Unless something earth-shattering (God forbid) happens, I'm gonna spend the next few weeks, days or so jabbering about personal stuff.  Not that anyone may notice, mind you.

Never done much personal stuff online ..... Stalkers who get toooo up-close and personal make you think twice about telling too much .... Maybe I'll give 3rd person narrative a whirl -- mix and match some family stuff with the personal.

Who's to know, eh?  Better still -- who's to tell?  But me, that is ....

I've just started an unofficial Romney Watch blog roll, featuring blogs and articles that refer to Mitt Romney's run for the Presidency in 2008.

Naturally -- most of the links will be supportive of his candidacy.  Included, however, will be any reputable commentaries which relate to Romney's qualifications and electability.

If interested in being added to the roll, send me an email.   You're welcome to simply add the script to your site, if you prefer. 

Here's the script:  delete the [brackets]

[<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript" src="http://rpc.blogrolling.com/display.php?r=7ee704348d75bf62f4ec33f601a29450"></script>]

You're most welcome to suggest relative links!

  I just saw a preview of tonight's pending announcement of CNN-Time's Person of the Year at 8:00 pm EST on CNN.

If I had a vote (or were a panalist or even subscribed to either Time or CNN), I humbly suggest that Barbaro should be named "person of the year."

I can't think of a public figure  who more appropriately profiles  Barbaro's winning spirit, his  unfathomed determination, his response to an amazingly successful combination of science and technology, and the universal support which he has garnered.

Not a slack in his profession, either.

Go, Barbaro, Go! 

You're a winner, Barbaro -- a brave creature who has won the hearts of everyone who has prayed for your continuing recovery.

Note:  since I'm boycotting CNN, I'll catch the results on the net.

UPDATE:  Dear Times/CNN:  Thanks for selecting ME as person of the year.  Even though selected, I graciously decline this dubious honor and suggest you seriously reconsider Barbaro as a worthy recipient of this :::coughcough:::: esteemed award. 

Sincerely,

Me (or You or whoever)

I'm with Diane West and Powerline. 

I've said for weeks that it's time for the US to draw a few lines in the sand (including political regions or states) in Iraq.  It's now time for a new coalition.  Call it Enjoined Parties. 

Set timelines to either join the new coalition or get your butt blasted militarily.  Pave a few sand dunes (the way we should have done in the jungles of Nam) and the infidels will get the message.

Let this new coalition of Enjoined Parties consist of current coalition troops, government military forces and regional/tribal militias (bribed and freely enjoined) who agree to stop the madness.

Let the centuries-old religious war-mongers have at it (in designated areas) while  Enjoined Parties weed out terrorist groups AND give the Iraqi government (politically, geographically, tribally and militarily) a timeline to get on the road toward a peaceful and prosperous coexistence.

Forget those Rules of Engagement (ROE's) which restrict the US from using full-military force to protect our troops and Enjoined Parties. 

Draw lines in the sand.  Use a bulldozer for those visually challenged. 

Draw these lines regionally AND intra-cities (including Baghdad and all those other alphabet names).

Let the Sunni/Shiite go at it in designated areas while our troops focus on destroying terrorist enclaves, protecting and expanding the Iraqi economic infrastructure and defending Enjoined Parties.

If Iran or Syria or the Saudis want to intervene on behalf of either Sunnis or Shiites -- let them bring it on.  Let them fight to their hearts content.  But in designated areas EXCLUDING "the green zone," the airport region, oil fields and transportation conduits, "Enjoined Party" regions or areas of Kurdish control.

As long as they don't cross lines in the sand. 

And for every assault, every bomb that is ignited in an Enjoined region --- the line in the sand will be become a noose around the necks of the un-enjoined.

Only the tribes and regions of Enjoined Parties, however, will receive economic benefits from Iraqi resources.  And if the Saudis or the Iranians feel they can continue to support the un-enjoined in non-productive religious wars, let them drain their national coffers to do it.   

Subtitled:  Big Brother from the OTHER side of the aisle?

 to StopTheACLU: 

Soooooo ... it's ok for corporations and unions to lobby for/against issues and candidates, but not grassroots groups?  Wait a minute --

What does Pelosi have against grassroots groups and especially Freedom of Speech?  HA!  So this is how Pelosi plans to slow down the Swift Boats, eh? 

Pelosi Targets Grassroots Freedom of Speech

House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) has pledged to take up a lobbying reform proposal that would impose new regulations on speech by grassroots organizations, while providing a loophole in the rules for large corporations and labor unions.

The legislation would make changes to the legal definition of “grassroots lobbying” and require any organization that encourages 500 or more members of the general public to contact their elected representatives to file a report with detailed information about their organization to the government on a quarterly basis.

The report would include identifying the organization’s expenditures, the issues focused on and the members of Congress and other federal officials who are the subject of the advocacy efforts. A separate report would be required for each policy issue the group is active on.

“Right now, grassroots groups don’t have to report at all if they are communicating with the public,” said Dick Dingman of the Free Speech Coalition, Inc. “This is an effort that would become a major attack on the 1st Amendment.”

Under the bill, communications aimed at an organization’s members, employees, officers or shareholders would be exempt from the reporting requirement. That would effectively exempt most corporations, trade associations and unions from the reporting requirements—but not most conservative grassroots groups, which frequently are less formally organized.

Larger, well-funded organizations are also currently eligible for a “low-dollar lobbyist exemption” that Pelosi’s bill does not give to grassroots organizations. If an organization retains a lobbyist to contact lawmakers directly at a cost of $2,500 per quarter or less, or employs a full-time lobbyist at a cost of $10,000 per quarter or less, the organization does not have to report to the government.

Public Citizen, a liberal “government watchdog,” is taking credit for helping Pelosi craft the legislation and expects the final draft of the bill to closely resemble Pelosi’s Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2006, which contains these provisions.

Craig Holman, a lobbyist for Public Citizen, said the changes would help “streamline” how grassroots organizations are regulated by the IRS and other laws. Public Citizen would like Congress to adopt the IRS’s definition of “lobbying,” which includes communication that encourages the general public to contact a member of Congress on pending legislation or public policy.

“The IRS has a definition that requires all organizations, including non-profits, to file as a part of our tax returns,” Holman said. “When it comes to the election code and the lobbying disclosure act, they have no definition of grassroots lobbying. It’s excluded from everything. The IRS has a definition of grassroots lobbying, but their information is not publicly reported. It’s just our tax returns to the IRS.”

Suzanne Coffman, director of communication for Guidestar.org, which makes IRS 990 forms available on the Internet, said any secular, non-profit organization that has more than $25,000 in income per year is required by law to make the last three years worth of tax forms available upon request. “We get them directly from the IRS, and we have more than two million 990s online” said Coffman. “For non-charitable organizations, like private charities or private foundations, we have fewer because the IRS began scanning those only in April 2005. They focused on charitable organizations, which make up the bulk of exempt organizations, because those are the ones that accept tax-deductible contributions. The need for accountability is much higher with them than with other types of organizations which are sort of subsidized by the taxpayer because they federally are tax exempt, but not like a charity is.”

Public Citizen’s public IRS 990 disclosure forms show that it raised more than $3 million in 2005. That year, the group spent $297, 431 on mail and $178,182 on consulting and professional fees.

A coalition of grassroots organizers, including David Keene of the American Conservative Union, Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America and Terrence Scanlon of the Capitol Research Center, have written an open letter calling on Public Citizen to renounce its efforts, which they called “flawed to the point of hypocrisy.”

“This bill would apply to those who have no Washington-based lobbyists, who provide no money or gifts to members of Congress, and who merely seek to speak, associate and petition the government,” it said. “Regulating the speech, publishing, association and petitioning rights of citizens is not targeted at corruption in Washington, as Public Citizen and its supporters would believe. Instead, it is targeted directly at the 1st-Amendment rights of citizens and their voluntary associations.”

The Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act, which made some of these changes, was actually approved by both the House and the Senate in the 109th Congress, but failed to make it through a conference committee.

To help dramatize the bill this time around, Pelosi is planning to assign sponsorship of various amendments to incoming freshman, which they will promote in their maiden House floor speeches.

Current law prevents former members of Congress and senior staff as well as senior executive staff from lobbying for one year. Pelosi’s proposal would extend that to two years and completely ban members and staff from accepting gifts, meals and privately sponsored travel.

Don't expect the full Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act to pass as currently written, however. 

Members are Congress aren't going to give up those freebie gifts, meals and junkets.  You can expect grassroots groups to stay on the chopping block, however .....

Middle America doesn't need a Congressional ACT to see how "transparent" this  one is going to be!

It's only an opinion, and basically unsubstantiated, but since reading an old article that stated elder-Bush was allegedly more concerned about Jeb losing an election than about GW winning the Presidency -- I've long had my suspicions about the father-son dynamics between GHWB and GWB.

Elder-Bush's tears at a recent event honoring Jeb re-kindled this allegation.

When the Iraqi Study Group was instituted in March, I wondered if GWB would seriously consider adopting solutions compiled by a gathering of his father's contemporaries. 

Would  Bush stand Lincoln-esque (as described by a recent article) "a man alone" to declare, not only personal validation, but a proactive path toward resolution to the Iraqi quagmire?   

I prefer to think that Bush has begun to stand alone -- to seek a workable resolution -- in spite of ideas rehashed for a problem (-- make that problems) that members of the ISG were unable to resolve 25-30 years ago. 

How did so many blue-head good ole' boyz (and girls) get involved in resolving everything from head lice to terrorism to peace in the Middle East? 

I have my theories. 

And I am one, by the way.  A blue-head, that is.  Still naturally brunette, though.  With only a hint of gray.  Still got my own teef, too.  But I digress.

More to come .....

  to Stop the ACLU .... A disturbing report is being circulated on the net.

Are members of Congress and/or representatives of the DNC meeting secretly with Hamas? 

Dennis Miller has it right-on.  Even the Washington Times has noted that the airline, pilot/staff and police acted appropriately.