Religion Politics

Subscription Renewal Decade

Subscription Month, like the Presidential Election Cycle, may go on forever! I am waiting for you - YOU - to go to the Subscription Renewal Page and subscribe. And don't think for one second that I, like Santa, don't know who has been naughty and who has been nice.

Seriously, this is important and as we move into the sprint leading up to:

Iowa - Jan 3

Wyoming - Jan 5

New Hampshire - Jan 8

Michigan - Jan 15

South Carolina / Nevada - Jan 19

Hawaii - Jan 15

Florida - Jan 29

Über Tuesday - Feb 5

You are going to want to know the inside scoop.

Please take a minute now and go to the Subscription Renewal Page.

Thank you.

Rich

-----

From St. Petersburg, Florida

The GOP YouTube Debate

Religion has taken center stage in the GOP primary election.

It started the other day when former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee began running an ad in Iowa in which, according to reporter Ariel Alexovich writing in the NY Times, he says "Faith doesn't just influence me, it really defines me."

That raised some eyebrows, not because Huckabee claimed he was the Big Christian in the campaign, but because it was seen as a bank shot against Mitt Romney being the Big Mormon in the campaign.

Alexovich wrote that the ad was designed to set Huckabee

"apart from Republican rivals: Mitt Romney, a Mormon; Rudy Giuliani, a Catholic who is twice-divorced; and Fred Thompson, also a Christian conservative but one who is not campaigning as doggedly in the Hawkeye State."

Huckabee, running a very close second against Romney in Iowa, thus, was the first candidate to drop the Mormon Bomb on Mitt.

But that was just the start.

On Tuesday, a businessman, Mansoor Ijaz, who had attended a fundraiser for Romney in Las Vegas, wrote in the Christian Science Monitor that he had asked Romney whether he would consider having a Muslim in his cabinet.

Specifically, according to Ijaz, he had asked "whether he would consider including qualified Americans of the Islamic faith in his cabinet as advisers on national security matters …"

Romney, again, according to this single report, responded that "…based on the numbers of American Muslims [as a percentage] in our population, I cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified. But of course, I would imagine that Muslims could serve at lower levels of my administration."

Yikes! Romney appeared to be suggesting that positions in his cabinet would be based upon a formula: How many Americans are of the same faith of the person being considered. If there are enough people of that religion, then he or she gets the nomination. If not, it's a Junior, Deputy, Under-Assistant, Subordinate Secretary job for you, pal.

If percentage of the population is the test, and you're a Rosicrucian, the best will be able to hope for in a Romney administration will be being given a stick with a nail on the end, picking up used cardboard cups on the National Mall after the annual Independence Day celebration.

Sen. John McCain jumped on the Romney remark by saying:

"I think his comment is indicative of how he might govern, and I think it's absolutely wrong … to somehow exclude any group of Americans, in my view, is, well, it just is not the way to go."

Later in the day, Romney refined his answer and, according to CBSnews.com told reporters

"I'm open to having people of any faith and ethnic group but they would be selected based on their capacity and their capabilities and the values and skills that they could bring to the administration, but I don't choose people based on checking off a box."

Which appears to be the opposite of what he had said at that fundraiser in Las Vegas.

The matter of Mitt Romney's religion has been simmering just under the surface of this campaign for a year or more. With Huckabee's ad and Romney's reported comment, the notion of religion - especially the Mormon religion - in the Republican primary is now at a full boil.

Pray for a good seat. This is going to be very interesting to watch.

On the Secret Decoder Ring page today: Links to the Christian Science Monitor column, the CBSnews.com piece and a Wikipedia entry on Rosicrucians. Also a Mullfoto from Thanksgiving morning and a Catchy Caption of the Day.

The Australian Election

Subscription Renewal Decade

Subscription Month, like the Presidential Election Cycle, may go on forever! I am waiting for you - YOU - to go to the Subscription Renewal Page and subscribe. And don't think for one second that I, like Santa, don't know who has been naughty and who has been nice.

Seriously, this is important and as we move into the sprint leading up to:

Iowa - Jan 3

Wyoming - Jan 5

New Hampshire - Jan 8

Michigan - Jan 15

South Carolina / Nevada - Jan 19

Hawaii - Jan 15

Florida - Jan 29

Über Tuesday - Feb 5

You are going to want to know the inside scoop.

Please take a minute now and go to the Subscription Renewal Page.

Thank you.

Rich

-----

The big news over the weekend was that a guy named Kevin Rudd won the election to be the Prime Minister of Australia. Rudd is the leader of the Labor (Labour?) Party and beat the incumbent John Howard whose Conservative Party had been in power for nearly 12 years.

This was, of course, reported around the world as a defeat for … George Bush.

EVERYTHING is reported around the world as a defeat for … George Bush.

Rudd said he would do two things immediately:

1. Ratify the Kyoto Protocols on global warming; and,

2. Withdraw all of Australia's troops from Iraq.

Both were seen by some writers as "further isolating" … George Bush.

On the Kyoto front, let us remember that in 1997 the US Senate voted unanimously, 95-0, for a resolution introduced by Chuck Hagel (R-Neb) and Robert Byrd (D-WV) which stated that

"The United States should not be a signatory to [the Kyoto] protocol [because] the exemption for Developing Country Parties is inconsistent with the need for global action on climate change and is environmentally flawed …"

The "Developing Country Parties" in question were China and India which were specifically exempted from the requirements regarding pouring crap into the atmosphere.

If you've ever been to China or India and tried to breathe the air you would understand that neither country appears to be buying into the whole "Green is Great" marketing frenzy.

The treaty itself was never even submitted to the Senate for ratification by the President who, by the way was not … George Bush but was, in fact, Bill Clinton.

Regarding Rudd's pledge to end Australia's participation in Iraq, this from GulfNews.com on the plans of the new Prime Minister of Australia is concise and typical:

Kevin Rudd has pledged to withdraw Australia's combat troops from Iraq.

Know how many Aussies are in Iraq? Take a guess.

4,700? Nope.

2,850? Wrong-o.

1,117? Sorry, circle gets the square.

Here's the answer: 550 troops.

Just to give you some context, the standard configuration of the gigando jet designed by Airbus Industries - the A-380 - will carry about 550 passengers.

Rudd's big plan will have the effect of bringing about one planeload of soldiers home from Iraq, assuming they all fly coach.

That was the Big News because it was seen as a slap in the face of … George Bush.

Wait'll China starts patrolling the Pacific Ocean with its own warships. Old Kev (who speaks fluent Mandarin) will be taking up at least one first class A-380 seat coming to visit Your Nation's Capital asking for our help.

Meanwhile, buried in the back pages of the world's popular press was this from the International Herald Tribune (which is wholly owned by the NY Times):

Colonel David Sutherland of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division … said Saturday that all 5,000 of his troops would be gone by mid-December.

Wait. What? 5,000 US troops will be rotating home? Did you know that?

No, of course not. Why? Because it reflects well on … George Bush.

On the Secret Decoder Ring page today: Links to the IHT coverage of the US Troop rotation and to the text of the Byrd-Hagel resolution (which is not very long and is worthwhile reading if only to recite to the Liberal in the next cube); as well as a Mullfoto (which further examines the foolishness of the US media) and a Catchy Caption of the Day which … has no meaning whatsoever.

Thanksgiving 2007: Desitny's Child

This is a rewrite of the Thanksgiving MULLINGS first published in 2002.

Please, this weekend, take a moment and say a Prayer of Thanks for those brave Americans; not just in uniform, but also the civilians who are serving in far off places, away from their families, protecting us, while projecting America's values while enjoy our Thanksgiving dinners safe from fear, and from want, and protecting our freedoms of worship and of speech.

In 2003, I wrote the Thanksgiving column from Camp Victory just outside of Baghdad. Please take a look back at the Iraq Travelogue by clicking here: "Good Morning Mesopotamia"

Rich

It was the day before Thanksgiving and I was giving the Mullmobile it's quarterly treat: A professional car wash. At Andy's Car Wash in Alexandria, you drop your car off, then go inside to pay. A woman and a little girl - about three-and-a-half - were paying ahead of me.

It was a cold day, so the little girl was bundled up in the way little girls are on cold late-Autumn days.

Ignoring the advice of The Lad, ("Dad, just because you CAN talk to everybody in the world, doesn't mean you HAVE to talk to everybody in the world.") I asked the woman what little girl's name was.

"Destiny," she said, beaming. "She's my baby."

In the way of precocious little girls, Destiny asked me where my car was. I told her it was right behind her mom's.

Destiny looked up and me and asked me if my car was going to be a shiny as her mommy's.

I said I hoped so, and I asked her, in that patronizing way grownups talk to children, how shiny her mommy's car was going to be.

She thought about this, staring off toward the seafood store across the street with that look of deep concentration little girls assume when contemplating great concepts. Then she looked back up at me and said, "Rainbow Shiny."

The magnificence of that phrase took my breath away.

The problem with looking at the world through middle-aged eyes is we can no longer see things as being "Rainbow shiny." Even on those rare occasions where we see things as beautiful as a rainbow, we know from long - and often harsh - experience that rainbows are, like fame and glory, fleeting.

But for Destiny, everything in her world is decorated with the brilliant hues and gentle shadings contained within the infinite colors of her rainbow. Her entire future is decorated with vivid, shiny thoughts and dreams.

On Thanksgiving day, we should try - just for a few minutes - to look at our world though Destiny's eyes: Look at our world as "Rainbow Shiny."

Even though we know it won't last, we should enjoy Thanksgiving for this one day while we look around the table eating the wonderfully familiar meal, telling the well-told stories, to the same precious people, remembering fondly any who are missing from this year's gathering of friends and family.

As her mom was strapping her into her child seat, I caught Destiny's eye and pointed to her mom's clean car and, smiling and nodding, I blew her a kiss.

Destiny, in the way of little girls, hid her eyes and giggled.

This is another kiss to Destiny: Thank you for reminding a grown-up that if we look at our world with the simple trust of child we, too, can see it as "Rainbow Shiny."

That little girl is destiny's child. All children are.

Happy Thanksgiving.

On the Secret Decoder Ring today: All four of the "Freedom" paintings by Norman Rockwell. Note the dates these were published in the Saturday Evening Post: World War II had been dragging on in Europe and Asia for nearly four years and we were still more than a year away from D-Day.

Dems Eating Dems - Life is Good

Subscription Renewal Month Tick … Tick … Tick

November is MULLINGS Subscription Renewal Month.

I know it seems as if Renewal Month has been going on for about a year and a half, but it is only two weeks in. If you just take a second now and go to the Subscription Renewal Page you can skip this three-day-a-week appeal for money and go right to the grist of the mill.

If not, I will continue to torment you with these Oliver Twistonian "Please, sir, I want more" pleas and you will feel vaguely guilty for the rest of the day for not having done it.

Come on. Get with the program. Click on this link to the Subscription Renewal Page.

Thank you.

-----

It all stated over the weekend when Bob Novak's Sunday column began with the following:

Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the party's presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, but has decided not to use it. The nature of the alleged scandal was not disclosed.

Yikes! This is the best of all worlds. A major, major columnist alleging skullduggery by the campaign of Hillary Clinton having unearthed (but holding onto) double secret, but way scandalous, info against Barack Obama.

The Obama campaign responded the Novak report was "devoid of any facts, but heavy on innuendo and insinuation" and called on the Clinton campaign to affirmatively deny that any such info existed.

Reuters reported:

The Clinton campaign denied the accusation, saying Obama's reaction to the vaguely worded column by Robert Novak played into Republican hands and showed the Illinois senator's lack of political savvy.

But, Obama suggested that was a pretty lame denial in a press conference on Saturday when he said:

Look, the Clinton campaign didn't come out and deny it initially … Sen. Clinton's campaign, after three iterations of it, said they do not engage in these practices and they don't have any information that is scandalous, as was referred to in the Novak column.

Taking that "three iterations" business as the shot that it was, the Clinton campaign responded:

"Senator Obama knows that our campaign responded instantly with
a clear denial. Senator Obama is manufacturing an issue to distract voters
from a disastrous debate performance that revealed that his health care plan
doesn't cover every American."

Oh, yes. That would be it. The old Health Care Coverage Dodge was at play here.

Here's what's really at play. As we discussed here last week Hillary, Barack and John (Edwards - but John is such a pedestrian first name in a campaign which includes, in addition to the afore mentioned Hillary and Barack, a Willard, a Dennis, a Rudolph, a Duncan, and a Freddie) are now tied in the polling running up to the Iowa caucuses to be held on January 3, 2008.

Hillary and Obama have raised enormous amounts of money and it appears Clinton has spent more than Obama has.

One of the worst things which can happen in politics is to have lost a close election only to find there was a lot of money left in the bank.

Obama understands he needs to beat expectations in Iowa or the only thing standing between Hillary and the nomination will be Bert Parks singing "Here she is, Ms. America."

It is not outside the realm of possibility that it was anti-Hillary forces within the Democratic party which have been spreading gossip about Obama with the specific purpose of putting the Clinton campaign on the defensive.

Just as it is possible that allies of the Romney campaign have been making those anti-Mormon push-poll phone calls in Iowa and New Hampshire specifically to create this syllogism:

-- A push-poll speaking ill of Mormons is a bad thing.

-- Mitt Romney is a Mormon.

-- Ergo, speaking ill of Mitt Romney is a bad thing.

Politics at this level is not for the faint of heart.

Let's get back to the Democrats eating their own: Last week, after a dreadful debate performance, Hillary's campaign allowed as how it was all those mean boys ganging up on the only girl.

To my finely tuned ear for conspiracy, it appears that Obama campaign is tacitly alleging the White Clintons are spreading rumors about the only Black candidate in the campaign, thus feeding into the worst of any remaining racial biases in American politics.

Robert Novak is known to have been incorrect in his analysis of the facts before him; but no one in this town has ever shown him to have invented an item.

Someone fed Novak that business about the Clintons having dirt on Obama. Novak has proven he won't give up a source, but it bears public discussion as to which campaign is helped and which is hurt by such blind allegations.

And you thought a thirty-second negative ad was the worst the system had to offer.

On the Secret Decoder Ring page today: Links to the Novak column and a report of an Obama presser discussing the whole thing, as well as the Bert Parks reference. . Also a RARE Mullfoto and a Catchy Caption of the Day.

FISA Football

Subscription Renewal Month Continues

November is MULLINGS Subscription Renewal Month.

It is going very well. Very well indeed. But I need everyone - this includes you - to pitch in. MULLINGS gives you info, opinion, and occasionally humor three times a week.

Please take a moment and go to the Subscription Renewal Page.

-----

From Arlington, VA

Atlanta, GA

Kansas City, MO

Atlanta, GA

Pensacola, FL

It was that kind of a day

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act - FISA - is set to expire early next year and the Democrats in Congress are feverishly looking for ways to weaken it to try and score political points among its MoveOn.org wing.

FISA was first adopted in 1978 and was updated as part of the Patriot Act of 2001. It was originally passed as a reaction to the misuse of intelligence services during the whole Watergate business.

According to a 2003 US Navy Memo

FISA is the statute which authorizes federal agents to conduct electronic surveillance, as part of a foreign intelligence or counterintelligence investigation, without obtaining a traditional, probable-cause search warrant.

The major change in FISA following the 9/11 attacks, again according the Navy memo, is called "roving authority."

Prior to the amendment, the law required the FISA court to specify the location of the surveillance and to name any third parties whose cooperation would be required, such as a telephone company or an internet service provider. If the target of the surveillance changed telephone companies, the government would have to return to the FISA court and request a supplemental order naming the new third party.

With the change, the FISA court can now issue a generic order that can be served on any third party needed to assist with the surveillance.

It is that "third party" issue which was at the heart of Senate Judiciary Committee action yesterday. On two separate votes, the panel first voted to grant immunity from law suits to "third parties" such as telephone, cable, and other common carriers which provide data to the government. Then the Committee voted NOT to grant such immunity.

They were for it before they were against it.

If you are on the fence about whether phone companies should be able to provide traffic info to the government, consider the following which was issued after the second vote:

"We are ecstatic that the Democrats were able to strip this measure out of the Judiciary Bill."

That was issued by the American Civil Liberties Union. Here's a pretty good rule of thumb: Anything which makes the ACLU "ecstatic" when it comes to dealing with terrorists needs to be examined very, very carefully.

The House, meanwhile, went ahead and passed a version of the bill which does not provide immunity to phone companies which means phone companies won't comply with requests from intelligence services to provide information on phone calls made to and from suspected terrorists outside the United States.

Good idea, huh?

More importantly, the House version stripped a provision which it passed only this past August which, according to Reuters

Authorized the National Security Agency to intercept without a court order communications between people in the United States and foreign targets overseas.

The bill adopted last night requires the government to get FISA Court authority to intercept communications from terrorists who might be plotting with a sleeper cell in the US.

It also forbids one agency from sharing intel with another agency if it comes across potential terrorist activity "inadvertently."

Good ideas, huh?

The President will veto a bill with the provisions the Democrats adopted yesterday. There will be another face-down in February, the President will win because the Democrats - having given MoveOn and the ACLU all the ammunition they need to fund raise from hard-core Liberals - will put aside political ambition and vote to protect America.

That would be a good idea.

On the Secret Decoder Ring page today: Links to the Associated Press and Reuters coverage of yesterday's Congressional action and a link to that US Navy memo which is a pretty good primer on the whole FISA issue. Also a Mullfoto and a Catchy Caption of the Day.

Fit to be Tied in Iowa

Subscription Renewal is STILL Going On!

November is MULLINGS Subscription Renewal Month.

You would think that with the Federal government spending $1.3 Ga-jillion dollars on all sorts of things, that one Member of the House or Senate would see fit to insert an EARMARK into an Appropriations Bill saying approximately the following:

The General Services Administration (GSA) is directed to purchase a subscription to MULLINGS for every civilian employee of the Federal Government a the bargain-basement prices of $30 per employee.

But, nooooooo.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics there are just under 2 million civilian federal employees (not including the Postal Service). That one teenie tiny EARMARK would let the rest of you off the hook until the year 2527 when, one assumes, Zager and Evans would pick up the slack.

Seriously, please take a moment and go to the Subscription Renewal Page while I decide what I'm going to write about. You won't miss a thing, but you will help keep MULLINGS strong and independent.

-----

From Myrtle Beach, South Carolina

The news hit the political world with the force of a category V hurricane pushing a world-class tsunami: The CBS/New York Times poll to be released at 6:30 last night would show a virtual three-way tie between Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards in Iowa.

Clinton - 25

Edwards - 23

Obama - 22

According to the later reporting, the margin of error in this poll was plus or minus four percentage points meaning Obama might be leading and Clinton might be in third.

The Iowa caucuses will be held on January 3, 2008. These are precinct caucuses. That is to say, you go to the elementary school gym, or the fire station in your precinct and you vote for the person you think would be the best nominee for your party.

You do this in the dead of night in the dead of winter when you could otherwise be hanging out at your precinct bar discussing the potential outcomes of the first weekend of the NFL playoff games.

Everyone knows the Howard Dean story from the 2004 Iowa caucuses. Leading in the polls. Leading in fundraising. Leading in media attention. Dean got the endorsement of former Vice President (and future Nobel Laureate) Al Gore in mid-December.

On January 19, Dean came in a distant third with 18% of the caucus vote behind winner John Kerry (38%) and John Edwards (32%). Dick Gephardt, who finished fourth, dropped out of the race.

This was CNN's take:

The finish would have shocked pundits less than a week ago, when Dean, former governor of Vermont, was leading the polls, just ahead of Gephardt, a congressman from neighboring Missouri.

This, remember, is not mid-January nor mid-December. It is mid-November.

Nevertheless, the notion of Hillary being tied with her two principal opponents this far out cannot be spun as good news especially on the heels of an uncharacteristically bad couple of weeks in Hillary-land.

The problems started with the most recent debate in which Clinton was for, against, for and then against giving drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants in New York.

That led to very grave chin-scratching articles about whether her inability to clearly articulate an answer on almost any question - from what to do about Social Security to whether it is day or night - would cost her support.

That was followed, just a few days ago, with a story that the Clinton campaign had gotten caught planting questions in the audience of "town-hall" type appearances which her opponents jumped on with every available foot.

Prior to this was the ugly story of a west-coast crook who had bundled some $800,000 worth of donations for the Clinton campaign only to have it come to light he had been on the lam from a felony rap and the campaign had to give back the money.

Nationally, Hillary still holds a lead averaging over 20 percentage points over Barack Obama. But "Nationally" ain't votin' on January third. And if Clinton does not win on January 3rd then the next round - New Hampshire on … who knows … is up for grabs.

Believe it or not, the New Hampshire Secretary of State in whom the power to decide the date of the 2008 Presidential primary has yet to make up his mind, although the heavy betting is on January 8 - five days after the Iowa Caucuses.

The reason this is important is because under New Hampshire law, voters who are registered as Independents can vote in either the GOP or the Democratic primary.

In 2000, a huge percentage of Independents voted in the Republican primary and a huge percentage of those who did voted for John McCain.

A favorite parlor game in Washington, DC these days is trying to sound smart while explaining why Independents will (or will not) gravitate to one primary or the other.

It is safe to assume, however, that if Obama or Edwards (or Obama AND Edwards) upset Clinton in Iowa there will be an avalanche of Independent voters in New Hampshire participating in the Democratic primary - whenever it is held.

As Bette Davis once famously observed: "Fasten your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy night."

On the Secret Decoder Ring page today: Links to the CBS/NY Times poll, and CNN's coverage of the 2004 Iowa Caucus results as well as the Bette Davis line. Also a Mullfoto from South Carolina and a Catchy Caption of the Day.

Ask Me No Questions ...

Subscription Renewal is STILL Going On!

November is MULLINGS Subscription Renewal Month.

You would think that with the Federal government spending $1.3 Ga-jillion dollars on all sorts of things, that one Member of the House or Senate would see fit to insert an EARMARK into an Appropriations Bill saying approximately the following:

The General Services Administration (GSA) is directed to purchase a subscription to MULLINGS for every civilian employee of the Federal Government a the bargain-basement prices of $30 per employee.

But, nooooooo.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics there are just under 2 million civilian federal employees (not including the Postal Service). That one teenie tiny EARMARK would let the rest of you off the hook until the year 2527 when, one assumes, Zager and Evans would pick up the slack.

Seriously, please take a moment and go to the Subscription Renewal Page while I decide what I'm going to write about. You won't miss a thing, but you will help keep MULLINGS strong and independent.

-----

From Ottumwa, Iowa

(Home of Walter O'Reilly)

One of the staples of campaigning in the "early states" is the tradition of candidates delivering remarks, and then taking questions from the audience.

In Newton, Iowa, the other day. Senator Hillary Clinton was doing just that. She made her remarks at a biodiesel plant and then asked for questions.

She called on a student from Grinnell University who asked her about global warming. Clinton warming to the subject, launched into her standard I'm-Greener-Than-Al-Gore riff.

---

A D V E R T I S E M E N T


Focus On Results! From product promotions to
e-newsletters, your message will be right on target
with email services from Focus Data Solutions.

For more information, visit us online at www.focusdatasolutions.com or call

703-836-0080.

Focus Data Solutions

---

Trouble is, the student reported to her university newspaper that a Clinton staffer had provided her with the question and then placed her in a position where Mrs. Clinton was likely to call on her.

Which, I'm surprised to report, Clinton did.

The Clinton campaign said "It's not a practice of our campaign to ask people to ask specific questions," which is a standard Clintonian non-denial-denial.

Later, of course, the campaign had to 'fess up because the Grinnell student had spilled the beans.

Fox News' Major Garrett called upon the John Edwards campaign to get its reaction to Plant-Gate. Edwards' communications director said:

"In light of a weak debate performance, not to mention a persistent inability to answer the tough questions, it appears the Clinton campaign has adopted a new strategy of planting questions.

"It's what the Clinton campaign calls the politics of planting."

Which is a pretty good line.

---

A D V E R T I S E M E N T


eDonation.com

eDonation.com: The industry leader in online fundraising.

The political leader in Internet deployment.

e-Donation.com

---

To show how closely Iowans pay attention to this stuff, it was mentioned at both campaign stops last night. A man prefaced a question about education policy by saying the Thompson campaign had not planted it. And at the second stop, the woman who acted as MC asked for "non-planted questions" at the appropriate point in the program.

Hearty laughs all around.

SIDEBAR

The other day I was did a segment on the Fox radio program "Brian and the Judge." I was asked why I thought professional conservative Paul Weyrich had endorsed Rudy Giuliani.

I paused and said, "Global Warming."

Hearty laughs all around.

END SIDEBAR

While candidates planting their own questions with their own questioners is looked down upon, we had an occasion last week in New Hampshire when a questioner pointed out that Fred Thompson had once been a lobbyist and asked if he was still registered as a lobbyist in Washington, DC.

Thompson responded, "No one's offered me any work in that area, so the answer is no."

Then last night another plant, reading from a piece of paper, said that he was going to join the Peace Corps after college and wanted to know Thompson's position on AIDS in Africa.

Thompson answered and then thanked the student for his "spontaneous question."

Hearty laughs all around.

60 Years of Meet the Press

Subscription Renewal Month

November is MULLINGS Subscription Renewal Month. Please take a moment and go to the Subscription Renewal Page while I decide what I'm going to write about. You won't miss a thing, but you will help keep MULLINGS strong and independent.

-----

From Manchester, New Hampshire

[NOTE: Most of you know this, but it bears repeating that I am a paid consultant to the campaign of Fred Thompson.]

Dear Mr. Mullings:

Is the entire column today going to be a series of prefaces, publisher's notes, prologues, forewords, preambles and introductions? Or is there going to be some actual copy which we can read with our morning coffee?

Signed,

The "Make Mine Decaf" Club of Alexandria, VA

I wanted to give you plenty of time to hit the Subscription Renewal Page. But here it comes now.

Hot on the heels of his moderating the Democratic debate, last week, Tim Russert sat in his familiar chair yesterday to host "Meet the Press."

"Meet," as those of us who pretend to be Washington insiders, like to call it, is broadcast live at 9 AM in many markets, and taped at that same time for rebroadcast elsewhere - Washington being an example where it is shown at 10:30 on Sunday mornings.

I only raise that because yesterday Russert opened his show at 8 AM instead of 9 AM due to the New York City Marathon which Channel 4 in New York wanted to carry live.

Russert, whom a Hillary supporter suggested "should be shot" (obviously a one-person 2nd Amendment - Hillary Clinton Subgroup) on a conference call following the debate, happens to be a decent guy who came from a working-class background in Buffalo, New York.

Thompson was the guest on Meet yesterday - the first of the "top tier" GOP candidates to march into the lion's den.

Because I am trying to win the "Staffer of the Month" award on the Thompson campaign, I was at the studio at about seven-thirty, having first stopped at Starbucks to pick up my regular no-fat, no-whip, Grande Mocha with one Splenda.

Unlike the regular news programs on which I am invited, the Sunday shows have actual food available for their guests. In the Green Room at the NBC studios in Washington yesterday, there were platters of bagels, smoked salmon (known as lox to those who were standing on the curb to watch the New York City Marathon in person), and fruit plus assorted pastries, juices and hot beverage selections.

At about 7:40 Tom Brokaw came into the Green Room. He has a new book about to be published titled, "Boom!" about the 60's generation. If he follows the pattern of his fabulously popular "Greatest Generation" series there will be "Letters to Boom!," "Boom!'s Favorite Recipes," "Children of Boom!" and so on.

Thompson came in about five minutes later and they chatted about this 'n that for a few minutes in between sessions in the make-up chair.

At about five minutes to eight we were walked to the Meet the Press set and instructed to turn off all cell phones and pagers which I did. But I didn't turn off my camera so I could take a photo of Thompson and Russert on the set just before the show began which you can see on the Secret Decoder Ring Page.

Thompson, unlike most of the Meet guests had nearly the entire show to himself - other than the Brokaw segment and a short piece on Meet the Press in years gone by. The show first went on the air on November 6, 1947 and so is celebrating its 60th anniversary which Russert said "makes it the longest running show in the history of television."

Another fact about Meet which I didn't know is this: Russert is the ninth permanent host and, as he has held that post for the past 14 years, he is the longest-serving person in that role.

I think this is a true story: Russert told me once that when he had been tapped to take over the show, he went to its previous host (and long-time producer) Lawrence Spivak and asked how he should do it.

If I have the story correct, Spivak said to Russert: You're trained as a lawyer not as a journalist. Use your skills. Listen to what your guest says and - don't argue with him - but take the opposite view and make him defend it.

For the past 14 years, that is what Tim Russert has done.

And that's what he did yesterday with Fred Thompson. It was a civilized hour of television at an uncivilized hour on a Sunday morning exactly one year before election day, November 4, 2008.

On the Secret Decoder Ring page today: Links to the MSNBC Meet the Press History page, and the transcript of yesterday's program; plus a Mullfoto of Tim and Fred on the set, a link to the Subscription Renewal Page and a Catchy Caption of the Day.

Hillary: America's Victim

Subscription Renewal Month

Before we start deconstructing Hillary, I would like to remind you that November is MULLINGS Subscription Renewal Month. Please take a moment and go to the Subscription Renewal Page and help keep MULLINGS strong and independent.

-----

Hillary Clinton, according to the reporting of the NY Times' Adam Nagourney,

came under withering attack from the rest of the Democratic presidential field last night in a pitched two-hour debate that her opponents used to challenge her candor and electability and to portray her as enabling President Bush to prepare for an invasion of Iran.

The central point of the debate was Hillary's refusal to answer Tim Russert's question about whether or not she supported NY Governor Elliot Spitzer's plan to issue driver's licenses to illegal - that's ILLEGAL - aliens.

According to New York's Newsday newspaper:

At the debate, Clinton appeared to both endorse and oppose Gov. Eliot Spitzer's controversial plan to give driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants.

According to the Fox News website, after all the candidates were asked if they supported Spitzer's plan,

only Sen. Christopher Dodd said he disagreed. He then pressed Clinton on the issue and argued against the plan, saying: "A license is a privilege, and that ought not to be extended, in my view."

Clinton responded: "Well, I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Governor Spitzer is trying to do."

Dodd then quickly interrupted Clinton before she could finish, seizing on the apparent discrepancy. Moderator Tim Russert then tried to elicit an answer on whether she supported the plan or not, but she avoided offering specific support for the plan.

On Wednesday, according to Newsday, "the campaign issued an unusual clarification, saying she now supports the plan's concept without commenting on specifics."

But that's not all. What the campaign did was to claim that the seven male candidates (plus moderator Tim Russert) had ganged up on Hillary thus claiming that she was - once again - a female being victimized by the men in her life.

This was a very successful tactic when she ran against Rick Lazio in her first election for US Senate in 2000.

This will not be so successful in 2008 running for President. In fact, the Clinton campaign has placed itself squarely in a political box which may have long range effects.

Americans may be perfectly happy to have a female President, but they probably do not want a female President who is going to be shattered by being put upon by men.

Especially if the men she is being shattered by happen to run countries like Iran and Cuba and North Korea and China.

The Clinton campaign understands the damage which was done to her during the debate. They held a conference call with fundraisers, a breakfast with other supporters, and put out statements in an effort, according to The Hill newspaper to "apparently to stop whatever bleeding the senator might have sustained during a debate in which Clinton wore a bull's-eye on her back throughout the evening."

Over the past few months, Hillary Clinton has built a 20+ percentage point lead over her nearest rival Barack Obama and a 30 point lead over John Edwards.

For his part, according to the MSNBC website, Obama is trying to have it both ways as well as

Advisers to Obama told NBC News that Obama reviewed tapes of Bill Clinton's debate performances in his victorious 1992 campaign for clues to how to ratchet up his attacks on [Hillary Clinton] without sacrificing his likeability.

Maybe he deserves to be stuck at 20% in the national polls.

The Iowa Caucuses will be held on January 3, meaning we are only eight weeks away and Hillary's rivals have a make a move and make a move quickly.

Hillary gave them the opening they have been looking for when she stumbled, mumbled and then crumbled during the debate.

The Clinton campaign is going to have to decide - and quickly - whether they want to present her as a strong person, or a victimized woman.

Like Hillary's debate answers, they can't have it both ways.

On the Secret Decoder Ring page today: Links to most of the articles referenced above, plus a Mullfoto of The Lad, a link to the SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL PAGE and a Catchy Caption of the Day.