Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

GOP Weighs Calendar Changes for 2012

UPDATE, 5:00 pm : The Iowa Republican Party is declaring the passage of the "Ohio" plan as a strong first step in keeping the Hawkeye State caucuses first in 2012. "This is a great day for the state of Iowa," said state party chairman Stewart Iverson. "Iowans take their role in the nominating process very seriously. We invest the time to get to know the candidates and their positions on the issues, and understand the extremely significant role we have in selecting the next president."

UPDATE, 3:45 pm: An astute reader notes that the actual "pods" for the large states were amended during the process and no longer split only on geographic lines. The new pod lists are after the jump.

Also, Saul Anuzis, the chairman of the Michigan Republican Party, said he opposed the Ohio plan, and, in an email to supporters said the plan could drastically extend the primary fight in 2012. "The Ohio Plan almost assures that we would have to use a 'convention' rather than a primary to select our nominee...a mixed blessing giving conservative a stronger voice in the process," wrote Anuzis

ORIGINAL POST

Even as the Democratic presidential race slogs on, a group of Republican party officials gathered this week in Albuquerque, New Mexico have moved forward on a plan that would drastically reshape the nomination calendar in 2012.

The "Ohio" plan, as it is known, was passed by the Republican National Committee's 56 member rules committee earlier today -- a major step forward for advocates of significantly adjusting the way in which the party selects its nominee.

The Ohio plan would, in essence, split the nomination fight into three distinct tiers: early states, small states and large states.

The first would be the traditional early states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, which would be allowed under the plan to retain their status at the front of the nominating calendar. The exemption for the early states is a new wrinkle for Republicans, following in the footsteps of the Democrats who currently recognize the primacy of the traditional early-voting bastions.

That quartet of votes would be followed -- in the third week of February -- by a window of votes for 19 small states comprising 50 electoral votes.

The final piece of the Ohio plan encompasses the large states, which would begin voting in three clusters
in the first week of March. The large states, according to the Ohio plan, would be parceled out into three pods based on geographic region and would rotate their relative voting positions every four years.

That is, the East/Midwest region might vote in the first week of March in 2012 followed by the South region three weeks later and the West region three weeks after that. In 2016 then, it would be the South, West, then East/Midwest in the large state votes. (The complete list of states in each geographic region is after the jump.)

Before we get to far ahead of ourselves, a few caveats are in order.

First, this is a non-binding resolution passed by the 56 members of the Rules Committee. The proposal will now move forward to another rules committee meeting in August followed by the RNC summer meeting. At that gathering all committee members will have a chance to amend it or offer some sort of substitute amendment. The recommendations made by the RNC members will then be put forward at the party's national convention in September in Minnesota.

Second, the strategists for each of the candidates weighing potential 2012 bids (Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee we are looking at you) are sure to carefully study this Ohio plan between now and the summer meeting in order to see how this helps or hurts their possible candidate. While it may be hard to believe that those sorts of calculations are going on already, trust us -- they are.

So, the passage of the Ohio plan by the rules committee represents a significant but not conclusive step toward re-arranging the way in which Republicans pick their nominee in 2012 and beyond.

Democrats won't cross that bridge as long as their nomination fight continues on but it is a looming problem for the party -- especially given the current conundrum regarding Florida and Michigan. (Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean declared today that the Sunshine State delegates will be seated but offered no specifics on how they would be split between Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.)

It's hard to imagine the Michigan forces -- led by Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Debbie Dingell -- yet again swallowing their objections about the primacy of the early states for the good of the party in 2012. And yet the extended primary race between Clinton and Obama seems to have rewarded states -- like Indiana and North Carolina -- who resisted the urge to move up their presidential votes, a development that could radically readjust each state thinks about their place in the nominating calendar in four years time.

Pod X: Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Wisconsin, Utah, and Washington

Pod Y: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Indiana, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia

Pod Z: Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania

By Chris Cillizza  |  April 2, 2008; 2:28 PM ET
Categories:  Republican Party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: For Clinton, Simply Winning Pa. Isn't Enough
Next: Clinton Unveils New 3 AM Ad, McCain Responds

Comments

Posted by: Chelsea | April 14, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Kiera | April 14, 2008 7:04 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Jacob | April 14, 2008 3:08 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Callum | April 13, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Chloe | April 13, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Sophia | April 13, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Liam | April 13, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Jacob | April 13, 2008 5:19 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Jasmine | April 13, 2008 2:44 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Madison | April 13, 2008 12:17 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Amy | April 12, 2008 9:34 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Finlay | April 12, 2008 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Samuel | April 12, 2008 7:32 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Jasmine | April 12, 2008 3:51 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Amber | April 12, 2008 12:01 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Niamh | April 11, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Very good place
forex made easy currency forex learn online trading dallas

Posted by: Ethan lemci | April 10, 2008 5:51 AM | Report abuse

The DNC made a mess of this campaign for President. Back in June 2007, a DNC spokeswoman , told the Associated Press that neither Dean nor the Rules Committee "has the power to waive the rules for ANY state, these rules can be changed only by the full DNC.' Yet a few months later , on the same day that the Rules Committee stripped Michigan of its delegates, it waived the rules for New Hampshire, Iowa, and South Carolina. Now this the DNC call fair play and of course the Obama campaign agrees. Now you know why Clinton's campaign does not!

Posted by: jpannebecker | April 3, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

He is charged with bribery, money laundering and obstruction of justice.


Or you can just say "the family business".

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

NEW ORLEANS - The eldest brother and political strategist of indicted U.S. Rep. William Jefferson has been charged with giving payoffs to a school-board president - a bribery case apparently unrelated to the one against the congressman. In a federal indictment handed up Wednesday, Mose Jefferson is accused of giving $140,000 to help secure about $14 million in contracts to bring a computer-based teaching system to Orleans Parish schools. He is charged with bribery, money laundering and obstruction of justice.

Nothing different here folks, just moveon. Lib business as usual.

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Being taken seriously by a moonbat and responding promptly really wasn't one of my considerations. In fact, your opinion doesn't enter into any thinking person's calculus whatsoever, as indicated by the congressional votes since the lefties took over.

But why would anyone expect the Libs to run the nomination any different than they run congress, all bluster and no results with disorganization and confusion as the watchwords. Power, lies and corruption will eventually rule the day, as usual.

But it is interesting that the loony drindl-jackals stick to their gutter ball approaches, just like thier messiah.

gutter ball is sounding even better with the double entendre of gutter ball scoring zero and veering left along with the base and sordid methods, as in, from the gutter.

so by all means, preach on moonbats, with your gutter ball methods.

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

its funny it took zouk 20 minutes to even come up with a response. did you have to pull out a thesaurus to look up the word wanton? or trying to cram your post thru a 56k modem is the reason it took you so long.

like i said, no one takes you seriously. even the other conservative posters dont take you seriously. just out of curiosity, do you troll other blogs too? well anyway im leaving my job for the day, you can have this blog to your self. ill just wait for your response in about a half hour.

Posted by: jaymills1124 | April 2, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

I would like to know the reasoning behind changing the pods from geographical regions.

Chris?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 2, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

What is it with moonbats and the cutting and pasting?

If being taken seriously is a metric for you, I suggest that you and your entire philosophy is wanton.

the imbecile Dean and his party have bumbled another election beyond repair. He might as well let out a moonbat scream/howl and be done with it - again.

Why would anyone beleive that the party of bumblers is capable of doing anything at this point?

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

so moonbat jaymills contributes by re-pasting all my posts. and your point was????

that you are a loser? point ack. you are a petulant nimrod as well.

when will you drindl-jackals grow up and start acting like adults?

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 04:26 PM

oh my such insults, now who's acting like a child now?

here's a question, who takes you seriously? not me! anyone elese here does?

hey here's a thought. back to the topic at hand.

oyptimst-good ideal, but i would take the superdelegates out of the equation. it would make the dem side of the primaries more honest.

Posted by: jaymills1124 | April 2, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

blarg writes
"But there are also logistics to consider. It's easier for a state to have a single primary election day, instead of one in February and one in April. And in states with open primaries, it prevents voters from voting twice. Considering the problems with strategic cross-party voting this year, that's a concern."

That depends on your motivation, doesn't it? I suppose if you assume non party members will be malicious, there is an incentive to limiting participation to only one party's ballot. As an independent voter, I see it differently. For one thing, because I'm a swing voter, shouldn't both parties want my input? What is so wrong with me expressing a preference in each party's nominating process? I guess it depends on whether they want a candidate that appeals to swing voters, or a candidate that toes the party line across the board. If you want the former, open the process up & take any input you can get. If you want the latter, limit participation to party idealogues.

Posted by: bsimon | April 2, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

the story probably wont make the 5 O'clock news)


Nope, when Libs get caught doing something illegal or immoral, no one bats an eye. It is not news, it is business as usual. now if a story ever emerged about a Lib doing something noble, that would be big news indeed.

when they lie, it is simply misspeak. Obama and hillary are in a race to the bottom of the barrel with lies and muck defining the path. If you don't hear a lie from either of one of them before 10 am, check your router, it is malfunctioning.

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

so moonbat jaymills contributes by re-pasting all my posts. and your point was????

that you are a loser? point ack. you are a petulant nimrod as well.

when will you drindl-jackals grow up and start acting like adults?

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Here's my recommendation for the dems in 2012:

1) In the first phase keep IA, NH, NV & SC at the head of the parade. Not much chance of changing it and they did provide a 2-2 split between Obama and Clinton, though the NV result was mixed.

2) In the second phase, allow a group of states to hold proportional or caucus contests on a rotating regional "pod" basis.

3) In the final phase, prohibit caucuses and allow winner take all contests. Let the bigger states lurk here waiting to give a rich prize of delegates to the candidate with the best staying power. This will also keep large states like FL & MI from trying to move up. The winner take all feature should take the power to name a nominee out of the hands of the super delegates. And it also establishes the requirement that caucus states cannot offer winner take all contests.

Posted by: optimyst | April 2, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

doing the same thing day after day with no result is simply loony. but I guess we should expect looniness from a loon.

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 04:12 PM

ummmm......so this wasnt you then?


this is why the gutter ball analogy is good:

Obama says he is centrist and effective as he approaches the line and promises to score a strike or at least a spare. Instead, he veers left and ends up in the gutter, score - zero. why wouldn't the ball, the floor, the pins just do as he says?

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 03:46 PM

or this?

the notion that Obama will always throw gutter balls is predictive and apropos.

Like al Gore inventing the internet, hillary dodging snipers and kerry being a war hero, this goof will stick.

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 03:41 PM

or this?

Indeed, the liberal half.

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 03:39 PM

or this(by the way, big yawn in this area, folks around here are more concerned over kwame or the tigers right now, the story probably wont make the 5 O'clock news)

Another day, another Dem pervert:

Thomas Athans, the husband of U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow and cofounder of a liberal talk radio network, told Troy police detectives that he paid a prostitute $150 for sex at a Troy hotel in late February, according to a police report obtained Wednesday by the Free Press under the Freedom of Information Act. Athans, 46, was not arrested or charged, but agreed to fully cooperate with police in their investigation of Internet-based prostitution at hotels in the city, according to the report.

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 03:22 PM

so in the last hour you said absolutly nothing! but hey keep on spamming, im sure people are listening to you.not.

Posted by: jaymills1124 | April 2, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

bsimon: That's true; there are advantages to having later primaries. But there are also logistics to consider. It's easier for a state to have a single primary election day, instead of one in February and one in April. And in states with open primaries, it prevents voters from voting twice. Considering the problems with strategic cross-party voting this year, that's a concern.

Now that I've seen the 3:45 update to the post, I don't like the plan as much. Geographic pods are a good idea. It's cheaper and easier to campaign in a geographic region. These new pods, which ignore geography, make it more difficult for smaller (less well-funded) candidates to compete. Bring back the geographic pods!

Posted by: Blarg | April 2, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

drindl, you can rant on for months on end. Isn't it clear to you that neither the American public nor the elected Dems who campaigned on ending the war are going to do anything along the lines of what you wish? moveon.

In fact the trend is in the opposite direction with more and more voters realizing how irresponsible the Libs are.

doing the same thing day after day with no result is simply loony. but I guess we should expect looniness from a loon.

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps if the state parties paid for their own events, they could hold them at their leisure - leaving state gov't out of it.

gee, what a novel ideal, making the state parties pay for their own damn primaries.

Posted by: jaymills1124 | April 2, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

ok aside from zouk's predictible rantings, heres what i think about *gasp* the topic above.

well it sounds simlar to the one where its more regionalized. personally i would be in favor of that if it was rotated, if the dynamic duo of levin/dingell would accept it(doubt it). if anything, having the presidental primaries start in march of that year would be better than having it start the day after election day 06.

but im suprised no one offered their own primary season calender. here's mine, but i would start the primaries in late spring and have it end before the start of football season, and have the general election season start in late september. by my math it would be a 6 week campagin, possibly allowing for 8 weeks adding in both the conventions.

Posted by: jaymills1124 | April 2, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

anothr reason to get out of Iraq. we're simply getting suckered by the Iraqi government. We pay for everything and they stash their riches in foreign banks:

"Stuart Bowen, special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, said Baghdad in recent months has experienced its highest oil production and export levels since the war began five years ago.

Whereas Iraqi officials estimated $35 billion in oil revenue last fall, Bowen said the final number is likely to be closer to $60 billion.

Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and John Warner, R-Va., have called for an investigation into Iraq's handling of the money. While Iraq pays for fuel for its own troops, it relies heavily on U.S. dollars to provide citizens with basic services, including more than $45 billion for reconstruction.

"We believe that it has been overwhelmingly U.S. taxpayer money that has funded Iraq reconstruction over the last five years, despite Iraq earning billions of dollars in oil revenue over that time period that have ended up in non-Iraqi banks," Levin and Warner wrote in a letter to the head of the Government Accountability Office.

"At the same time, our conversations with both Iraqis and Americans during our frequent visits to Iraq, as well as official government and unofficial media reports, have convinced us that the Iraqi government is not doing nearly enough to provide essential services and improve the quality of life of its citizens," they said.

The senators estimated that Iraq will realize "at least $100 billion in oil revenues in 2007 and 2008."

Posted by: drindl | April 2, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

"And the states had better understand that it WILL be enforced so we don't get this kind of stupidity again."

I could be misinformed, but I think the FL Dems (and Rs) deferred to the state because the state paid for the primary. Perhaps if the state parties paid for their own events, they could hold them at their leisure - leaving state gov't out of it. Perhaps this would be a good 'small gov't' initiative for state-level pols to propose nationwide.

Posted by: bsimon | April 2, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

blarg writes
"Because the Democrats might not follow suit. If both parties moved their primary start dates to March, that wouldn't cause any problems."

Sure, the other party is in the news. But, the party to go 2nd gets a better idea of whom they're running against & what that candidate's flaws are. Its not all minuses.

Posted by: bsimon | April 2, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

" There needs to be a clear enforcement mechanism for primary dates if any plan like this is going to work."

Agree. And the states had better understand that it WILL be enforced so we don't get this kind of stupidity again.

oh look the taliban is back...

"The story of Afghanistan: One step forward, one hundred steps back. The re-Talibanization of the country continues apace. If you are saying to yourselves, "What the hell," well, this is what happens when you allow the embedding of fundamentalist religious law into a "democratic" constitution: Afghanistan's lower house of Parliament passed a resolution Monday seeking to bar television programs from showing dancing and other practices deemed unholy."

In many fundamentalist Christian communities in the US, dancing is also forbidden. One of the 1001 reasons relgion doens't belong in government.

Posted by: drindl | April 2, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

this is why the gutter ball analogy is good:

Obama says he is centrist and effective as he approaches the line and promises to score a strike or at least a spare. Instead, he veers left and ends up in the gutter, score - zero. why wouldn't the ball, the floor, the pins just do as he says?

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

the notion that Obama will always throw gutter balls is predictive and apropos.

Like al Gore inventing the internet, hillary dodging snipers and kerry being a war hero, this goof will stick.

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

that makes about half the human race perverts.

Posted by: drindl | April 2, 2008 03:35 PM

Indeed, the liberal half.

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

"When Obama's bowling score takes on political significance: MSNBC's Matthews, Scarborough question Obama's manhood after he bowls poorly - The six-week gap between the Mississippi and Pennsylvania primaries is a long slog for the political world, but it seems to have taken a painful toll on our poor media personalities. As Dayo Olopade noted, the gap has created "a 'news' vacuum that has essentially forced the national media into a sort of 1950s, pre-technological childhood, playing Sputnik with an old refrigerator carton." In this case, the old refrigerator carton is Barack Obama's inability to bowl well. Seriously." pathetic.

Posted by: drindl | April 2, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

if prostiution if perversion, i'd say that makes about half the human race perverts. but hey, maybe so.

Posted by: drindl | April 2, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

bsimon: Because the Democrats might not follow suit. If both parties moved their primary start dates to March, that wouldn't cause any problems. But if the Democrats repeated this year's primary schedule, that would be bad news for the Republicans. For 3 months, the Democratic race would get all the media coverage. And the Democratic nominee would probably be decided far before the Republican nominee, putting him in a better position for the general election.

I like this plan. It's not perfect, but it's a huge improvement over what exists now. I see one problem, though. As we've learned from Florida and Michigan, the national committee has limited ability to enforce primary dates. What would stop a state from breaking these rules and scheduling their primary early? There needs to be a clear enforcement mechanism for primary dates if any plan like this is going to work.

Posted by: Blarg | April 2, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Someone should ask John McCain where the troops are going to come from to 'stay the curse' in Iraq:

Senior Army and Marine Corps leaders said yesterday that the increase of more than 30,000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan has put unsustainable levels of stress on U.S. ground forces and has put their readiness to fight other conflicts at the lowest level in years.

In a stark assessment a week before Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, is to testify on the war's progress, Gen. Richard A. Cody, the Army's vice chief of staff, said that the heavy deployments are inflicting "incredible stress" on soldiers and families and that they pose "a significant risk" to the nation's all-volunteer military.

"When the five-brigade surge went in . . . that took all the stroke out of the shock absorbers for the United States Army," Cody testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee's readiness panel.

"He said that even if five brigades are pulled out of Iraq by July, as planned, it would take some time before the Army could return to 12-month tours for soldiers. Petraeus is expected to call for a pause in further troop reductions to assess their impact on security in Iraq.

"I've never seen our lack of strategic depth be where it is today," said Cody, who has been the senior Army official in charge of operations and readiness for the past six years and plans to retire this summer.""

So it's looks like McCain is willing to trade US security for Iraqi. So 5 years later we pay and pay and pay and they still jockey among themselves for power while the US goes to hell in a handbasket. Great plan.

Posted by: drindl | April 2, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

It makes sense to rethink the whole process. My question for the GOP is, if you're going to the trouble of rethinking it, why not rethink the start date too & move that back to late March or April? If you're going to reschedule the whole thing, why on earth would you want to put your candidates in IA & NH in January?

Posted by: bsimon | April 2, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Another day, another Dem pervert:

Thomas Athans, the husband of U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow and cofounder of a liberal talk radio network, told Troy police detectives that he paid a prostitute $150 for sex at a Troy hotel in late February, according to a police report obtained Wednesday by the Free Press under the Freedom of Information Act. Athans, 46, was not arrested or charged, but agreed to fully cooperate with police in their investigation of Internet-based prostitution at hotels in the city, according to the report.

Posted by: kingofzouk | April 2, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

i love the steady stream of great information here, but the comment about the importance of IN & NC this year leapt out at me.

hasn't the punditocracy christened just about every contest or group of contests--especially the Super Tuesday group--this year as decisive, in advance?

(ok, they left out WY and MI and a handful of others, but the bulk have been pre-ordained decisive, even game-changers.)

the continuing media insistence on decisiveness is particularly annoying now, though, since virtually everyone realizes it's essentially over. it's not COMPLETELY over--there could be a miracle--but the odds of that are remote.

we're now in the boring stage of watching the inevitable probably play out, with several unexpected twists ahead, which will liven things up for a day or a week, but probably won't affect the outcome.

PA will probably get the prize of proving that no matter how strongly PA comes out for a candidate, it's too late for PA to make a damn bit of difference.

IN and NC will be saddled with a lesser prize. (imagine a lesser prize. it boggles the mind.)

NC may get the last-straw prize, finally sewing it up for obama, and ratifying something that was essentially wrapped up more than a month ago.

how exciting for them.

but they may well have to watch that prize go to oregon, or wait for the whole damn thing to end with PR.

i'm having trouble picturing the states radically readjusting their thinking to fill those exciting shoes.

Posted by: cullendave | April 2, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Makes sense, if not the plan itself the concept, especially given the cost of campaigning in places like CA, NY, NJ. It will help put into reserves extra $$$ for winner and the party.

The Dems should look at the same model.

Posted by: rhinohide | April 2, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

well i love that they're moving in the right direction. but i see a few gaping problems.

i get the concession to the four early states. for political reasons, we may be stuck with that awhile. but isn't a major drawback of that the massive weight to small states? (in addition to massive weight to just those particular states.) so their solution is to give the second-biggest impact to all the other small states as well?

seems backwards to me.

Posted by: cullendave | April 2, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

I love it. It gives the little states the chance to give momentum while not letting the nomination become a done deal too early. (I still think we should rotate those early states as well.) I'm a Democrat and, on this one issue, I'd love my party to just agree with the Republican's plan and give us a nominating process that makes more sense.

Posted by: Sarcastrophe | April 2, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company