Annals of Outrage III

Last May, I wrote an Annals of Outrage II chronicling the waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government in the first half of 2004. Plenty of time has passed since my last piece and much has happened. Here, then, is my latest attempt to guide you through the Bush Administration's most egregious corruption scandals. The information comes to us courtesy of the federal government's internal investigations into administration fraud, waste and abuse. The cronyism and corruption have hit a new low. 

1) Bat Mitzvah Corruption: In terms of sheer outrage, millionaire defense contractor David H. Brooks is hard to top. The New York Daily News recently reported that Brooks spent an estimated $10 million on his daughter's bat mitzvah reception. Aerosmith performed at the reception (reportedly earning a cool two million dollars), and Kenny G, 50 Cent, Tom Petty and The Eagles' Don Henley and Joe Walsh also played. Here's the kicker: Brooks has reportedly made more than $250 million in wartime profits as the CEO of DHB Industries-- which has had thousands of defective bulletproof vests recalled by the government! 

According to a government investigation into the faulty vests that was uncovered by the Marine Corps Times, DHB's equipment saw "multiple complete penetrations" when 9mm pistol rounds were fired into the vests. One government ballistics expert quoted in the government's findings said he had "little confidence" in DHB's equipment. Meanwhile, the SEC is looking into Brooks' 2004 sale of $186 million worth of company stock. Institute for Policy Studies' Sarah Anderson, who co-authored a report called "Executive Excess 2005," called Brooks a "world champion war profiteer," concluding, he has "no shame." 

2) CPA's Bribes: The war in Iraq continues to churn out profiteering scandals on a weekly basis. The New York Times reported in November that the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction had uncovered a scheme involving a US comptroller in the Coalition Provisional Authority, Robert J. Stein, and other co-conspirators who accepted "kickbacks and bribes…to steer lucrative construction contracts" to an American-run company. According to the criminal complaint, Stein and his wife spent the bribes he received on cars, jewelry, and home improvements. In the meantime, the contracted work either wasn't performed or was shabbily done. Most outrageous of all, Stein was given control over eighty-two million dollars in funds for Iraq rebuilding despite the fact that he had spent eight months in jail in the 1990s on a felony fraud conviction. 

More broadly, the special inspector faulted the CPA for failing to adequately account for 8.8 billion dollars in funds designated for Iraqi rebuilding projects. As the Boston Globe reported this month, "11 investigators in Iraq [are] looking into more than 50…cases of graft involving civilians and the US military." 

3) Halliburton Redux, Redux: Annals of Outrage just wouldn't be the same if Cheney's ex-company didn't make my list. The company, of course, has spawned a cottage industry of government investigations into the corporate construction giant's nebulous billing and spending practices. Halliburton remains under intense scrutiny today. Just last month, CNN.com explained how whistleblower Bunnatine Greenhouse who had worked for the US Army Corps of Engineers charged that Halliburton's subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root was operating under government contracts rife with "the most blatant and improper contract abuse I have witnessed." Waste was ubiquitous. Greenhouse told a Democratic hearing sponsored by Sen. Byron Dorgan that instead of fixing $85,000 trucks in need of relatively minor repairs like flat tires, KBR decided to torch them. The Justice Department told Dorgan that it was looking into the mounting allegations of widespread fraud at Halliburton.

4) No-bid contracts: The effort to rebuild after Hurricane Katrina has created a massive amount of new work for the government's inspectors general. One example, according to the Washington Post, was the Department of Homeland Security's inspector general's report that the government had awarded an $80 billion no-bid contract to an Alabama company, Clearbrook LLC, for building camps for emergency work, but that the company had "mathematically inaccurate [billings] indicating over three million dollars in overcharges" and a "complete lack of documentation supporting price reasonableness." 

That's just the tip of the iceberg. The Post also reported that over at the Pentagon, the Inspector general's office is examining an Army Corps of Engineers contract to distribute ice in Katrina's aftermath and a contract for putting temporary roofs over damaged homes. In fact, by late October, a whopping 92 investigations had been initiated into allegations of corruption, overpayments and other improprieties associated with the federal response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. By early November, the website Govexec.com was reporting that investigations had already led to 23 arrests, 12 indictments, and more than 400 investigators reviewing "3,000 contracts worth more than $5.1 billion...."

5) Manna from FEMA: In response to questions from the South Florida Sun-Sentinel in October, the Dept. of Homeland Security's inspector general Richard Skinner said that he was investigating complaints that FEMA wily-nilly provided checks for $2,000 to residents of Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana unaffected by Katrina's destructive path. "In three Louisiana parishes," the paper reported, "FEMA issued more checks than there are households, at a cost to taxpayers of at least $70 million." One Mississippi official told the Sun-Sentinel that folks "made a ton of money." "We're talking plasma TVs...stereos...bicycles." While FEMA has told Congress that the disbursement problems have been fixed, Skinner said that he couldn't confirm FEMA's claim. By mid-October, 14 people faced charges of fraud in relation to the $2,000 payouts. Skinner said that "we expect many more" to be indicted. 

6) Bilking TSA: As I reported last May, the Transportation Security Administration has its own share of fraud, waste and abuse problems. And so in late October, Rep. Henry Waxman pointed to news reports citing "egregious waste under contracts awarded and administered by the Department of Homeland Security [and TSA]."

Pentagon investigators have found, for instance, that one contractor--the technology company Unisys--might have over-charged TSA by some 171,000 hours in labor and overtime by billing out their employees to TSA "at up to twice their actual rate of compensation," as Waxman's statement put it. One former TSA official told Congress that senior administration officials had ordered him to deflate cost estimates of TSA's deal with Unisys to mislead the public about the true costs of the contract. 

7) No Science Allowed: The Government Accountability Office found in mid-November that the FDA, according to the Los Angeles Times, had "compromised their usual science-based decision making process when they ruled in 2004 against letting the morning-after birth control pill be sold without a prescription." The GAO issued a report saying that the FDA's review process for the Plan B pill was "unusual," "not typical," "novel," "did not follow FDA's traditional practices." Before the scientific review had even concluded, senior FDA officials allegedly told mid-level employees that Plan B was not going to be approved for over-the-counter sales, regardless of the scientific findings. Henry Waxman concluded that the "GAO's final report describes an appalling level of manipulation and suppression of the science. It appears that the decision…was preordained from the outset." 

8) Politicizing Public Programming: The Corporation for Public Broadcasting's Inspector General Kenneth Konz recently delivered a report in which he found that CPB's former chairman, Kenneth Tomlinson, was trying to politicize PBS's programming by urging PBS to put a conservative talk show on the air and by hiring lobbyists and consultants without the CPB board's approval. Konz's devastating report concluded that Tomlinson (who resigned shortly before the report was publicly released) had "directly violated the agency's statutes and procedures," as the Washington Post put it. 

9) Abramoff: I could have devoted an entire Annals to chronicling the government investigations spawned by the notorious GOP super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff. But in brief, there's a Justice Department criminal probe into allegations that Abramoff bribed lawmakers and their staffs, bilked millions of dollars from Indian tribal clients, and committed assorted other frauds and abuses. The Inspector general's office in the Dept. of Interior (which is part of the DoJ's Abramoff task force) has been interviewing witnesses to determine whether former Deputy Interior Secretary J. Steven Griles had agreed to prevent the Gun Lake Indian tribe from building a casino in Michigan in deference to Gun Lake's competitor, an Abramoff client. Apparently, Abramoff had also talked to Griles about giving him a job with Abramoff's firm, and if there was a quid pro quo, it would violate conflict-of-interest laws. 

10) Abramoff II: Former General Services Administration Chief of Staff David Safavian was arrested on charges that he made false statements and obstructed the investigation by the GSA's Inspector General's office into his connections to Abramoff. Safavian told the IG, according to a Justice Dept. news release, that Abramoff "had no business with GSA prior to the August 2002 golf trip" Safavian took to Scotland with Abramoff, Bob Ney, Ralph Reed and others. But Safavian's claims weren't true: "Safavian concealed the fact that the lobbyist had business before GSA prior to the August 2002 golf trip," and he had apparently assisted Abramoff's bid to acquire federally-controlled property in the Washington area. 

Government investigators have their work cut out for them in the new year. Already, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi has urged the House's inspector general to review Bob Ney's House Administration Committee's decision to award a big contract to a wireless company, Foxcom Wireless, an Abramoff client, to improve cell phone reception for the House of Representatives. 

And Edward Kennedy recently urged the Pentagon's Inspector general to investigate the Pentagon contractor, the PR firm Lincoln Group, that reportedly paid Iraqi newspapers to publish favorable news stories written by US soldiers without acknowledging the article's origins -- blatant propaganda that erodes America's stated commitment to defending a free press. Kennedy called planting news stories part of a "devious scheme." 

Here's one bet you can take to the bank: The Pentagon's propaganda scandal will appear on my next Annals of Outrage top ten list, so stay tuned in 2006. 

Comments (51)

1. All government corruption should be prosecuted vigorously....

   but I find it a little difficult to get around the hypocrisy of those who wail about millions "stolen from the taxpayers" in the Pentagon or to contractors....who never seemed to care much about waste, fraud and abuse in their favorite SOCIAL programs and always insisted that the incidents are "rare", but "common" among the programs they DON'T like (like defense)!

   Posted by Mask at 12/08/2005 @ 5:03pm

2. Mask

   Care to provide an example or two?

   Posted by brunowe at 12/08/2005 @ 5:12pm

3. Posted by MASK 12/08/2005 @ 5:03pm

   Care to provide any documentation or numbers to support your statement?

   Posted by Will C. at 12/08/2005 @ 5:12pm

4. All government corruption should be prosecuted vigorously...

   ...furthermore, finding ways to reduce the amount of government corruption before it happens needs to become a top priority. As such, I refer you back to KVH's 12/2 post, Nation's Strongest Campaign Finance Bill Passes in CT. Making sure administrations/Congresspersons/etc don't get entangled in owing "favors" to extremely monied interests would be a start.

   Also, Mask, I do not doubt that corruption exists in all types of government programs, including the social programs to which you refer. But I would hazard a guess that MORE corruption exists in programs which involve MORE money, i.e. DEFENSE.

   Posted by liveeasy at 12/08/2005 @ 5:16pm

5. My understanding is that Medicare is remarkably efficient - at least in comparison to private health insurance. Many of the other programs could be eliminated if workers were adequately compensated. These programs benefit corporations as much as, if not more than, individuals.

   In any case, the level of abuse in the current administration is appalling. There were also problems in the 1990s, when democrats had control. Wrong is wrong. No excuses. The greed that underpins our system, the worship of the dollar, is a bipartisan issue.

   But, since I think the country is going in the wrong direction, I see no problem with broadcasting the corruption scandals. It may wake some people up to the hypocrisy of the culture fascists.

   Posted by tmag at 12/08/2005 @ 5:43pm

6. Conservatives look the other way as Republicans loot and attack America, they make excuses for it, and they crack jokes about it.

   Posted by reidsucks at 12/08/2005 @ 5:54pm

7. With respect to the conservative agenda, we have unparalleled corporate corruption on the one hand and a militant psuedo religious movement on the other. Their marriage, one for mutual profit and nation building (the USA unfortunately) can exist only so long as one side observes the dogma of the other. By virtue of their actions, they are being hoisted on their own petards. Every misdeed should be judged by the applicable chapter and verse of the Bible, and then the apologists and defenders should be publicly challenged to defend the act or acts.

   Posted by Ifida at 12/08/2005 @ 6:33pm

8. Really now Katrina,

   I know you hope to give Democrats a real boost towards 2006, but your argument is really an empty one when it comes to Republicans being the sole perpetrators of corruption in politics.

   Note some interesting history:

   Mr. JOE PRATT ( Historian/Author): I would say there is a historical continuum from the first day Herman Brown entered construction to what we're seeing in Iraq today, and that continuum is public sector contracting is a tricky business, and personal contacts are a very important part of it.

   BURNETT: That's Joe Pratt, a historian at the University of Houston who has co-written a biography of the Brown brothers. Their lifelong friendship with LBJ was based on mutual affection and pragmatism. They donated millions of dollars to his political campaigns over the years, and won it all back and more in lucrative government construction projects. Robert Caro wrote in his first volume on Johnson, "The Path to Power," 'Brown & Root became an industrial colossus thanks to Lyndon Johnson.'

   http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/2851.html [url]

   Billie Sol Estes, now known as the Texas wheeler-dealer and con-man supreme was, in 1961, at the peak of his agricultural career. He had become a multimillionaire and a virtual icon in Pecos, Texas. His success was due, in great part, by his solid connections in government - and one of his primary connections was Vice President Lyndon Johnson. Things started to fall apart when Estes' cotton allotment scheme began to be scrutinized by Agriculture officials. Estes had master minded a bizarre method of having the government transfer other farmer's cotton allotments to his own cotton acreage. In this way all of his land could be used to grow the tightly regulated crop. Such a scheme would have been impossible without help from high officials, either inside the U.S.D.A., or Washington, or both. Henry Marshall, in reviewing the cotton allotment irregularities connected with Billy Sol Estes, evidently uncovered a warm path that led to Vice President Johnson, but also to his own untimely death.

   Billie Sol went to trial and then prison, never once breathing the name of Lyndon Johnson - until his release in 1984. A Texas Ranger, Clint Peoples, had befriended Estes and convinced him that he should come clean with the whole truth. True to his word, Estes agreed to appear before a Robertson County grand jury and clear the record concerning the cotton allotments, the death of Henry Marshall and the involvement of LBJ and others.

   He recounted the whole ugly picture - from the millions he had funnelled into Johnson's secret slush fund, to the illegal cotton allotment scheme, to the murder of Henry Marshall. Estes testified that Lyndon Johnson, Cliff Carter, Malcolm Wallace and himself met several times to discuss the issue of the "loose cannon" - Henry Marshall. Marshall had refused a LBJ-arranged promotion to Washington headquarters, and it was feared that he was about to talk. Johnson, according to Estes finally said, "Get rid of him," and Malcolm "Mac" Wallace was given the assignment. According to testimony, Wallace followed Marshall to a remote area of his farm and beat him nearly unconscious. Then while trying to asphyxiate him with exhaust from Marshall's pickup truck, Wallace thought he heard someone approaching the scene, and hastily grabbed a rifle which customarily rested in the window rack of the truck. Quickly pumping five shots into Marshall's body, Wallace fled the scene. Suicide.

   http://home.earthlink.net/~sixthfloor/estes.htm [url]

   Abe Fortas-Johnson appointee and friend resigns due to corruption from Supreme Court

   In 1969, a new scandal arose. Fortas had accepted a $20,000 fee from a foundation controlled by Louis Wolfson. Wolfson was a financier who was under investigation for violating Federal securities laws. He was later convicted and spent time in prison. Wolfson was also a friend and former client of Fortas. Under intense congressional scrutiny, including a threat of impeachment, Fortas resigned from the court.

   http://www.answers.com/topic/abe-fortas [url]

   Perhaps KVH and others, you remember Abscam:

   Raymond Lederer - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania from 1977 to 1981. Implicated in the Abscam sting - convicted of bribery and sentenced to three years in prison and fined $20,000. Harrison Arlington Williams, Jr. - Democrat - U.S. Senator from New Jersey from 1959 to 1970. Implicated in the Abscam sting. Allegedly accepted an 18% interest in a titanium mine. Convicted of nine counts of bribery, conspiracy, receiving an unlawful gratuity, conflict of interest, and interstate travel in aid of racketeering. Sentenced to three years in prison and fined $50,000. Frank Thompson, Jr. - Democrat - U.S. Representative from New Jersey from 1955 to 1980. Implicated in the Abscam sting, convicted on bribery and conspiracy charges. Sentenced to three years in prison

   Michael Joseph Myers - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania from 1976 to 1980. Implicated in the Abscam sting - convicted of bribery and conspiracy; sentenced to three years in prison and fined $20,000; expelled from the House of Representatives on October 2, 1980. John Michael Murphy - Democrat - U.S. Representative from New York from 1963 to 1981. Implicated in the Abscam sting. Convicted of conspiracy, conflict of interest, and accepting an illegal gratuity. Sentenced to three years in prison and fined $20,000. John Wilson Jenrette, Jr - Democrat - U.S. Representative from South Carolina from 1975 to 1980. Implicated in the Abscam sting. Convicted on bribery and conspiracy charges and sentenced to prison

   BTW, Murtha was implicated but never convicted.

   And please, let us not forget Tamany Hall, Boss Tweed, Mayor Jimmy Walker, Mayor Richard Daley, Huey Long, etc. etc.

   As I continue to maintain, as long as we give government the power to tax, corruption will continue as men and women seek to maintain their grip on power from all political parties.

   Posted by love liberty at 12/08/2005 @ 7:39pm

9. Not included in the "list", but something that shows how callous this administration has become, is the recent Supreme Court ruling that the Bush Administration has the right to collect for overdue student loans . . . no matter how long ago they went into default, and no matter what the circumstances. Case in point, the ruling went against a 67 year old man who receives $864/mo from Social Security . . . his only income. He has diabetes and several other medical conditions, plus medication costs, etc. His loan defaults were over the 10 year statute of limitations but the ruling basically stated that there would be no time limit. We all have "stuff" that happens to us in life, and even though I don't know the specific reason for his default, I think that at his age and in his circumstances the government should cut him some slack. The Bush Administration claims that there is approx. $7 billion in default loans and it is therefore necessary to go after these people. At the same time, the government has been bailing out airlines that are in financial trouble. For example, the government recently assumed $10 billion of pension obligations so that an airline could stay "afloat" so to speak. When it comes to the little guy however, you are pretty much screwed if you get into financial trouble (the new bankruptcy bill doesn't care if you have problems because of divorce, loss of job, major medical expenses, reserve service in Iraq, etc. If you default, you are going to pay). Even in the Bible debtors are forgiven after 7 years. Not so in the compassionate conservatism of the Bush Administration.

   Posted by skeptiq1 at 12/08/2005 @ 7:52pm

10. Mask & Zero

    Zero...I like the train of thought re: health insurance, and perhaps Mask (if I recall says he is/was in the industry for a long time) can give some insight. The very root issue of the "Universal care" vs "status quo" hinges on the dichotomy of the apparent disutility of "health for profit" (status quo) versus health care as a "public service".....

    Posted by leftofcenter at 12/08/2005 @ 8:02pm

11. Yeah, well, oink, oink, oink, you know. Keeping the porcine set happy is what made this country what it is today.

    Posted by Legba at 12/08/2005 @ 8:04pm

12. SkeptiQ1

    Next it'll be debtor's prisons...then slavery? (Indentured servitude to pay debts) while corps get bailouts....

    In this "trickle-down" economy, the stuff trickling down on me don't smell like success....in fact its kinda brown and runny.

    Posted by leftofcenter at 12/08/2005 @ 8:05pm

13. "On March 3, 1978, Senator Edward Kennedy bragged, 'As the author of the first HMO bill ever to pass the Senate, I find this spreading support for HMOs truly gratifying. Just a few years ago, proponents of health maintenance organizations faced bitter opposition from organized medicine.' He added, 'HMOs have proven themselves again and again to be effective and efficient mechanisms for delivering health care of the highest quality. HMOs cut hospital utilization by an average of 20 to 25 percent compared to the fee-for-service sector.'

    Isn't he now saying the same things about socialized medicine? I wouldn't trust with my daughter or my car and I don't trust him with my health care.

    Posted by usc1 at 12/08/2005 @ 8:29pm

14. Skeptiq1,

    I agree this is a tragic decision, but it would be unfair to lay this solely at the feet of the Bush Administration.

    The Supreme Court ruled unanimously on this case, so the liberal judges were in agreement.

    The 9th Circuit, the most liberal court in the nation, ruled against the defendant. The lower court also ruled against the defendent.

    These actions are generated by career bureaucrats in low level positions. They are not part of some conspiratorial plot within the White House to drain seniors of their retirement income.

    That said, I hope someone in government makes a wise decision to waive the deductions. It is enough to have established the legal principle in this SCOTUS decision.

    One last point; where though is the accountability and responsibility of the defendent that he made no effort to pay back $77,000 in student loans he took out in the 1980's? He deliberately tried to defraud the government. This action especially when it is repeated over and over, only serves to make it more difficult to obtain student loans.

    Posted by love liberty at 12/08/2005 @ 8:40pm

15. USC1 -

    Don't worry, I think Ted stopped making house calls awhile ago.

    Posted by tmag at 12/08/2005 @ 8:49pm

16. Really now Katrina,

    I know you hope to give Democrats a real boost towards 2006, but your argument is really an empty one when it comes to Republicans being the sole perpetrators of corruption in politics.

    LOVELIBERTY Firstly, do you have anything this century? Secondly, where exactly did Ms. vanden Heuvel say that Republicans were the sole sources of corruption? If the Republicans are subject to greater focus now, it's because they control both the appropriation and the spending branches of government.

    Posted by brunowe at 12/08/2005 @ 8:50pm

17. Corruption, corruption ... you ask what is the root of this phenomenon. Greed as always? Yes. But incompentence at the top has added new dimensions to this aspect of our life as it's been inviting around corruptions in enormous scopes in recent years. And it also demoralizes us the most submissive people on Earth, we hate the Fed and we're afraid of it at the same time.

    Posted by HelenDAO at 12/08/2005 @ 8:53pm

18. LEFTOFCENTER

    Most of us are already in debtor's prison and we don't know it. The fancy cars, houses, TV's (the opiate of the masses) mask the fact that most people pay forever and never have the kind of freedom that we think we have. Besides, it's hard to convince a person with a full stomach that they have a problem. The current administration is simply lifting the facade a bit.

    Posted by skeptiq1 at 12/08/2005 @ 8:54pm

19. With all the constant sound bites of Republican corruption, it might be good to draw upon a little perspective. How is the rest of the world doing?

    Well, the US recently ranked 17th according to Transparency International. Some noteworthy examples on how socialist havens are doing in comparison.

    Venezuela 136, Vietnam 114, China 78, Cuba 59, South Africa 46, and Spain 23.

    To be fair, the top 10 are mostly socialist democracies in some form. But I believe the factor that is more critical for some of the top 10 is their small populations and their geographic locations. Iceland, Finland, Sweden, Norway, New Zealand

    http://ww1.transparency.org/cpi/2005/cpi2005_infocus.html

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10387519/ [url]

    LONDON - Corruption is on the increase in most countries and poor people are often the hardest hit, according to a global survey released on Friday.

    The poll, published on United Nations Anti-Corruption Day, found a majority of people in 48 out of 69 countries surveyed thought the problem had got worse over the past three years.

    Information on the poll background and it's resources; the data is evaluated in Germany.

    For further detail see J. Graf Lambsdorff, ‘Determining Trends for Perceived Levels of Corruption', Passau University Discussion Paper, V-38-06, 2005.

    What are the sources of data for the CPI?

    The CPI 2005 draws on 16 different polls and surveys from 10 independent institutions. TI strives to ensure that the sources used are of the highest quality and that the survey work is performed with complete integrity. To qualify, the data must be well documented and sufficient to permit a judgment on its reliability.

    Data for the CPI has been provided to TI free of charge, on a non-disclosure basis. The institutions who provided data for the CPI 2005 are: Columbia University, Economist Intelligence Unit, Freedom House, Information International, International Institute for Management Development, Merchant International Group, Political and Economic Risk Consultancy, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, World Economic Forum and World Markets Research Centre.

    For a full list and details on questions asked, number of respondents and coverage of the 16 polls and surveys included in the CPI 2005, please see the CPI methodology at

    http://www.transparency.org/surveys/index.html#cpi or www.ICGG.org

    Posted by love liberty at 12/08/2005 @ 9:21pm

20. God some of these posts are is like driving by a bad car wreck! You don't want to look but feel compelled to.

    Posted by vano at 12/08/2005 @ 9:45pm

21. LOVE LIBERTY

    As I said, I didn't know the specifics of his delinquency (I did know that the sum was $77,000 and that the decision was unanimous). However, I must take exception to some of your points. The unanimous ruling was in regards to the extension of the time that he could be liable. It was more a ruling on an interpretation of the law (with regard to time limits), and less a ruling on his specific case/circumstances. And while perhaps correct with regard to the letter of the law, I question whether it was correct with regard to the spirit of the law. As regards the unanimous verdict, it seems to me that we had a near-unanimous vote to go to war in Iraq, and we all know (in hindsight) the wisdom of that vote. Secondly, you mention that a "liberal" court had previously ruled against him as well. Hmmmm . . . sounds a lot like the Schiavo uproar by the right about our out of control liberal courts. I'm sure I don't have to remind you that the courts are suposed to be independent of political considerations. It seems to me that this administration has politicized our courts like no other. Take, for example, Tom DeLay getting the judge changed in his case because he felt that a democratic judge would not render a fair verdict! And how about ol' Georgie Boy and Harken Energy. Bush sold off his shares before Harken nose-dived and then he failed to report his insider trade for 34 months. When he became president, guess who presided to decide if there was merit to prosecute him for insider trading? It was his former personal attorney! And there was no wrongdoing according to him. Now, Martha Stewart had to go "jail" and endure house arrest for a far smaller sum than that involved in the Bush case. Third, as for a conspiratorial plot to drain seniors of their savings, I have to say that "plots" to use your terminology, abound. How about the recent medicare prescription drug legislation? By and for the pharmaceutical companies, plain and simple. Not in the best financial interests of seniors. And how about the bankruptcy bill I mentioned (written by and for the credit card companies). If you are an old granny who runs up astronomical medical bills due to a catastrophic illness, they can and will take your "retirement" residence. If you are a reservist who is called up for repeated tours in Iraq and you are unable to pay your mortgage (because you no longer have your civilian paycheck that could cover the mortgage) you can't file bankruptcy as before, and save your home. I know, a reservist is not a "senior", but some of the people called up (as seen on 60 Minutes awhile back) were very close to that age group (and yes, they have lost their homes . . . how's that for a welcome home?!!). The same for recently divorced seniors who are still working . . . 55 and older is considered a senior/recently unemployed near-retirement seniors. And last, as for this old geezer trying to defraud the government. How about crooked CEO's who do it all the time and get away with it while the little people have to eat @#%! and die. I just think we're sending the wrong message here. Assuming he did try to get out of paying it back, 10+ years ago, I say cut him some slack. Just think of his $77,000 as a couple of bombs we won't be dropping in Iraq.

    Posted by skeptiq1 at 12/08/2005 @ 10:01pm

22. Love Liberty Transparency Int'l is a fine organization, and I agree that overall we aren't nearly as bad as many countries but those other countries aren't run by my elected representatives spending my tax dollars.

    Posted by brunowe at 12/08/2005 @ 10:21pm

23. http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_nypost-welfare_fraud.htm

    For those that asked....but I know it does no good.

    See, for every example of welfare fraud and abuse I cite...I'll get "Oh, yeah...Well...that's still not as bad as what Exxon (or insert other demon of the Left here) gets away with with CORPORATE WELFARE" and the cycle continues.

    Do you know how liberals could have SAVED welfare, AFDC, WIC, etc. from the Clinton/Gingrich welfare reform of 1995? If THEY had stepped up and said, "You know what, before we ask for A DIME more...we're going to spend X amount MORE busting the abusers and the cheats....and until we've knocked off X percent of the criminality and corruption of the system...we're not spending anything extra."

    But they didn't...and you know why? Because they really didn't CARE about making welfare and other social programs efficient, "clean" and above reproach...just something they could point to and say "See, see...see how compassinate we are" or (more often) "See, see...those guys just want to let you starve with their so-called 'reforms' and 'clean-up'...but WE'll protect you."

    And so after 30 years...you got Bill Clinton, searching for a way to secure his re-election, and a GOP Congress fulfilling the promise that years of Democratic "promises" turned failures let them make....and the system is STILL getting ripped off (see above link)....and nobody cares on the Left, just like few care on the Right about the corporate scandals....and nothing changes.

    Posted by Mask at 12/08/2005 @ 10:27pm

24. Bill Clinton did preside over the end of welfare, prodded no doubt by the conservative revolution. But as corporations continue to ship jobs overseas with outsourcing where is the investment in education, and job retraining. Where are the ideas for a social contract that will ensure a vital middle class. All I see are fissures, all I read is invective, scratching at the scabs.Gotcha. It is pathetic...and we are all to blame.

    Posted by audiojoebob at 12/08/2005 @ 11:03pm

25. Mask It would be difficult to determine if the example you cite is better or worse than Exxon, corruption in Iraq, etc. since the article cites NO NUMBERS WHATSOEVER regarding the amount of money involved. Is that the best you can do?

    Posted by brunowe at 12/08/2005 @ 11:17pm

26. Take this old Oriental proverb on corruption: "A night bandit is a bandit, a day bandit is your own ruler".

    Posted by HelenDAO at 12/08/2005 @ 11:23pm

27. Mask, in all fairness, I'm sure that public assistance programs are victimized by cheats chronically, but I would like to see some specific numbers when you can. I think one can also argue that it's potentially more serious when people in power do it.

    Posted by brunowe at 12/08/2005 @ 11:35pm

28. My personal outrage: Karen Hughes.

    How much do we pay this shill to say, as she just did a moment ago on Charlie Rose, that it's "unfortunate" we are having such a hard time convincing the world that we don't support torture? She is justifying our torture of people in Gitmo by saying that some of them actually were found guilty of crimes. If only we could cover her in chum and shove her overboard--I am sure she is guilty of something.

    Help me out. Have we ever hired someone to serve exclusively as the chief propaganda artist for our president? Clearly, she does not represent the country, because when she uses the word "we" it refers only to this administration. Good conservatives or libertarians, does this not sicken you?

    I've never hit a woman, but she's my size so I wouldn't feel bad about it. Closed hand, to the mouth (I know it will be moving, but I'll take my chances). Just one punch should be enough to at least let me sleep tonight. And it might do an enormous good for the rest of the world by limiting the speed of the lies that come from her pie hole.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 12/09/2005 @ 12:35am

29. Karen's the only one in the Administration whom Queen Mother Barbara Bush still likes. Babs is mad at Cheney, Rove and the rest of the gang who make her boy look bad and stand in the way of his legacy.

    Posted by proudlib at 12/09/2005 @ 01:30am

30. Skeptiq1,

    I'm not sure why you went off on me to such an extent as you did. Perhaps as you read my posting, you missed the paragraph where I said I hoped that someone in the government would waive his student loans.

    The federal court I mentioned was the 9th Circuit which everyone, conservative or liberal admits is the most liberal court in the nation. I just pointed that out to show that even that court and the liberal members of SCOTUS all voted against this man.

    Bringing up every suspected injustice you can fit into a blog posting does nothing to advance this particular debate.

    Posted by love liberty at 12/09/2005 @ 02:34am

31. Be honest to yourselves, if any other administration in the world would be corrupt has this one is, they would already have been eliminated by the CIA. their only way to survive would be by permitting US militar bases in their soil, so as to secure torture heavens, just see Romania.

    Posted by areyouok at 12/09/2005 @ 03:39am

32. Frei,

    I am not sure you should respect my instinct to slug Karen Hughes. Mine was a pretty petty rant. First, I should try to talk with her, get her to understand that her job is not as complicated as concocting the right pitch. All she needs to do is point to successes when they happen, admit mistakes when they happen, and point to plans for future improvements--all without the snowjob. Inevitably she'll start the sales pitch on me. THEN, I'll slug her.

    However, "rocks"? She needs to get back to the used car lot in which she honed her skills. Sure, a few people will die as she sells lemon after lemon to those who can't keep up with her rapid-fire doublespeak, but at least she won't be covering our country's reputation with garbage.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 12/09/2005 @ 07:55am

33. i dont think katrina said there was never corruption among democrats, nor that only the branches of government mentioned were afflicted by corruption.

    MASK - the manhatten institute is a conservative think tank. they, along with other pseudo scholarly instututes (the large majority of which are funded by the right through individual and corporate contributions) are notorious for punching square pegs of ideology through round holes of reality. before u respond that liberal think tanks do the same, let me say that 1) yeah i know, and 2) a few of the think tanks labeled as liberal were around before the right dumped buzillions of dollars into creating their think tanks and therefore i question the labeling - the way the right labels any institution, academic or journalistic, whose work does not fit into its ideology as "biased".

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 12/09/2005 @ 09:41am

34. LL:

    Nice list of Democratic corruption going back to the 1950's. But, KVH's post is clearly a list of recent corruption, so I fail to see your point. If anything, it just shows that absolute power corrupts absolutely. When Democrats controlled Congress, there were abuses by those in power. Now that Republicans are the majority party, it is not surprising that most of the abuses are in the GOP camp. So, your defense of "the other guys did it too" fails to sway me.

    Posted by Hman23 at 12/09/2005 @ 10:09am

35. Corruption is a fact of life. Those in power, especially those with no fear of consequences, are notorious for basing their decisions on personal profitability, rather than intrinsic good. In college, I met a gentleman from Nigeria who told me that when his town discovered that the mayor had bilked the citizens of thousands of dollars and given a sewage contract to an associate who never did the work, the townspeople simply marched on the mayors house, dragged him out in the street, and hanged him from a flagpole, where he hung for days. Now, granted, this happened almost forty years ago, but the lesson is the same. The rich and powerful have no fear of anything but death. Do you honestly think Scooter and Duke Cunningham are worried about their future "jail" sentences? Please. Maybe if we stuck them in a regular max-security prison where'd they'd be sodomized daily (or maybe in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo!), they'd be more afraid. The death penalty is unfair, as long as people like corrupt politicians are spared.

    Posted by Robespierre at 12/09/2005 @ 12:04pm

36. Now that Republicans are the majority party, it is not surprising that most of the abuses are in the GOP camp. So, your defense of "the other guys did it too" fails to sway me.

    Posted by HMAN23 12/09/2005 @ 10:09am

    Somehow HM, you missed my summary point:

    As I continue to maintain, as long as we give government the power to tax, corruption will continue as men and women seek to maintain their grip on power from all political parties.

    Posted by LOVE LIBERTY 12/08/2005 @ 7:39pm

    So, my point was not to search for some 1950's scandal (actually I touched on far more), and I skipped Clinton because that is already over discussed; I used Johnson to illustrate the last 2 term real Democratic power in office.

    My real point though is just as I concluded with previously; our tax system is the biggest contributor to corruption by all parties. Even campaign finance reform cannot begin to eliminate all the favoritism and corruption from the Federal system.

    I recognize the corruption and how money affects everyone in political office

    Posted by love liberty at 12/09/2005 @ 12:59pm

37. Also HMAN,

    One of my points to KVH is that she has been pounding this nail while also promoting Democrats (not as much on these web pages as she does on TV and personal appearance). So, I am just trying to get her to address the topic with some balance instead of just shilling for the Dems.

    Posted by love liberty at 12/09/2005 @ 1:01pm

38. "Fair and Balanced" reporting on corruption, eh?

    Well, fine. Democrats have been caught with their hands in the cookie jar quite a few times too, but since they have almost zero national power, and not much more state or local influence, they have been shut out of the most prime opportunities for corrupt dealings lately. Republicans control every branch of the federal government, including the most powerful: K Street. The "pruning" of almost every Democrat or liberal from the lobbyist branch of the U.S. government has created a situation where Democrats have no chance to steal, and no reason to be offered bribes. The Abscam scandal occured when Democrats controlled Congress, just as the Teapot Dome scandal of the 1920's occured when Republicans had a majority and a sleaze-in-chief in office. Somewhere, Warren G. Harding screams in eternal suffering... burn on, Warren. The point is this: Only the powerful have the chance to be truly corrupt. And only the powerful ever get away with it.

    FYI: (The real) Robespierre's nickname was "The Incorruptable". Didn't do him much good, he still wound up on the guillotine.

    Posted by Robespierre at 12/09/2005 @ 1:52pm

39. Love Liberty,

    You are no doubt a more rigorous historian than I. Is it possible that corruption was that much less a problem before the Wilson years? I could take your point about taxation as it applies directly to tax law, income tax policy and issues regarding deductions have traditionally been as icky as some of the federal funding recipients.

    However, hasn't corruption been an enormous thorn in our country's side since this country has had a side?

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 12/09/2005 @ 3:40pm

40. By the way, there should be a period instead of a comma between "tax law" and "income tax policy". And for more on "icky", see section 142.16.3 of the Federal Tax Code of the United States of America.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 12/09/2005 @ 3:42pm

41. Katrina,

    " Bat Mitzvah Corruption: In terms of sheer outrage, millionaire defense contractor David H. Brooks is hard to top. The New York Daily News recently reported that Brooks spent an estimated $10 million on his daughter's bat mitzvah reception."

    Major non-sequitar fallacy, what does how much this man spent on his daughters little shin-dig have anything to do with an outrage?

    Oh.. your trying to make an arguement that "war-profiteering" is "bad". Hmmm, to each his own I guess. I don't have a problem with reputable companies making profit, particularly those that supply the military. Beyond that, your argument is still flawed.

    Todd

    Posted by Oksportsguy at 12/09/2005 @ 3:53pm

42. OKSPORTSGUY

    You should've read the whole section. The issue is that he made that money supplying defective bulletproof vests that were recalled by the government after tests resulted in "'multiple complete penetrations' when 9mm pistol rounds were fired into the vests"

    Posted by brunowe at 12/09/2005 @ 4:52pm

43. Seeing the latest polls below, I'm again amazed at how corruption in one party will taint the other-- apparently by sheer osmosis. If dem's do not figure out how to make the rep's own their mistakes, corruption, and lies, divorce them of the taint; they're lost in their own incompetence. Even though dem's are diverse and are a conglomeration of varying issues, they all need to point out what is wrong with the rep's, why dem's are apposed to the rep's mistakes, corruption and lies and consistently point out what the truth with proof is and is not. Otherwise the mistakes, corruption and lies of the rep's will paint ‘all' politicos with the same wide brush stroke. And that seems to be what is currently happening. It's not enough to see rep's exposed for what they are, the public needs to be educated to the facts and distinctions. Dem's need to be screaming at the top of their lungs what the deference's are between the dem's and rep's before they're indistinguishably bonded.

    Associated Press-Ipsos poll conducted by Ipsos-Public Affairs. Dec. 5-7, 2005. N=1,002 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.1.

    "How serious a problem is political corruption in the United States today? Would you say very serious, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not at all serious?"

    ...............Very Serious...Somewhat Serious....Not Too Serious...Not At All Serious...Unsure

    12/5-7/05........51.................37.........................8........ ......................3.................1

    "How widespread do you think corruption is in public service in America? Would you say hardly anyone is involved, a small number of people are involved, a moderate number of people are involved, a lot of people are involved, or almost everyone is involved?"

    ......Hardly Anyone...Small Number...Moderate Number...Lot Of People..Almost Everyone

    12/5-7/05......1..................20.................39.... .................28.................10

    "In general, which elected officials would you say are more ethical: [see below]?"

    ..................Democrats.......Republicans..........Both Equally.....Neither Is Ethical....Unsure

    12/5-7/05........36.................33..........................10...... ...............15......................6

    Posted by Bushfools at 12/09/2005 @ 5:00pm

44. Frank

    LOL...good one

    Posted by leftofcenter at 12/09/2005 @ 7:31pm

45. Two words - "term limits"

    Posted by Hman23 at 12/09/2005 @ 10:22pm

46. Leaperman is a perfect example of what it is to be a democrat. Definitely 'not' lock step with his own party, confusing the party message, most probably totally wrong, but still he's a dem. That he appears to have cut a deal in support of the fascist BC totalitarian regime-- is it just incredibly ironic or an outright outrage? Depending on what his motivations are or what was the promised outcome could determine whether it's a corruptly motivated stand. And it's precisely dependant on where your point of view resides at the time will determine how you'll see it. To find a warm spot, someone at the North Pole would travel south, exactly the opposite direction if he were at the South Pole..., but the motivation is the same.

    Posted by Bushfools at 12/10/2005 @ 09:53am

47. You want outrage???

    Every outrage you have mentioned is tied directly or indirectly to this outrage:

    FALSE FLAG TACTICS:

    These "Terrorists"...who are they...really?

    The news media tells us that they are all Musilm Extremists - Al Qaeda. Are they?

    How many of the purported terrorist attacks that have grabbed the headlines might actually have been "false Flag operstions?"

    I never knew what a false flag attack was until the past three years or so, when I began to do my own research to learn the truth behind the lies we are fed by the infotainment networks who claim to provide "news."

    A false flag attack is strategic. The strategy works.

    If you can make it appear that your enemy has attacked you (or your closest ally) in some grand and heinous way, it provides justification to strike your enemy (or those you wish to invade).

    This is a TACTIC. If you don't know how frequently this tactic has been used, and to what ends, you really need to begin studying how many time false flag operations have been employed, who was behind them, who was warned of the attack in advance, who actually carried out the attack, how they did it, what the media response to the attack was, and what the political and military responses to the false flag attack were.

    Many of the "Terrorist Attacks" that you believe were committed by "Muslim Extremists" or Al Qaeda", weren't.

    If that statement is true, doesn't that cause you to at least do the research I am recommending here, so as to form your own educated opinion about this entire subject of "Terror" and how it is being used to manipulate the political and military landscape?

    Nuclear war is going to break out very soon, and a false flag will be at the heart of it. Can we prevent nuclear war? Do you care enough?

    "This campaign designed to prepare the American people to blame Iran for a possible upcoming nuclear terrorist attack fits the description of a Mossad false flag operation, especially because of Israel's numerous, even flagrant recent violations of American nuclear security.

    Israel's long record of using terrorism and especially "false flag" terrorism - covert military operations designed to pin blame on an enemy - is extensive and well documented, beginning with the bombing of the Hotel King David by Menachem Begin's Irgun fighters, through the Lavon Affair and recently includes the bust up of a phony al Qaeda cell that was in reality manufactured by the Mossad.

    For those still under the illusion that Israel has always been a US ally, please note the USS Liberty Incident , wherein Israeli fighter planes and torpedo boats nearly sunk an unarmed US intelligence vessel in international waters, and also the US Army War College's assesment of the Mossad: "Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target US forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act." - Washington Times . Even the US army acknowledges that Israel can and does engineer "false flag" attacks.

    Citizens can afford to waste no time informing the President, the Pentagon, Congress, State Officials, FBI Counter Intelligence and the press that we are aware of the intent of this propaganda campaign and are not fooled. Recent Israeli and US efforts to publicly distance themselves from war plans for Iran may be part of a campaign to appear peaceful, such that a terrorist attack falsely blamed on Iran with the full force of the international media will look all the more brutal and undeserved."

    http://www.progressiveconvergence.com/nuclearfalseflagmail.htm

    Opening your eyes to the coming war against IRAN is not anti-Semitic.

    Unless you are eager for a front row seat to Armegeddon, educate yourself, and let your voice be heard:

    The Sunday Times December 11, 2005

    Israel readies forces for strike on nuclear Iran

    ISRAEL'S armed forces have been ordered by Ariel Sharon, the prime minister, to be ready by the end of March for possible strikes on secret uranium enrichment sites in Iran, military sources have revealed.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1920074,00.html

    This is NOT about politics and it is NOT about religion. This is not about bigotry or hate of any ethnic group. This is about saving our planet from the mad men who are hell bent on destroying it.

    Get educated and get involved.

    Is The Sunday Herald a reputable paper?

    What are we to make of this?

    Sunday Herald - 02 November 2003

    Five Israelis were seen filming as jet liners ploughed into the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001 ...

    Were they part of a massive spy ring which shadowed the 9/11 hijackers and knew that al-Qaeda planned a devastating terrorist attack on the USA?

    Neil Mackay investigates...

    THERE was ruin and terror in Manhattan, but, over the Hudson River in New Jersey, a handful of men were dancing. As the World Trade Centre burned and crumpled, the five men celebrated and filmed the worst atrocity ever committed on American soil as it played out before their eyes.

    Who do you think they were? Palestinians? Saudis? Iraqis, even? Al-Qaeda, surely? Wrong on all counts. They were Israelis – and at least two of them were Israeli intelligence agents, working for Mossad, the equivalent of MI6 or the CIA.

    Their discovery and arrest that morning is a matter of indisputable fact.

    It has always been a long-accepted agreement among allies – such as Britain and America or America and Israel – that neither country will jail a "friendly spy" nor shame the allied country for espionage. Chip Berlet, a senior analyst at Boston's Political Research Associates and an expert in intelligence, says: "It's a backdoor agreement between allies that says that if one of your spies gets caught and didn't do too much harm, he goes home. It goes on all the time. The official reason is always visa violation."

    What we are left with, then, is fact sullied by innuendo. Certainly, it seems, Israel was spying within the borders of the United States and it is equally certain that the targets were Islamic extremists probably linked to September 11. But did Israel know in advance that the Twin Towers would be hit and the world plunged into a war without end; a war which would give Israel the power to strike its enemies almost without limit? That's a conspiracy theory too far, perhaps. But the unpleasant feeling that, in this age of spin and secrets, we do not know the full and unadulterated truth won't go away. Maybe we can guess, but it's for the history books to discover and decide.

    http://ww1.sundayherald.com/print37707

    9/11: did Israel sacrifice the twin towers?

    On November 2nd 2003, The Sunday Herald published its investigation into the mystery surrounding the five Israelis seen filming as jet liners ploughed into the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001, asking whether they were part of a massive spy ring which shadowed the 9/11 hijackers and knew that al-Qaeda planned a devastating terrorist attack on the USA.

    The story exploded onto the international agenda, attracting record numbers of visitors to this website and provoking a stormy debate that raged across the world's media. To give readers a flavour of the investigation's impact, listed below is a selection from the hundreds of news organisations, weblogs and newsgroups that responded to an article that woke a world from its slumbers.

    http://ww1.sundayherald.com/np/911mystery.shtml

    Posted by plunger at 12/11/2005 @ 07:29am

48. DEFENSE SPENDING EXPLAINED...

    Anti-Semitism Refuted:

    Those on the receiving end of Globalization now have a terrific advocate in John Perkins, whose new book, Confessions of an Economic Hitman exposes Globalization and the New World Order for what it really is: a transnational, transreligious, corporate crime syndicate whose major criminal enterprises are known as banks, intelligence services and "Defense" departments.

    According to Andreas von Bulow, the former German Parliamentarian with whom Mike Ruppert has appeared in Germany:

    Von Bulow told AFP that he believes that the Israeli intelligence service, Mossad, is behind the September 11 terror attacks. These attacks, he said, were carried out to turn public opinion against the Arabs, and boost military and security spending...At this level, he said, the organization doing the planning, such as Mossad, is primarily interested in affecting public opinion. The architectural level planners use corrupt "guns for hire" such as Abu Nidal, the Palestinian terrorist who von Bulow called "an instrument of Mossad," high-ranking Stasi (former East German secret service) operatives, or Libyan agents who organize terror attacks using dedicated people, for example Palestinian and Arab "freedom fighters." The terrorists who actually commit the crimes are what von Bulow calls "the working level," such as the 19 Arabs who allegedly hijacked the planes on September 11. "The working level is part of the deception," he said. "Ninety-five percent of the work of the intelligence agencies around the world is deception and disinformation," von Bulow said, which is widely propagated in the mainstream media creating an accepted version of events. "Journalists don't even raise the simplest questions," he said adding, "those who differ are labeled as crazy."

    Just as important is the Zionist ideology, well summarized by Yitzhak Shamir, former Israeli Prime Minister:

    "Neither Jewish morality nor Jewish tradition can be used to disallow terror as a means of war... We are very far from any moral hesitations when concerned with the national struggle. First and foremost, terror is for us a part of the political war appropriate for the circumstances of today..."

    These documents should convince any intelligent reader of the importance of examining the possible Zionist connection to the 9/11 terror attacks. There is much more evidence, and those with questions and interest in additional documentation are welcome to request it. Equating legitimate research and critique of those shielding Zionists from public inquiry using the canard of anti-semitism is a typical attack of people who, ironically, are unashamedly racist, anti-Arab and in some cases as documented in the Talmud, anti-Gentile. Instead, those same people should be denouncing the racist Zionist doctrines and distancing themself from Jewish religious teachings that promote or allow racism.

    http://www.progressiveconvergence.com/nuclearfalseflagmail.htm

    Posted by plunger at 12/11/2005 @ 08:30am

49. Educating yourself is patriotic.

    Acting on what you learn is the most patriotic thing you can do.

    With our troops in harms way and our national treasure stolen, it's the least we can do.

    Telling the truth, and Pledging Allegiance To The United States were two of the most important lessons I had learned by the age of 5.

    How about you?

    Posted by plunger at 12/11/2005 @ 09:09am

50. I invite you to read the Nobel Literature Winner 2005, Harold Pinter

    http://nobelprize.org/literature/laureates/2005/pinter-lecture.html

    Your mainstream media is silent on this.

    Posted by areyouok at 12/11/2005 @ 12:02pm

51. BC's theme song:

    "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."

    – Sir Winston Churchill

    Posted by Bushfools at 12/11/2005 @ 7:57pm