Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Sharron Angle's M.O.: I never said what I plainly said!

Nevada journalist Jon Ralston has been doing a nice job documenting what he calls Sharron Angle's "pathological habit" of denying she ever said things that videotaped evidence proves she plainly did, in fact, say.

Here's one of the clearest examples of this yet, as clearly as we can spell it out.

Yesterday Harry Reid released an ad that said this: "In the Assembly, Sharron Angle tried to repeal the law that makes insurance companies cover mammograms."

In response to that ad, Angle released a statement accusing Reid of lying: "His new attack ad makes a blatantly false claim that I tried to repeal a law that makes insurance companies cover mammograms."

So Angle says she never tried to repeal such a law. Okay. But on July 24th, the Las Vegas Review Journal editorial board asked Angle to justify her opposition to mandated coverage of mammograms and colonoscopies. Angle said:

"That was one of those things that I even had a bill to remove those mandates here in the state, because every time they put a mandate on, somebody can't afford it. Somebody drops off."

And at a GOP Senate primary debate, Angle also boasted about the same bill:

"As your state legislator, I introduced three bills. One would have taken off all of the mandates on insurance."

In other words: Angle says Reid's ad is false. But if Reid's ad is false, her own previous statements would appear to be false, too.

Angle, of course, can say what she wants -- false or otherwise -- thanks to the First Amendment. So maybe Angle is merely exercising her right to revise or deep-six past statements and actions with what she might call First Amendment remedies?

By Greg Sargent  | October 1, 2010; 3:57 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Senate Dems, Senate Republicans, Tea Party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: What Rick Sanchez said about CNN and Jews
Next: Happy Hour Roundup

Comments

Greg,

The link to the Las Vegas Review Journal takes us to an interview that is over 1 hour long. That is more of Sharron Angle than I can possibly bear. Do know where in the interview she makes the statement?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 1, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Most GOOPers have felt unconstrained by actual facts for a long time now. Angle is remarkable, though, in the degree to which her indifference to reality is copious and transparent.

It's telling that someone like her actually has a real shot at getting elected.

Posted by: jzap | October 1, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw -- it's in response to the first question, right at the beginning...

and hey jzap, meant to say, haven't seen you around in a bit.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 1, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Is it possible that she's lying AND she's stupid?

Or does she think she'll get away with it because no one she consorts with pays attention to details?

Maybe that's how she got this way in the first place: just sliding through life without having to take responsibility for things. The sheer fact that she rails against gov't support for health care and other useful societal needs while getting health care from her husband's FEDERAL pension probably suggests that this is symptomatic.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 1, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Strange post. One would think that, in a post about whether Sharron Angle took some action in the Nevada legislature to repeal the law that makes insurance companies cover mammograms, Greg Sargent would, well ... analyze the action that Angle took in the Nevada legislature. Did the Nevada bill really try to repeal a mandate for mammograms?

But instead of actually doing the work to tell us who is **actually right**, Greg just points us to some other statements that may or may not conflict with what Angle is saying.

This is why political journalism is so terrible now. Instead of doing the hard work to actually analyze the bill referred to in the Reid ad, Greg takes the lazy way out and points to some alleged conflicting statement.

Why, oh why, can't we have better political journalists???

Posted by: asudnik | October 1, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

A lying nutbag. Textbook teabag candidate.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 1, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Greg

I really did try to have a reasonable conversation about what has been going on in the blog.

I pointed out several different thing.


12BarBlues has been coming on every day - seeking to start a fight - if you want to call that harassment - fine.

However, the left has shown a good amount of hostility here -

I believe the conservatives have showed a great deal of RESTRAINT here -


Many of the liberals just want to SHUT down opposing points of view - it is that clear.


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

BG: "Is it possible that she's lying AND she's stupid?"

Bingo!

Posted by: jzap | October 1, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Greg

What we have here is a bunch of children - and instead of telling them to act like ADULTS, there is an effort to appease them.


The children stoop their feet and say they are leaving - and all of a sudden they have to be coddled.


NO effort to tell them to act like mature adults - to treat the others around them with respect.


Instead - 12BarBlues gets away with instigating this whole situation.


How about this rule: Tell everyone to stop saying they will ignore someone - and stop telling others to ignore someone -


STOP acting like this is a third-grade group of girls acting like a clique.


This whole thing is childish -


Tell everyone to engage everyone - and if they don't like it - leave.


And get rid of 12Barblues - she started this.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Rainforest, the "liberals" on this site have not asked for a banning of all conservatives. Just a handful, and it often seems like those few clearly are posting with intent to harass.

only one commenter has been banned in the history of this blog.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 1, 2010 4:38 PM | Report abuse

I'm re-posting this from the bottom of the last thread. Apologies if you saw it already.

STR's last 3 or 4 posts are exactly what we're talking about. They are repetitious and show no insight into the way threads get filled with lots of posts that just don't say anything or, worse, add unhinged comments way off the subject.

Is my judgment subjective? Yes. I don't agree with STR's politics or positions, but that's NOT what I'm objecting to. I'm objecting to long posts that have little (IMO) content and tend to say the same thing over and over.

I'll tell you what would help. If you (STR and others) post something that makes an argument, and that is not responded to by anyone, then move on. DON'T keep posting it over and over. The marketplace of ideas has judged it to be unworthy of the conversation. This happens to me all the time and I just re-engage with some other idea or what someone has said about something else.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 1, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

@jzap: "It's telling that someone like her actually has a real shot at getting elected."

She has Harry Reid to thank for that. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 1, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Just to be perfectly clear, I just scrolled past another of STRF's useless and frustrating posts and, while I did not read it, it still resulted in disappointment and disgust.

As far as the other right leaning posters, sbj, nickel (qb), brigade, troll, scott and even jake, while I disagree strongly with much, if not all, of what they say, they at least allow the comments to develop and the posters to communicate. Wrong is not offensive without any sort of benefit. STRF offers nothing whatsoever beneficial and its presence is a drag on the community.

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 1, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

@BGinCHI: Also, he's kinda singled out 12BarBlues, which is creepy and stalkerish. And keeps saying that 12Bar is doing stuff that she is not and has not, and it's just weird.

Also, STRF is not a conservative. He's basically admitted he's an anarchist, which is not really consistent with conservatism. So he's should really be objecting to all these non-anarchists who are harassing him.

"You're discriminating against me because I'm a threadbombing anarchist! Injustice!"

If nothing else, putting the poster above the message instead of below would be helpful, as ruk (I miss him already) suggested.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 1, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Greg

There is no "intent to harass" anyone


On the contrary - they are HARASSING THE CONSERVATIVES.

This is ridiculous - it is like children who are trying to enforce a clique.


Who are the higher ups ???

So your position is NONE of them have harassed ANYONE - it is just the conservatives who are wrong?


.
.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 4:49 PM | Report abuse

"The children stoop their feet and say they are leaving - and all of a sudden they have to be coddled."

No, STRF, others who post here are saying that they will choose to spend their time doing other things if coming to the "Comments" section here means having to wade through your posts. "This product doesn't meet my needs, so I will pick something else as long as this product displays these 'qualities.'" That is called a free market. I thought conservatives support a free market.

If you really believe your thoughts are indispensable, you could start your own blog and see how many "hits" you get. See how you do in the free market. Or do you not want to know?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 1, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Kevin, agree on changing the look of the site to make things work better. Once Fred Hiatt gets his yacht paid off he's going to get right on it.

Is ruk out? Missed that. I sure hope not. My guess is he won't be able to live without us for more than a week. FL just can't keep him occupied that long.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 1, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

@STRF,

The reason you hate me so much is because I tell the folks here what you were like on the Fix.

And you were exactly the same on the Fix. All the spamming, duplication, CAPSLOCK, carriage returns...posts that fill up 70% of the blog lines. How do I know that? Because one poster kept track of the lines posted and you had about 70% of them.

And you use the same excuses:

I don't know the rules,
no one follows the rules,
the liberals are against me,
others are worse than me,
it's a violation of my civil rights.

But your reputation preceeds you. The Fix is a WaPo blog and so is Plumline. So perhaps the "higher ups" are the same folks, and perhaps they might just remember you and your years of harrassing Fix posters and Chris Cillizza.

Anyone who doubts this should get on the Fix archive and look for the poster 37th&OStreet, who is STRF.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 1, 2010 4:51 PM | Report abuse

kevin: "If nothing else, putting the poster above the message instead of below would be helpful, as ruk (I miss him already) suggested."

How? You're still scrolling past the same number of posts. After all these weeks, if one can't pick out the troll's posts within a second or two, it's time for stronger bifocals. :o)

For me, all this scrolling past is tedious, time-consuming, and just not worth the effort.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 1, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Greg

There she is - 12BarBlues - the one who has been stirring up all the discontent.


AND she admits what she has been doing


She has been encouraging others to start fights on this blog.


THAT IS NOT HARASSMENT?


It is one thing to have a rule - but another to only enforce it against one side.


I see the conservatives exercising a great deal of restraint on this board.

When there is a hostile comment, it is not always returned.


ANYONE get credit for that? Apparently not.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 4:56 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1 at 4:50 PM

So it's all about CONTENT that you don't like???


It is the point of view that you don't like.


If I was posting pro-Obama - fawning over his every move - that would be OK, right?


,

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

12Barblues

You know what you have been doing - you have been coming onto this blog everyday - to cause trouble with other posters -

And when you can't start a fight all by yourself - you seek to encourage other people to start fights -

And you try to get a gang together - A LYNCH MOB.

It's just like the democratic party again - lining up with the KKK - and getting rid of some people - in order to try to keep everyone else "in line".


.
.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

And you use the same excuses:

I don't know the rules,
no one follows the rules,
the liberals are against me,
others are worse than me,
it's a violation of my civil rights.
---------------------------
Bwahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You ought to change your schtick so you are not so predictable.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 1, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

12Barblues


You are on here everyday - seeking to cause trouble.


You are trying to start a fight


You are not engaging in the discussion.


When you can't start a fight, you seek to get other people unhappy - so that they start fights as well.


THAT is harassment.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

STRF,

Free market. If people don't like your posts, for whatever reason, they are free to do something else as long as you are here. Obviously, several frequent commenters have left, and they have let Greg know why. Free market.

Why should I tell you what I don't like about your comments? It would waste your time and mine. You won't change.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 1, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Nuke STRF.

Just DO IT already WaPo.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 1, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

it seems to me that the debate about content should cut both ways. If harrassment is in the eye of the beholder, what should we make of this, for example:
"Is it possible that she's lying AND she's stupid?"

If the standard is that comments ought to be civil and promote debate, how does the above meet that benchmark?

I understand the drive to have some dissenting voices here banned. But much of it is just kettle meeting pot. When it comes to nastiness, there are some liberal posters here who make the top of the list. Is sauce for the goose sauce for the gander or will Mr Sargent impose the good old double standard?

How many conservatives here have been called a moron by RUK or a fool by Ethan, and how does that rhetoric support the goals that the liberals are now so loudly proclaiming?

vicious personal attacks are derigeur for many liberals that frequent these threads. Of late I have been repeating some of the more blatant example, but to no avail.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 1, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

skip, stupid is as stupid does. And Sharron Angle does stupid things. She also then lies about it. Should I have said that she's "not too bright?" Is that ok?

You are changing the subject, of course. STR is not being singled out because of his political views. It's the way he bombs the thread. If you don't understand that, then you can't really be a good faith participant in this discussion.

Ps. We've all called people a few names and been called them in return. It happens. When it's chronic or takes the place of argument then it's getting in the way.

Does this make sense to you?

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 1, 2010 5:25 PM | Report abuse

"There she is - 12BarBlues - the one who has been stirring up all the discontent.

"

OMG--you know what went through my head, 12Bar, when I read this? You're the subject of a bad opera, to the tune of "Kill the Wabbit, kill the Wabbit" as sung by Elmer Fudd!!!

Or maybe it was great opera after all. . .

And, after all, STRF just goes to show how it's possible for the Christine O'Donnells and Sharron Angles of this world to have a constituency!

Posted by: Michigoose | October 1, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

@12Bar: What is the messaging system that the Fix uses, if any? I see nothing--a comment link, but no way to comment. Of course, I'm behind a safe surfing web filter here, so that's probably the culprit. But if Greg goes to that, I definitely won't be posting any more, because it won't be possible. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 1, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1 at 5:10 PM

You are arguing both sides of the issue there - aren't you?


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

"You are trying to start a fight"

Shhhhh . . .

The first rule about Fight Club is . . .

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 1, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of Republican LIARS:

In an interview with the Palm Beach Post, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (I) insisted that he would have run as an independent for U.S. Senate even if he had been leading the GOP primary by 20 points.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/10/01/crists_believe_it_or_not.html

Video at the link........

DROP OUT CHARLIE, lying pos.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 1, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

My complaints have nothing to do with the ideology of the poster and I have not read any other complaints that are based only on that criterion. It is disingenuous for someone to now try to make this into an ideological issue but, I think we have all come to expect nothing else from skip. That does not mean I think skip should be banned. I just think skip is wrong about most everything.

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 1, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

All


One thing which is clear -


There is a group of people on here who have made a point of saying "I am going to ignore you"


AND YET - the complaints are coming - and what they are really saying is "Save the Rainforest is IGNORING ME"


So which is it - they want to be obnoxious - but when one ignores them back, they are like a bunch of 8 year-old girls fighting about who is going to be in the clique.


It really is not a mature discussion among adults, is it?


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest "It's just like the democratic party again - lining up with the KKK - and getting rid of some people - in order to try to keep everyone else "in line"."
--------

That occurred in the 1860's, for Christ sake. And the Democratic and Republican parties of today bear little resemblance to those of that era (some have said they've reversed identities).

Is that the typical tenor of your commentary ... argumentative antagonism? (a rhetorical question)

Posted by: curtisemayle | October 1, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

@kevin,

If you go to the Fix, I think you have to signin at the bottom. You should be able to signin with your Plumline handle. Then you can see the comments section. The comments used to be the same system as Plumline. Now, it is quite different, threaded for example. From my point of view, I prefer the unthreaded format.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 1, 2010 5:47 PM | Report abuse

STRF at 5:35 p.m.,

No.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 1, 2010 5:47 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest "It's just like the democratic party again - lining up with the KKK - and getting rid of some people - in order to try to keep everyone else "in line"."


____________________________


This is how the democratic party ruled the South - and Indiana - up until the 1950s


The era of the KKK probably had its height in the 1920s.


In fact, the KKK used to control blocks of delegates at the Democratic National Conventions - when they were deciding who their presidential nominees would be.


The principle is the same - LYNCH A FEW - so the others will fall in line.


THAT is the objective of the democrats - cyber-lynching.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 5:48 PM | Report abuse

pragmaticstill at 5:43 PM


I can not agree with you.


If the postings were all pro-Obama, fawning over the wonder of how great the fantastic Obama is - I seriously do not believe the liberals would be saying anything.

It is ALL ABOUT CONTENT.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 5:53 PM | Report abuse

"Let's be honest. We tried it Harry Reid's way, and it didn't work."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/10/01/nv-sen_angle_ad_real_world.html

Posted by: sbj3 | October 1, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Lets face it


The liberals are really upset about the poll numbers - and upset with Obama who lied and disappointed all of you.


Obama showed a great deal of arrogance - and never took care of the economy -


Obama let you down.


It's not about one Conservative poster.


If the poll numbers were better, the liberals wouldn't be so grumpy.


There seems to be a national consensus building that the nation wants Obama out of office - perhaps many - Right and left will be happy if he would just resign and go back to Hyde Park.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 1, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

STRF, you distort past events to support your world view. The history and evolution of the parties' social progressivism and the KKK (in each of its three incarnations towards race and civil rights obstruction) is quite clear and available. Attempting to impugn current Democratic behavior with what existed in those periods is as illusory as hijacking the term "Lincoln Republicans" for anything related to GOP policy of the last forty years.

Posted by: curtisemayle | October 1, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Excuse #6:

The principle is the same - LYNCH A FEW - so the others will fall in line.
------------------------------
The thing you have to ask yourself is this: Why is it always STRF who has to pay the price? Why is it always me?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 1, 2010 6:11 PM | Report abuse

All, Rick Sanchez just got the ax from CNN. That and more in the Happy Hour Roundup:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/happy_hour_roundup_100.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 1, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest, have you saved the rainforest yet?

I suggest you get involved, STRF!

Here is one of my favorite rainforest advocacy groups, the Rainforest Action Network:

http://ran.org/

Here is some good news, STRF, that will help preserve rainforests around the world:

* General Mills Moves Away From Rainforest Destruction *

The new palm oil procurement policy includes specific commitments on critical issues including respect for the rights of Indigenous communities, prevention of further destruction of endangered rainforests and protection of peatlands, a major source of climate change causing emissions from palm oil production. In addition, General Mills has set a goal of “sourcing 100 percent responsible and sustainable palm oil” by 2015, setting a new bar for the American food industry.

http://ran.org/content/general-mills-moves-away-rainforest-destruction

You can also go here for more info on why palm oil industry is bad for rainforests:

http://www.theproblemwithpalmoil.org/

Thank you for bringing the preservation of the rainforests to our attention, SaveTheRainForest!

I suggest everyone call their congresscritters and express support for policies that preserve and protect our planet's endangered rainforests.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 1, 2010 6:18 PM | Report abuse

greg I am curious if Reid will be producing a follow up ad showing Angle's actual quotes and proposed legislation in the Nevada legislature with her denial and the phrase should we believe her or her lying eyes or perhaps Honesty is Not Ms. Angle's strong suit. Seems like just like in the Meg Whittman scenario that denying what you actually said or proposed in the state legislature, or certified notice your spouse signed for, that the futile effort at cover up or denial is worse than what was actually proposed, if I am making sense. Whittman will be toast soon when the San Diego County Rs start turning on her.

Posted by: leichtman1 | October 1, 2010 8:14 PM | Report abuse

greg I am curious if Reid will be producing a follow up ad showing Angle's actual quotes and proposed legislation in the Nevada legislature with her denial and the phrase should we believe her or her lying eyes or perhaps Honesty is Not Ms. Angle's strong suit. Seems like just like in the Meg Whittman scenario that denying what you actually said or proposed in the state legislature, or certified notice your spouse signed for, that the futile effort at cover up or denial is worse than what was actually proposed, if I am making sense. Whittman will be toast soon when the San Diego County Rs start turning on her.

Posted by: leichtman1 | October 1, 2010 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Oh God I can't take STRF's (aka 37th & O street) paranoiac drivel posted unrelentingly any longer.

Thought I'd just read an article or two and some comments but I have to wade through the same old crapola from the poster who was banned under multiple screen names from the fix.

Time to go elsewhere, the blog is polluted.

Posted by: JRM2 | October 1, 2010 8:32 PM | Report abuse

I think too many GOP and Tea Party folks think we are really dumb. They forget that cameras are always rolling and they get caught in their lies and denials quite easily

Posted by: patisok | October 1, 2010 9:27 PM | Report abuse

I think it might be, like breast cancer month or something. The local newspaper was printed on pink newsprint. That seemed to be the most plausible explanation.

Posted by: CalD | October 1, 2010 10:33 PM | Report abuse

These tea partiers are just loose cannons. Random anger and strong rhetoric with no discernable plan. America can do without them.

Posted by: B2O2 | October 2, 2010 12:57 AM | Report abuse

Las Vegas Review Journal editorial board ~ I think I'd rather make a reference to Satan himself.

For those uninitiated in the matter, the LVRJ has conspired with a law firm that calls itself "RIGHT HAVEN" to file suit against people who copy stuff from from LVRJ to their own sites ~ they usually demand $75,000 and forfeiture of your web address.

They refuse to play ball and allow even minor quotes, and they have actually filed suit against a firm that SUPPLIES NEWS to them for carrying the same news on their own site.

"Not well wrapped" are they?

So whatever they have to say about Sharon Angle NOBODY WANTS TO HEAR IT.

Sure, lot of folks would like to hear what Sharon has to say, or what Hairy Reed said, or whatever, but not through the medium of the LVJR.

It's dangerous to even quote them in a comments board like this, so i don't, and you shouldn't either. Greg can do what he wants of course, but I doubt the WarshPost will pick up the legal tab.

Posted by: muawiyah | October 2, 2010 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Didn't Congress act some time ago to make breast exams mandatory ~ thought so ~ which makes this issue irrelevant.

Now, Greg, BAN all the very repetitive Leftwingtards who kept trying to bring that one up ~

~ or something ~

Anyway, I'd like it if you'd go through the threads sometimes and check out some of the "quotes" to make sure you aren't giving folks like the bad boys at Right Haven a hook.

You and I both know your employers will drop you like a rock if Right Haven shows up at the door and that is so annoying to people who enjoy comments threads.

Posted by: muawiyah | October 2, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

So, Since Obama, Looks like UNIONS are running our country now!
Considering how Unions ran manufacturing out of this country --- Americans better wake up... do you really want greedy, uneducated union bosses running this country?

Posted by: ohioan | October 3, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company