it looks like... Daimler-Benz lost a lot of money on them.

From the AP (via SF Chron) Region Strikes Over Pakistan Violence . Ostensibly this is an article about the citizens of Pakistan rebelling against our supported Dictator, President Gen. Pervez Musharraf's ouster of the chief justice. He fired an independent SC Cheif Justice because the guy wouldn't toe the dictators line and wanted a democratic Pakistan restored.

What worries me more is this part:

"In Karachi, where a weekend of violence linked to the dismissal of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry left 41 people dead and more than 150 injured, security forces now have authority to shoot rioters on sight. The unrest took an ominous ethnic turn on Sunday with clashes between Urdu-speaking Mohajirs linked to a pro-government party and Pashtuns, a rivalry that has caused bloodshed here in the past."

As I've seen in other blogs today, the question arises....What are we going to do if our thug goes down? What are we going to do if someone even less inclined to listen to the bush43 administration takes over? Remember, Pakistan already has nukes.

Tomorrow night, PBS is running a documentary which examines the numerous ways in which the government's domestic surveillance powers have been vastly expanded since 9/11. Most of that expansion has taken place in secret, with virtually no oversight of any kind, and has remained almost completely shielded from any public debate.

That's the first paragraph of Glenn Greenwalds post about this program. Just as compelling is this one:

"The real value in the program is to serve as a reminder for just how little we know about what our government is doing in spying on our domestic activities and communications and the data it is collecting....Every time -- literally, each and every time -- administration officials such as Alberto Gonzales answered questions about the scope and breadth of the warrantless NSA surveillance program (most prominently when Gonzales appeared before the Judiciary Committee once the NSA program was revealed), they very carefully qualified their answers by emphasizing that the information they were providing was confined to "the specific NSA program" which the President acknowledged in light of the New York Times story. Thus, when they were asked whether they were eavesdropping on purely domestic communications, or engaging in massive data mining and/or driftnets, or monitoring email communications or mail, administration officials would deny that such activities were part of the specific NSA warrantless eavesdropping program the President confirmed. They would not, however, deny in general that the administration is engaging in such activities, claiming that national security concerns prevented them from disclosing any information other than information about the specific "program which the President confirmed"

ABC News (via HuffPo) says Gingrich Says There Is a 'Great Possibility' He Will Run for President .

In his polite, demure and worldly ways he said he wasn't happy with the current contenders, comparing them to contestants on "American Idol."

"We're in this virtually irrational process," he said. "It's exactly wrong as a way of choosing a national leader."

I'll agree with Newt on that level. Right now it's worse than a Jr High popularity contest. I'd really prefer the English Model where you get 90 days, start to finish & not 2 or 4 years of puff pieces and imaginary "news".

On my level though, god I hope he runs. I will so look forward to dragging out each and every one of his adultery pecidillos that he'll think tarring & feathering will be much more to his liking.

TPM has an excerpt of Frank Rich Article on GOP Culture of Corruption

By my rough, conservative calculation -- feel free to add -- there have been corruption, incompetence, and contracting or cronyism scandals in these cabinet departments: Defense, Education, Justice, Interior, Homeland Security, Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services, and Housing and Urban Development. I am not counting State, whose deputy secretary, a champion of abstinence-based international AIDS funding, resigned last month in a prostitution scandal, or the General Services Administration, now being investigated for possibly steering federal favors to Republican Congressional candidates in 2006. Or the Office of Management and Budget, whose chief procurement officer was sentenced to prison in the Abramoff fallout. I will, however, toss in a figure that reveals the sheer depth of the overall malfeasance: no fewer than four inspectors general, the official watchdogs charged with investigating improprieties in each department, are themselves under investigation simultaneously -- an all-time record.

Wrongdoing of this magnitude does not happen by accident, but it is not necessarily instigated by a Watergate-style criminal conspiracy. When corruption is this pervasive, it can also be a byproduct of a governing philosophy. That's the case here. That Bush-Rove style of governance, the common denominator of all the administration scandals, is the Frankenstein creature that stalks the G.O.P. as it faces 2008. It has become the Republican brand and will remain so, even after this president goes, until courageous Republicans disown it and eradicate it.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

If conservatives want to improve GOP and their culture of corruption, I think nominating Guiliani is not the way to go which is bolstered with this article.
Guiliani also recommended Keric who was indicted for accepting bribes and who is his business partner. That speaks on how he will view corruption.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/12/AR200705...

And Mitt Romney is a phoney--who changes his stances depending on who the voters are.

McCain was wrong in attaching himself with George Bush--but I think he is an ethical man.

How come Huckabee is not gaining more favor--being a governor and a evangelist.