Friday, December 28, 2012
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
Monday, December 24, 2012
Friday, December 21, 2012
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Husbands do the craziest things. American Plumbing
Yesterday, a lady asked me to check out a wet spot in her yard. After some investigation I found the washing machine drain line was stopped up and instead of calling us to unclog the drain line her retired husband attached a pipe to the cleanout and ran a pipe under their very nice wooden deck. Now every time the washing machine dumps out the water, it dumps into their yard. Needless to say, the wife has scheduled us to remove his Obama engineered piping system and unclog their washing machine drain line. Maybe the husband should have taken up golf in his retirement years. :)
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Monday, December 17, 2012
Friday, December 14, 2012
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Monday, December 10, 2012
Friday, December 7, 2012
Thursday, December 6, 2012
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Monday, December 3, 2012
Friday, November 30, 2012
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Monday, November 26, 2012
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Monday, November 19, 2012
Friday, November 16, 2012
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Monday, November 12, 2012
Friday, November 9, 2012
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Monday, November 5, 2012
Friday, November 2, 2012
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Blog - American Plumbing
A wire was released yesterday showing the State Department knew 30 days before 9/11 that things were very dangerous in Benghazi. Read below:
Exclusive: Classified cable warned consulate couldn't withstand 'coordinated attack'
By Catherine Herridge
Published October 31, 2012
FoxNews.com
The U.S. Mission in Benghazi convened an “emergency meeting” less than a month before the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, because Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a “coordinated attack,” according to a classified cable reviewed by Fox News.
Summarizing an Aug. 15 emergency meeting convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Aug. 16 cable marked “SECRET” said that the State Department’s senior security officer, also known as the RSO, did not believe the consulate could be protected.
“RSO (Regional Security Officer) expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound,” the cable said.
According to a review of the cable addressed to the Office of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Emergency Action Committee was also briefed "on the location of approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps within Benghazi … these groups ran the spectrum from Islamist militias, such as the QRF Brigade and Ansar al-Sharia, to ‘Takfirist thugs.’” Each U.S. mission has a so-called Emergency Action Committee that is responsible for security measures and emergency planning.
The details in the cable seemed to foreshadow the deadly Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. compound, which was a coordinated, commando-style assault using direct and indirect fire. Al Qaeda in North Africa and Ansar al-Sharia, both mentioned in the cable, have since been implicated in the consulate attack.
In addition to describing the security situation in Benghazi as “trending negatively,” the cable said explicitly that the mission would ask for more help. “In light of the uncertain security environment, US Mission Benghazi will submit specific requests to US Embassy Tripoli for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs by separate cover.”
As for specific threats against the U.S., the cable warned the intelligence was not clear on the issue, cautioning that the militias in Benghazi were not concerned with any significant retaliation from the Libyan government, which had apparently lost control in Benghazi. A briefer explained that they “did not have information suggesting that these entities were targeting Americans but did caveat that (there was not) a complete picture of their intentions yet. RSO (Regional Security Officer) noted that the Benghazi militias have become more brazen in their actions and have little fear of reprisal from the (government of Libya.)”
While the administration’s public statements have suggested that the attack came without warning, the Aug. 16 cable seems to undercut those claims. It was a direct warning to the State Department that the Benghazi consulate was vulnerable to attack, that it could not be defended and that the presence of anti-U.S. militias and Al Qaeda was well-known to the U.S. intelligence community.
In a three-page cable on Sept 11, the day Stevens and the three other Americans were killed, Stevens wrote about “growing problems with security” in Benghazi and “growing frustration” with the security forces and Libyan police. The ambassador saw both as “too weak to keep the country secure.”
Fox News asked the State Department to respond to a series of questions about the Aug. 16 cable, including who was specifically charged with reviewing it and whether action was taken by Washington or Tripoli. Fox News also asked, given the specific warnings and the detailed intelligence laid out in the cable, whether the State Department considered extra measures for the consulate in light of the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks – and if no action was taken, who made that call.
The State Department press office declined to answer specific questions, citing the classified nature of the cable.
"An independent board is conducting a thorough review of the assault on our post in Benghazi," Deputy Spokesman Mark Toner said in written statement. "Once we have the board's comprehensive account of what happened, findings and recommendations, we can fully address these matters."
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Monday, October 29, 2012
Friday, October 26, 2012
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Monday, October 22, 2012
Friday, October 19, 2012
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Monday, October 15, 2012
Friday, October 12, 2012
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Is this your typical Obama supporter? American Plumbing Company, Port Allen, LA - Blog - American Plumbing
Is this your typical Obama supporter? American Plumbing Company, Port Allen, LA - Blog - American Plumbing
Is this your typical Obama supporter? American Plumbing Company, Port Allen, LA
October 9, 2012
Here is the link to the Obamaphone lady. Check it out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio
This is the vote Obama depends on!
Is this your typical Obama supporter? American Plumbing Company, Port Allen, LA
October 9, 2012
Here is the link to the Obamaphone lady. Check it out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio
This is the vote Obama depends on!
Monday, October 8, 2012
Friday, September 28, 2012
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Monday, September 24, 2012
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Blog - American Plumbing
The other day Mitt Romney said President Obama's base supporters don't pay federal income tax, "believe they are victims" and will vote for Obama "no matter what. The liberal media goes crazy. Read below:
Romney defends donor comment, says more jobs will mean more paying taxes
Published September 18, 2012
FoxNews.com
Romney: Redistribution does not get people back to...
Romney's '47 Percent' controversy: His 'golden'...
'Victims' remark a problem for Mitt Romney?
Mitt Romney, in an interview with Fox News, defended his comments from a fundraiser earlier this year in which he said President Obama's base supporters don't pay federal income tax, "believe they are victims" and will vote for Obama "no matter what." Romney, challenging the notion that he's dismissing those voters, told Fox News he wants to create jobs so that far more Americans are able to pay taxes.
"I do believe that we should have enough jobs and enough take-home pay such that people have the privilege of higher incomes that allow them to be paying taxes," Romney said Tuesday. "I think people would like to be paying taxes."
Romney, in those secretly videotaped remarks, was referring to the 47 percent of people who don't pay federal income tax. The Republican presidential nominee, who took considerable heat from Democrats Tuesday, explained on Fox News that he was trying to outline a key difference between his approach and Obama's approach to governing.
"Frankly, we have two very different views about America," Romney said. "The president's view is one of a larger government."
But Obama hit back at Romney during a taping of the "Late Show" with David Letterman, disputing that Americans who aren't required to pay federal income taxes are "victims" and taking issue with Romney's comment that he didn't have to worry about those voters.
"My expectation is that if you want to be president, you have to work for everyone, not just for some," Obama said.
Romney, though, also referenced a Web video that emerged Tuesday purportedly showing Obama in 1998 saying he likes "redistribution."
"I disagree," Romney said. "I think a society based upon a government-centered nation where government plays a larger and larger role, redistributes money, that's the wrong course for America. ... The right course for America is to create growth, create wealth."
Romney responded to claims that he had effectively written off half the population with his fundraiser remarks. Romney said "we go after every group we can to get votes" and suggested his policies would help even those who might not support him.
But he continued to say that those who are not paying income tax probably won't be attracted to his message of lowering the tax rates.
"And those that are dependent upon government and those that think government's job is to redistribute, I'm not going to get them," he said.
The interview comes after Romney assembled a brief and to-the-point press conference Monday night to address the tape, which had been posted online by liberal magazine Mother Jones.
Romney, while saying his phrasing was not ideal, stood by the premise of his remarks, which reportedly came from a fundraiser in Florida.
"It's not elegantly stated, let me put it that way. I was speaking off the cuff in response to a question," Romney said, adding he wants to help "all Americans."
But he continued: "It's a message which I am going to carry and continue to carry, which is that the president's approach is attractive to people who are not paying taxes because frankly my discussion about lowering taxes isn't as attractive to them. Therefore I'm not likely to draw them into my campaign as effectively as those in the middle."
The video was widely circulated after it was obtained by Mother Jones, though it had been on the Internet for weeks. It showed Romney speaking at a May 17 fundraiser in Boca Raton, Fla.
"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what," Romney could be heard saying. "There are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it."
Romney added his job as a presidential candidate was "not to worry about those people."
Democrats seized on the tape, claiming they showed the GOP candidate was out of touch. Obama's re-election campaign released a web video Tuesday that asked voters to watch Romney's comments and respond. In the ad, one woman said she felt "sick to my stomach."
The Obama campaign slammed the comments Monday, calling them "shocking."
"It's hard to serve as president for all Americans when you've disdainfully written off half the nation," said Jim Messina, campaign manager for Obama for America.
Romney, in his press conference, called for some context and urged for the full tape to be released -- which Mother Jones did Tuesday afternoon.
But he went on to echo largely his original remarks.
"I believe the point I was made is that the president starts off with a large number of the voters, 47, 48, 49 percent, something like that. These are people who are in his camp and they will vote for him almost no matter what," he said.
"Of course there's a very different approach of the two different campaigns, as I point out I recognize that among those that pay no tax, approximately 47 percent of Americans, I'm not likely to be highly successful with the message of lowering taxes. That's not as attractive to those who don't pay income taxes as it is to those who do. And likewise those who are reliant on government are not as attracted to my message of slimming down the size of government. And so I then focus on those individuals who I believe are most likely to be able to be pulled into my camp."
Romney's running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan, weighed in Tuesday, calling Romney's original comment "inarticulate."
"He was obviously inarticulate in making this point," Ryan told a TV station in Nevada, arguing that the campaign's point is that more people are dependent on government under Obama.
In another clip Mother Jones released Tuesday, Romney also told the donors that Palestinians "have no interest" in peace with Israel. He says Palestinians are "committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel" and that the prospects for a two-state solution to Mideast peace were dim.
"You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem ... and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it," Romney said. He said pushing Israel to give up disputed territory for a two-state solution with the Palestinians "is the worst idea in the world."
The Romney campaign on Tuesday defended those comments as well.
"Gov. Romney laid out a detailed description of the many difficult issues that must be solved in order to reach a two-state solution. And as he's often said, there is this one obvious truth: peace will not be possible if the extreme elements of the Palestinian side refuse to come to the table for talks or to recognize Israel's right to exist," spokeswoman Amanda Henneberg said.
The Romney campaign was opening up its fundraisers to cameras on Tuesday.
The video emerged after the grandson of former President Jimmy Carter apparently persuaded the source who secretly taped Romney at a fundraiser to release it. James Carter IV told The Associated Press he was intrigued after seeing what he describes as a short, mysterious clip of Romney talking about Chinese factory conditions. He told The Associated Press that he tracked the source down on Twitter in August and convinced them to trust a journalist at Mother Jones magazine with the clips. Mother Jones released the video on Monday.
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Monday, September 17, 2012
Friday, September 14, 2012
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Monday, September 10, 2012
Friday, September 7, 2012
What are you going to tell God?
What are those pastors and ministers going to tell God when they have to explain why they supported a party that not only went against everything the Bible teaches but, also had to take a vote on whether to keep God in their party platform. To top it off the verbal vote actually failed even though the party leaders claimed it passed due to the bad press.
Thursday, September 6, 2012
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Monday, September 3, 2012
Friday, August 31, 2012
Thursday, August 30, 2012
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Friday, August 24, 2012
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Monday, August 20, 2012
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Monday, August 13, 2012
Friday, August 10, 2012
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
Obama ad lies again! American Plumbing Company, Denham Springs, LA - Blog - American Plumbing
Obama ad lies again! American Plumbing Company, Denham Springs, LA - Blog - American Plumbing
Sounds to me like Mr. Soptic is another bitter Cindy Sheehan. Mitt Romney left Bain Capital in 1999 and Mr. Soptic's wife died in 2006. Where's the connection? Just like Cindy Sheehan, Mr. Soptic is being used by the Democratic Party.
A new Obama ad accuses Mitt Romney of being responsible for woman's death. Read below:
Priorities USA, the super-PAC backing President Obama, unveiled a tough new ad Tuesday featuring a former steelworker who says he could not afford healthcare for his sick wife after his company was purchased and shut down by Bain Capital, the private equity firm founded by Mitt Romney.
“I don't think Mitt Romney understands what he's done to people's lives by closing the plant,” says former GST Steel employee Joe Soptic, speaking to the camera in the new ad, titled “Understands.” “I don't think he realizes that people's lives completely changed.”
Soptic says his wife was dying of cancer when he lost his job and company health benefits.
“When Mitt Romney closed the plant, I lost my healthcare and my family lost its healthcare and a short time after that my wife became ill. I don’t know how long she was sick, and I think maybe she didn’t say anything because she knew we couldn’t afford the insurance,” Soptic says. “And one day she became ill and I took her up to the Jackson County Hospital and that’s when they found the cancer. And by then it was stage four and there was nothing they could do for her and she passed away in two days.”
The Romney campaign has pushed back on other GST Steel-related attacks by arguing that the plant in Kansas City closed after he stepped away from his management job at Bain. (Democrats counter that Romney was still listed as a top executive at Bain through 2002, and that he built up the private equity firm during the time it invested in GST Steel.)
In the case of this particularly jarring super PAC ad, it may also be relevant that Soptic’s wife died in 2006, years after the GST factory closed down.
A 2006 story in the Kansas City Star reported the death of Ranae Soptic, a former champion roller skater: “Soptic went to the hospital for pneumonia, but doctors found signs of very advanced cancer, and she died two weeks later on June 22.” READ THE FULL STORY AT POLITICO
Former steel worker Joe Soptic has resurfaced in a new pro-Obama Super-PAC ad, blaming Romney for his wife’s death from cancer.
“I do not think Mitt Romney realizes what he’s done to anyone,” Soptic says in the ad. “And furthermore I do not think Mitt Romney is concerned.”
But Soptic is actually a familiar face on the anti-Bain beat, and accused Romney of this before.
Soptic was featured in an Obama ad in May, who explained that although he wasn’t “rich” he was able to put his daughter through college.
In January, Soptic complained to Democracy Now, a liberal non-profit TV station, that when the steel company he worked for was bought out by Bain, they tried to buy out his job... READ MORE HERE AT WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Monday, August 6, 2012
Friday, August 3, 2012
Thursday, August 2, 2012
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Monday, July 30, 2012
Blog - American Plumbing
The liberal mayors of Boston and Chicago attack Chick-fil-A just because the president of Chick-fil-A said he supports traditional marriage. Once again, change you can count on. Check out this article.
There’s one part of Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy’s recent remarks that the left seems especially intent on disproving: the part where he said,
… we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles.
The rest of Cathy’s comments, if you haven’t already heard, concerned his opinion of the propriety of gay marriage from a biblical perspective. As retribution for his voicing this opinion, some liberals in Chicago and Boston want to deny Cathy and his company the right to operate in their cities.
This is disturbing on a number of levels, two in particular.
The first is the idea that local governments might deny a business license to a company because of the beliefs of its owners. In Chicago, Alderman Proco “Joe” Moreno threatened to do just that in his ward. (The city’s mayor, former Obama aide Rahm Emanuel, was more oblique, voicing sympathy with Moreno’s perspective but saying only that a Chick-fil-A restaurant in Chicago “would be a bad investment, since it would be empty.”)
As Elizabeth Scalia notes, this is how fascism works. As the far-from-right-wing Boston Globe editorialized, in response to Boston Mayor Thomas Menino’s statement that “Chick-fil-A doesn’t belong in Boston” and that the company shouldn’t be allowed to open a store near famed Faneuil Hall along the city’s — first irony alert! — Freedom Trail:
… which part of the First Amendment does Menino not understand? A business owner’s political or religious beliefs should not be a test for the worthiness of his or her application for a business license. … If the mayor of a conservative town tried to keep out gay-friendly Starbucks or Apple, it would be an outrage.
Menino has since backtracked on his threat. Moreno appears to be digging in, although some of his fellow aldermen take a different view.
The second is the way Menino and Moreno are twisting the definition of the word “discrimination” to apply it to Cathy’s objection to — second irony alert! — the redefinition of the word “marriage” to apply to same-sex couples.
“You can’t have a business in the City of Boston that discriminates against a population,” Menino told the Boston Herald to explain his desire to keep Chick-fil-A out of his city.
“If you are discriminating against a segment of the community, I don’t want you in the 1st Ward,” Moreno told the Chicago Tribune.
But I have yet to see the first shred of evidence Chick-fil-A is actually discriminating against gay couples. Menino and Moreno cited no reports that same-sex couples in a Chick-fil-A restaurant have been denied service or asked to leave, nor any instances of gay employees or job applicants being dismissed due to their sexual orientation. This is hardly comparable to a Southern lunch counter turning away black customers half a century ago.
Nor could anyone accurately describe Cathy or Chick-fil-A as influential political agitators who are enabling some sort of “discrimination.” While much was made back in March of the company’s donations to groups that promote the traditional definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman, the company is practically silent in terms of donations to politicians and political organizations. According to the Sunlight Foundation, the sum total of all political donations by the company, its employees and its PAC, between 1989 and 2012, was just $177,410 — about $7,400 a year. And even this meager spending does not appear to have been tied to the issue of gay marriage.
If a mere difference of opinion with elected officials is enough to qualify as “discrimination,” then in some way or another virtually every employer would be, as Cathy put it in the interview that sparked this episode, guilty as charged. Civil society itself would be fractured irretrievably. As Scalia asked,
… where does the “punishment” spiral stop? The press declares Chick-fil-A “homophobic” (a dishonest word) and then the local governments start penalizing them for it; Jim Henson’s outfit stomps off. What next? Will people against gay marriage start boycotting Muppet stuff? Pyres of Elmo in support of Chick-fil-A’s right to be itself?
We’re already seeing a preliminary version of this: Activists are encouraging same-sex couples to visit Chick-fil-A stores next Friday for a “National Same-Sex Kiss Day”; former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is encouraging fellow social conservatives to “buycott” the company by patronizing its restaurants en masse next Wednesday.
Does anyone see this thing headed toward reconciliation?
The idea at the foundation of our freedom of speech is often said to have been summarized by the French philosopher Voltaire: “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” It’s a long way from Voltaire’s France to Menino’s Boston and Moreno’s Chicago, and the direction is a very disheartening one.
– By Kyle Wingfield
There’s one part of Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy’s recent remarks that the left seems especially intent on disproving: the part where he said,
… we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles.
The rest of Cathy’s comments, if you haven’t already heard, concerned his opinion of the propriety of gay marriage from a biblical perspective. As retribution for his voicing this opinion, some liberals in Chicago and Boston want to deny Cathy and his company the right to operate in their cities.
This is disturbing on a number of levels, two in particular.
The first is the idea that local governments might deny a business license to a company because of the beliefs of its owners. In Chicago, Alderman Proco “Joe” Moreno threatened to do just that in his ward. (The city’s mayor, former Obama aide Rahm Emanuel, was more oblique, voicing sympathy with Moreno’s perspective but saying only that a Chick-fil-A restaurant in Chicago “would be a bad investment, since it would be empty.”)
As Elizabeth Scalia notes, this is how fascism works. As the far-from-right-wing Boston Globe editorialized, in response to Boston Mayor Thomas Menino’s statement that “Chick-fil-A doesn’t belong in Boston” and that the company shouldn’t be allowed to open a store near famed Faneuil Hall along the city’s — first irony alert! — Freedom Trail:
… which part of the First Amendment does Menino not understand? A business owner’s political or religious beliefs should not be a test for the worthiness of his or her application for a business license. … If the mayor of a conservative town tried to keep out gay-friendly Starbucks or Apple, it would be an outrage.
Menino has since backtracked on his threat. Moreno appears to be digging in, although some of his fellow aldermen take a different view.
The second is the way Menino and Moreno are twisting the definition of the word “discrimination” to apply it to Cathy’s objection to — second irony alert! — the redefinition of the word “marriage” to apply to same-sex couples.
“You can’t have a business in the City of Boston that discriminates against a population,” Menino told the Boston Herald to explain his desire to keep Chick-fil-A out of his city.
“If you are discriminating against a segment of the community, I don’t want you in the 1st Ward,” Moreno told the Chicago Tribune.
But I have yet to see the first shred of evidence Chick-fil-A is actually discriminating against gay couples. Menino and Moreno cited no reports that same-sex couples in a Chick-fil-A restaurant have been denied service or asked to leave, nor any instances of gay employees or job applicants being dismissed due to their sexual orientation. This is hardly comparable to a Southern lunch counter turning away black customers half a century ago.
Nor could anyone accurately describe Cathy or Chick-fil-A as influential political agitators who are enabling some sort of “discrimination.” While much was made back in March of the company’s donations to groups that promote the traditional definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman, the company is practically silent in terms of donations to politicians and political organizations. According to the Sunlight Foundation, the sum total of all political donations by the company, its employees and its PAC, between 1989 and 2012, was just $177,410 — about $7,400 a year. And even this meager spending does not appear to have been tied to the issue of gay marriage.
If a mere difference of opinion with elected officials is enough to qualify as “discrimination,” then in some way or another virtually every employer would be, as Cathy put it in the interview that sparked this episode, guilty as charged. Civil society itself would be fractured irretrievably. As Scalia asked,
… where does the “punishment” spiral stop? The press declares Chick-fil-A “homophobic” (a dishonest word) and then the local governments start penalizing them for it; Jim Henson’s outfit stomps off. What next? Will people against gay marriage start boycotting Muppet stuff? Pyres of Elmo in support of Chick-fil-A’s right to be itself?
We’re already seeing a preliminary version of this: Activists are encouraging same-sex couples to visit Chick-fil-A stores next Friday for a “National Same-Sex Kiss Day”; former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is encouraging fellow social conservatives to “buycott” the company by patronizing its restaurants en masse next Wednesday.
Does anyone see this thing headed toward reconciliation?
The idea at the foundation of our freedom of speech is often said to have been summarized by the French philosopher Voltaire: “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” It’s a long way from Voltaire’s France to Menino’s Boston and Moreno’s Chicago, and the direction is a very disheartening one.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Friday, July 27, 2012
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Friday, July 13, 2012
Thursday, July 12, 2012
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Monday, July 9, 2012
Friday, July 6, 2012
Thursday, July 5, 2012
Monday, July 2, 2012
Monday, June 25, 2012
Friday, June 22, 2012
Thursday, June 21, 2012
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Monday, June 18, 2012
Friday, June 15, 2012
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Monday, June 11, 2012
Friday, June 8, 2012
Thursday, June 7, 2012
Wednesday, June 6, 2012
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Friday, May 18, 2012
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Monday, May 14, 2012
Friday, May 11, 2012
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Monday, May 7, 2012
Friday, May 4, 2012
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Friday, April 20, 2012
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Monday, April 16, 2012
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Monday, April 2, 2012
Friday, March 30, 2012
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Monday, March 26, 2012
Saturday, March 24, 2012
Friday, March 23, 2012
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Monday, March 19, 2012
Friday, March 16, 2012
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Monday, March 12, 2012
Friday, March 9, 2012
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Monday, March 5, 2012
Friday, March 2, 2012
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Monday, February 27, 2012
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Friday, February 24, 2012
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Friday, February 17, 2012
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Monday, February 13, 2012
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Friday, February 10, 2012
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Monday, February 6, 2012
Friday, February 3, 2012
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Friday, January 27, 2012
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Friday, January 20, 2012
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Monday, January 16, 2012
Friday, January 13, 2012
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Friday, January 6, 2012
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)