta, Ohio to 35 people, and announced the
Occupation Project. I asked who among them would consider occupying their
local congressional offices. Without a moment's hesitation, six hands went

We talked about practical concerns: having to work, how much will it cost,
what will the charge be? We talked about taking a vacation day and the
modest fines involved for a misdemeanor F- all compared to the enormous
suffering Iraqis and soldiers now endure in this war.

So now let's see how these Democrats, all with their eyes cocked towards
2008 and the need to hold the antiwar vote, react to the threat or the
reality, of being occupied.

CounterPuncher John Farley, reading my comments on the blathersphere's
tactful silence at Reid's call for a troop "surge" directs our attention
to the feisty las vegas gleaner site, where this pertinent comment can be

Surge protector

We liked it better when the Democrats were just hiding behind the skirts
of Jim Baker and his Iraq Study Group and saying nothing about Iraq. Sure,
it wasn't a Democratic profile in leadership or anything. But it was far
preferable to the bizarre sight of the Great and Powerful Harry Reid going
on national teevee Sunday and endorsing the idea of sending more troops:

"If it's for a surge, that is, for two or three months and it's part of a
program to get us out of there as indicated by this time next year, then,
sure, I'll go along with it."

This qualified support, contingent on toothless guarantees and based on a
naive optimism that things will go largely as planned if executed
competently is vaguely reminiscent of something ... hmmm ... oh yeah,
Reid's vote to give Bush a blank check to invade Iraq in the first place.

It is nothing less than astounding that Reid would even consider trusting
Bush to keep good on a promise, any promise, let alone one wherein Bush
was able to escalate troop levels in Iraq so he could do what Bush is
clearly so loathe to do - withdraw from his optional war, effectively
admitting defeat to himself and to the judgment of history with which Bush
is so obsessed. In fact, if Harry Reid would like some advice about why
Bush can't be believed or trusted, Harry Reid need look no further than,
well, Harry Reid. Asked about Bush on election day, Reid said:

"I don't think he's emotionally capable of even thinking about governing
from the center. I think the man is a perfect example of what I studied in
school, the Acton theory, power tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts
absolutely. He's corrupt. Not in the sense of stealing from people. But
corrupt in the sense of having an arrogance of power. He controls the
White House. He did control the House and the Senate, seven members of the
Supreme Court were Republicans. And this man is arrogant with power. And
I'm not sure, that no matter what happens today, that he's going to change
that. I don't think he has it within him."

It wouldn't be a shocker to see the Harry Reid Democratic War Room and
Media Message Development Center, Amplifications and Clarifications
Division, put out a statement Monday trying to explain what Harry really
meant to say, whatever that is. Meantime, with any luck, the mainstream
media - and the public - will ignore Reid's inexplicable Sunday talk show
mutterings and instead cast their attention to Colin Powell, now firmly in
the cut and run camp and scoffing at the surge mentality.

[We'd all like to believe that that the national Dems aren't a pack of
brain-dead soulless zombie cannibals. And most of us (I for one) would
like to believe in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and Exciting
Omaha. -ed]

--------13 of 13--------

 Roll rich man up hill.
 Rolls back! Up! Back! Up! Wear edges
 big boulder to sand.


   - David Shove             shove001 [at]
   rhymes with clove         Progressive Calendar
                     over 2225 subscribers as of 12.19.02
              please send all messages in plain text no attachments

 To GO DIRECTLY to an item, eg
 --------8 of x--------
 do a find on

  • (no other messages in thread)

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.