The ACLU itself says that HR 1955 and S 1959 would impede even its freedom of speech on the Internet.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the proposal to include Jane Harmon was bypassed and someone else is being considered. However the language used was also a bit vague, so I suggest it's not at all bad to oppose this. This would be a big mistake on Obama's part.

Based on direct contact with the Legislative Aide in my US Rep's office (one of the golden few Reps who consistently votes the will of the people, opposed the Patriot Act, etc) it became abundantly clear to me that these Aides, whose job is to inform Congressmembers of the contents of bills, are instructed to say certain things and that they are complying. Thus, Congress may not often know the content of bills (they are too busy with other things to read them, alas!) and relying on their Legislative Aides, who are lying through their teeth, they may make mistakes. We need to brief them in, ourselves.

The Legislative Aide told me that "this bill merely studies terrorism: WHat are your concerns about it?" and said very misleading things about the free speech-oppressing contents of it. How can people do this?? It boggles my mind.

Let's inform Obama based on knowledge of the facts of our system, whether or not we agree with that system. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and just tell him that the legislative aides have misled him big-time.

The Center for Constitutional Rights gave a presentation on KPFA radio about Jane Harmon's bill which was vociferous. The ACLU's concerns are above. WE ARE NOT ALONE!!!

by Kathryn Smith (110 articles, 2 quicklinks, 43 diaries, 542 comments [23 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 5:12:07 AM

  (0+)

You know we're UNITED on this one.  BIG TIME!!

Great hearing from you!!

Linda 

by Linda Milazzo (128 articles, 1 quicklinks, 18 diaries, 210 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 5:34:25 AM

  (0+)

By the way, I am very greatful that you have brought this information about Jane Harman to our attention.

HR 1955 and the Senate companion bill S 1959, directly pose a clear and present danger to the freedom of speech we are engaged in right here.

 Thank you!!

by William Whitten (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4880 comments [1685 recommended, 28 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 11, 2008 at 2:17:02 PM

  (0+)

Rep. Harmon is nuts. Appointing a nutty person to any position in the new administration  is nuts on its own. I  would  argue immediate action- Change.gov still functioning?  As a matter of fact it answers the question  if people like Richard here are still needed. YES!!!!  We owe an apology to him for  our intolerance.  If someone like Harmon is even considered ... wwe better   be prepared.

by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4101 comments [130 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 8:11:39 AM

  (0+)

.... clearly apparent picture....

The fact that Jane is/was even being seriously considered, along with the appointees already noted, is yet more evidence of the sort of 'change' Obama is bringing to the ex-Republic. In spite of the 'enthusiamanics for Obama, the actual data is beginning to tell an unfortunate and horrific truth.

by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [399 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 6:04:42 AM

  (0+)

Heard rumor of this the other day, wanted to look into it and write about it because well...what a disaster waiting to happen. glad you were on it!

by Cheryl Biren-Wright (30 articles, 41 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 485 comments [7 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 6:10:18 AM

  (0+)

I heard that Jane was campaigning hard for this appointment. But, there may be some within the CIA who have a penchant for her.

From the CIA website:

Rep Jane Harman honored at CIA

June 18, 2007

CIA Director Michael V. Hayden today presented the Agency Seal Medal to Rep. Jane Harman in appreciation of her "thoughtful and thorough" oversight of CIA as ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The medal is awarded to people outside the Agency who have made significant contributions to CIA's mission.

Speaking at a luncheon at CIA Headquarters, Director Hayden said, "Jane's brand of oversight was unique as she is--perceptive, constructive, active."

"To be sure, she was vigilant about CIA's budget and authorities," he added. "But she was just as interested in our people. She's on a first-name basis with many of our chiefs overseas, and when something was happening--good or bad--she would pick up the phone to see what they needed, ask about their families, and the families of their officers."

Director Hayden noted that Rep. Harman, who left the Intelligence Committee at the end of the 109th Congress, has a deep knowledge of both the Intelligence Community itself and the major challenges to national security. Citing her "strong hand" in shaping intelligence legislation since 2001, Director Hayden also praised her insight into threats such as Islamic extremism. More Here

by Cheryl Biren-Wright (30 articles, 41 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 485 comments [7 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 6:16:31 AM

  (0+)

I'll speculate by saying Harman is very aggressive.  If she's been campaigning for this it wouldn't surprise me.  I would think Harman would see this as a personal vindication and payback toward Pelosi for demoting her from her original Committee Chair and giving it to Silva Reyes instead.  That was a big deal when Pelosi took office.  Interesting dynamics here.  

Also, and again this is speculation, there seems to be AIPAC stuff going on. It's there with Emanuel. I think there might be allegiance between Harman and Emanuel. An interesting perspective if AIPAC allegiance is a player here, will be how Lieberman is treated.  If he's soft gloved, I'd say that the AIPAC allegiance he shares with Emanuel (and with Harman) was key in helping Lieberman save face after blackeying his own community.  It's Lieberman's allegiance to Israel that motivates everything he does - as with Emanuel.  It's Lieberman's allegiance to Israel that stuck him like glue to McCain.   I'm shocked at what a huge player Israel and AIPAC seem to be in this new administration.  As someone who does NOT want the power of AIPAC to continue, I find this very troubling.  

I hope I'm wrong!!! 

by Linda Milazzo (128 articles, 1 quicklinks, 18 diaries, 210 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 8:56:24 AM

  (0+)

analysis. You appear right on all counts.

What to do? Damned if I know. Nothing anybody does will have any effect upon these people that I can see. Anybody else got an idea? 

by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [399 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:12:20 AM

  (0+)

Wake up the mesmerized public and ORGANIZE

 The new boss is same as the old boss.  Fascistic,authoritarian,constitution shredders.  They will not listen to your pleas.  They don't care what you want.  Their bottom line is global government and enslavement of we the people.  We are merely pawns in their game.  To deny this now, when it's become clearer every day with his choices for cabinet, is to deny reality.

by jersey girl (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1201 comments [734 recommended, 12 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:32:41 AM

  (0+)

Obama is just another puppet for the CFR and AIPAC.  He is not change.  As I said before, we have a one-party system pretending to be two separate and opposing parties.  A way to fool the massed into believing they have representation. 

Obama will not repeal the Patriot Act nor the Military Commisions Act.  He will continue Bush's fascist agenda and he will expand on them.  That is because this is the wishes of his handlers.   I certainly hope I am wrong.

Go

by Goblue (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 70 comments) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 8:37:00 AM

  (0+)

Carroll Quigley, noted historian (and a sympathizer, I believe, with the elites' goals nonetheless revealed:

"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies."

makes me wonder why some here get so upset when this truth is pointed out to them. 

by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [399 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:29:10 AM

  (0+)

You write: "It's hard to fathom why Jane Harman would feel the need to suppress Americans' freedom so severely that she'd author and advance such a vague and oppressive bill. It's even harder to fathom why President-elect Obama would consider Mrs. Harman for a key role in the Homeland Security Department or the CIA considering how little regard she has for participatory democracy, how wrong she was about the war in Iraq and the existence of WMDs."

It would be hard to fathom only if you still believe either of these two body-politics aren't now totally corrupt.

It would be hard to fathom that anyone in high office wouldn't be at least curious about 9/11 if they weren't somehow concerned that if the truth of that day comes out it would condemn them.

Than it would be easy to fathom why they would see a need for a bill such as HR 1955, and why Obama would push to have a snake like Harman in a highly sensitive security position.

It would also be easy to fathom why Obama would do this when you read Paul Craig Roberts article Conned Again, and realize what's coming.

 http://www.opednews.com/articles/Conned-Again-by-Paul-Craig-Roberts-081109-377.html

But good luck with trying to stop this appointment. I'll join you, but I fear it will have about as much effect as stopping him from voting for FISA, more war, or the idiotic so-called "recovery bill".

by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:40:13 AM

  (0+)

Zeig Heil! Welcome to the revolution my friends. Is the honeymoon still on-going?  See ya in DC

by kato krause (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 216 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:56:56 AM

  (0+)

Obama met with AIPAC and they told him what he'd have to agree to, in order to be President, and a deal was made. What you're seeing now is the consummation of an important part of that deal...the placement of all the necessary "people".

Bush set most or all of the necessary precedents...he "greased the skids", so-to-speak, and now comes Obama, the perfect puppet to follow up on the PNAC agenda.

by Harold Smith (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 556 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:09:30 PM

  (0+)

is it would open up a slot in congress. Maybe Marcy Winograd could fill it. Also, it woud get Harman's hands off legislation. I'm not saying any appointments of Harman to offices of greater power are a good thing, just trying to find the silk purses made from this sow's ear.

by Rob Kall (952 articles, 4177 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 3:03:26 PM

  (0+)

write on Harman.  She asked while I was already writing.  As soon as I heard about Harman I started to write.  Marcy is livid - as is everyone I know - particularly those of us who have been around Harman, studied her, and know her militancy and blind loyalty to the military industrial complex, to Israel and to AIPAC.  I'm fairly sure Marcy, who's a brilliant writer, will write her own piece on this since she ran against Harman and knows her so well.

Rob - there is NO upside to Jane holding an intelligence or any high level administrative office.   Look what she's done with HR 1955.  I put a link to that legislation in this article.  You can read the full text. Harman's intent is viscious and I don't believe Waxman when he says in the video (posted in this piece) that he was completely unaware of this legislation.  I know Maxine was unaware because I called her office and got her staff to bring her the legislation.  I know when she read it for the first time (I think).  She says she feels badly about it.  I asked her to reintroduce it on the floor but she hasn't.  Of course, the House has been insane during this election cycle.

But there IS an upside for me in general.  There always is.  Unlike many who see this as cut and dry and Barack as completely lost to progressives, I do not.  I try NOT to be an ideologue. I try to be productive - NOT negative. I respond to issues as they happen - like this one - but I keep an open mind.  I WANT DESPERATELY FOR BARACK OBAMA TO SUCCEED.  I'M THRILLED THAT HE WON.  I believe he has the capacity to be a great president AND I WANT HIM TO BE.  I'm frightened by what I see and who he's surrounded by but the "story ain't writ yet." - ya know what I mean??

As an activist, I plan to spend my time doing everything I can to bring change and to keep Barack conscious of PEOPLE above CORPORATIONS - just like I/we tried everyday during the pain and agony of Bush's reign of terror.  That's my job - to NEVER GIVE UP.  To keep on trying.  I believe in my ability to make change and that belief pushes me through the day.  It's positive and fulfilling.  Grousing ain't my way - although I do get pissed as hell!!

There are those here who'll say I'm foolish - a polllyanna - but believe me I'm not. I am an optimist though, and PROUD OF IT. 

by Linda Milazzo (128 articles, 1 quicklinks, 18 diaries, 210 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 4:28:22 PM

  (0+)

Dear everybody

To answer the question what we can do, let's organize in this way:

A) Letters to the editor in droves: Educate the public about the contents of HR 1955/S 1959 in as brief but fact-based fashion as we can (most editors only allow 250 words max) while demanding that Harmon step down.

PErhaps quoting the ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights about the Harmon bill would be helpful to support our position. Conservative attorney Bruce Fein (American Freedom Agenda) might not be a bad idea as reference source either, since he was formerly a Deputy US Atty Gen'l and would appeal to the conservative cross-sector of readers.

B) POst the letter to the Internet and ask other readers to submit letters of their own

C) Write to Moveon.org, Center for Constitutional Rights, Downsize DC, and other activist organizations who will work to unseat Harmon (The ACLU won't because they have a policy of not getting into politics in that sense. What they do, however, is to post the Congressional voting record to their website, where one can read about every individual Congressmember's votes as well as Congress overall. That way, people can make up their own minds who to support and who not to). PERHAPS OPEDNEWS READERS COULD WRITE TO MOVEON.ORG AS A GROUP UNDERTAKING, ASKING THEM TO "GET ON" THIS ONE.

D) To those who insist on this website that letters to the editor won't be printed, I have two suggestions. First of all, talk to your editors personally and demand an answer from them: Why are they biased in their work? Their job in publishing letters to the editor is to represent a wide cross-sector of public opinion, not agendas (this is not the same as journalists writing articles, who indeed have to answer to their higher-ups and their agendas).

 Finally, if you really don't believe your mainstream editor won't print your letter, turn to the college newsletter editors. College kids are very proactive, they talk with their parents and wake up the slumbering giant in so doing.

Write to local newspapers, who are more inclined to print such stuff than the mainstream.

But try the mainstream first: YOu might be pleasantly surprised, just as I have been on several occasions when mainstream news sources posted Patriot Act facts, even made cartoons about it to attract attention to the issue.

The more people we educate and get involved, the better.

E) SCANDALS WORK! Start scandalizing Harmon and use wordsmithing. "Unamerican" and so on. Just one little word and it plants seeds in peoples' heads. It doesn't have to be logical or fact-based. Just say the words. People hear. They don't think. They just echo. THat's how to get her out!!!

Thank you all for your help. And thank you for posting this very important article, Linda: I have always admired your work.

Rob you have a point that Jane Harmon would be vacating a seat in the SEnate, but I wonder whether or not it's true that she would have less legislative or other damaging power if she rose up to the Cabinet level. Seems logical to me to think that she would have all kinds of power in that capacity. Time to cue the public and Obama in. I think Obama has made very good choices so far except in this regard. Again he may not know the facts of the Harmon bill, based on misrepresentation by the Legislative Aides. A lawyer himself, he may or may not have had time to study the bill. We've got to cue him in ourselves.

Finally, as regards someone's concern here that politicians don't care and are sold out to their corporations, true indeed. Right you are. However, they still care plenty: Why else would so many politicians step down as scandals are about to break? Let's take heart from that and get off to work with our pens!

The voices of the few have little power but the voices of the masses matter plenty. So....let's write the editors, post to the Internet, and BE SURE TO ASK READERS TO POST IT EVERYWHERE THEY CAN THINK OF, FAR AND WIDE. BECAUSE IN SO DOING, WORD WILL SPREAD: I HAVE SEEN THIS WORK EVERY TIME!

Last but not least, there's always chain emails. 

Thank you all.

by Kathryn Smith (110 articles, 2 quicklinks, 43 diaries, 542 comments [23 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 4:11:46 PM

  (0+)

has nobody else DUGG or REDITT'd this article so far?? GRRR WOOF!! See why I have been disgusted by the lack of proactivity by Opednews forum members? Come on folks, if we are concerned then we must take action! The least we can do is to spread important news all over the web and vote it to the top!

Does anybody copy me?

Please spread this all over the web! Thanks!

by Kathryn Smith (110 articles, 2 quicklinks, 43 diaries, 542 comments [23 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 4:28:11 PM

  (0+)

I went ahead and DUGG it, but the question remains as to why you didn't beat me to it : )

Go get an account and do your own DIGGing, eh? 

by J. Edward Tremlett (24 articles, 0 quicklinks, 100 diaries, 380 comments [54 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 4:38:19 PM

  (0+)

Yes, I did REddit the article and I tried sending it to DIGG (After posting my comment) but it had already been posted from Afterdowningstreet's website. So it wouldn't let me duplicate it.

by Kathryn Smith (110 articles, 2 quicklinks, 43 diaries, 542 comments [23 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 11, 2008 at 8:47:18 AM

  (0+)

I think you have outlined the only 'potentially' viable plan I've yet seen. 

Is there any way, here on OEN to form some kind of working group to identify and list the salient points on this (rather than each person having to reinvent the wheel) in a format that allows each writer to use them in their own language and form to create unique letters to editors and such. (I would be pleased to try to help) At least the word can begin to be spread. In the end, waking folks up from their TV-induced trances and Obama ecstasy and making them angry and making them think can only have positive effects ...

We should prioritize and do something similar for each issue. And there are a bunch. We could become a factory to agitate the masses.... What is there to lose but some computer time?

by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [399 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 5:01:02 PM

  (0+)

In addition to writing Letters to the Editor,why not put the rubber to the road, arrive in DC by the busload and camp out until we get what we want. Go Cindy! KC 100, St.Louis 200, Chicago 300, Detroit 400, Cleveland 300. I don't know the exact demographics, but will help with the Operations Planning and Analysis in making it happen.

by kato krause (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 216 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 5:49:55 PM

  (0+)

Better do it before a few more army battalions are brought back from Iraq for "crowd control."  We have one battalion here and two more on the way. 

Any idea which blogs could organize such a big effort?  Most democrats probably believe everything is okay now that Obama is elected.  Do they have to go through months of pain before they wake up?  I would love to see OpEdNews and blogs like After Downing Street Memo, Democratic Underground, 911Blogger, Patriotsquestion911, etc. organize this event.  I think there would be enough passionate people to get the people mobilized.  We won't leave until the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act repealed and illegal spying ended.  Also, troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan.  While at it, try Bush/Cheney/Rove/Rice/Rummy for treason.

Go

by Goblue (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 70 comments) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 6:42:35 PM

  (0+)

Obama's first night in the White House. Praying he see's our light(s).

by kato krause (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 216 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 7:07:35 PM

  (0+)

More of a camp-out with lots of signs demanding our liberties back and stop the war.   A few "investigate 9/11" signs would also be nice.

Go

by Goblue (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 70 comments) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 7:23:14 PM

  (0+)

We don't need a bus. I'll pick you up at eight. 

by kato krause (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 216 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 11, 2008 at 8:51:37 AM

  (0+)

that drinking the O koolaid was not a good idea? (and Cheryl, and Rob, et al.)

by Rady Ananda (182 articles, 374 quicklinks, 49 diaries, 1718 comments [201 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:34:27 PM

  (0+)

cuz kool-aid hasn't passed these lips for more than 8 years.

by Cheryl Biren-Wright (30 articles, 41 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 485 comments [7 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:59:20 AM

  (0+)

The only answer I have to the question is in my comment above.  One thing that concerns me is feeling folks are waiting for failure and not working to push for success.

I don't believe Obama has failed. I see him doing troublesome things but - here goes - SORRY - I HAVE HOPE!!  Again, I'm not an ideologue. I don't expect things will all be as I want them to be. Even in the case of Emanuel - whom I have NO respect for - I WANT TO BE PROVEN WRONG! In the case of Harman, she would be a horrible horrible choice because she's clearly not in support of participatory democracy. If she's appointed, which we need to fight against, I'll work to keep her in line. I may be someone with little power and a tiny voice, but I'll use every bit I have to push forward.

No, my friend, no koolaid for me. Disappointment, yes - but as I said above, "the story ain't been writ yet." I'm hoping Obama's an outstanding president.   

by Linda Milazzo (128 articles, 1 quicklinks, 18 diaries, 210 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:13:01 AM

  (0+)

Great expression of feelings.  Dissappointed yes. Concerned yes. Obama not yet President, Yes.  Move towards the ledge, but don't jump off just quite yet

by kato krause (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 216 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:32:13 AM

  (0+)

Linda,

I am sorry but I think you have already been proven wrong about O and you simply fail to recognize it.

With every step he takes in the sure path to filling the dictator position created by the acts of the entire 'government' over the last eight years, I see apologetics here, rather than sensable analyisis.

It is utter tripe to call Obabma an"unknown"--he has history, a clear and shining path of history, painting a clear portrait of a opportunist and con man.

I would refer you to Webster Tarpley, if you doubt my words here.

by William Whitten (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4880 comments [1685 recommended, 28 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 11, 2008 at 1:48:15 PM

  (0+)

I retain hope because I don't think we can make it another four years.  If Barack is a Wolfin Sheep's clothing,  we have already written our epitaphs.  We must make it happen now, this administration, this year, no more waiting or patience.

Thanks for all you geniuses who knew better, but failed to convince us otherwise before the election.

by kato krause (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 216 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 11, 2008 at 3:00:02 PM

  (0+)

by Munich (1 articles, 86 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 1125 comments [86 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:07:42 PM

  (0+)

Nov. 11 (Bloomberg) -- It's hard to believe Barack Obama would even think of calling this change.

Take a good look at some of the 17 people our nation's president-elect chose last week for his Transition Economic Advisory Board. And then try saying with a straight face that these are the leaders who should be advising him on how to navigate through the worst financial crisis in modern history.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aNCFKvAMUQ6w&refer=home

by William Whitten (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4880 comments [1685 recommended, 28 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 11, 2008 at 2:53:42 PM

  (0+)

and I suspect I am above at least above 95% of Americans seriously attempting to do so.

Let's face it, we must be patient in our impatience. Obama is clearly smart enough to be tossing many balls in the air, already knowing which ones he going to catch. I will give him every doubtful benefit...

But I won't be turned on my head if is he is a shill for the Big Boys. I can't personally believe he speaks the way he does and is such a shill. But he also has games to play, people on every side to placate, and it will take some time.

Call him on clear bullshit, as this article does, but also cut him some slack and encourage him in every right choice, just as I did successfully for sixth graders. He is not that different from them, only a few years older.

Also, I think there may be clear access through Michelle and even his kids, if he goes too far astray.

by Daniel Geery (26 articles, 95 quicklinks, 126 diaries, 912 comments [26 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Nov 14, 2008 at 6:32:13 AM

  (0+)