Capitol - Your Illinois News Radar » “Beleaguered. Humiliated. Frightened. Ashamed.”
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      Mobile Version     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
“Beleaguered. Humiliated. Frightened. Ashamed.”

Wednesday, Jun 10, 2015

* He may yet beat these federal charges, or get them reduced. But Denny Hastert had better get used to feeling what this portrait shows because he’s now a pariah everywhere he goes and, barring a miraculously effective alibi, will forever remain so

* Mark Brown

A seething mass of news people swarmed the former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives on his way in and out of the Dirksen Federal Building like piranha drawn to a crippled calf.

Gawkers and protesters vied on the sidewalk for a mere peek at his hunched frame as he made his first court appearance since being charged in a federal indictment.

Inside the courthouse, Hastert found no respite either. Although the news media was kept at a more respectful distance, the eyes of an entire courtroom seemed to sear into his flesh as he squirmed self-consciously under the attention.

How would I describe Hastert?

Beleaguered. Humiliated. Frightened. Ashamed.

He should be all of that and more.

* Tribune

Hunched and tight-lipped, he was ushered into the elevator, ignoring shouted questions. There will be a lot of that in the months ahead, if the plan is to go to trial. But Hastert already looks like he’s doing time.

- Posted by Rich Miller        

  1. - Anonin' - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:05 am:

    Without excusin’ any perversion or associated wrong doin’ these scenes helped build the reputation of the USA and DOJ for bein’ fair and balanced and way above tamperin’ with the jury pool ( cue: start hummin’ proud to be an American)

  2. - Stones - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:08 am:

    Hastert’s appearance certainly showed that this is taking it’s toll.

  3. - Federalist - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:09 am:

    If I were wrongly accused, I would be furious and fighting back with everything. Calling people out, etc.

    I know people are different, but one would think that after many years in the public arena he would go after every accuser- if he is innocent.

  4. - A guy - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:09 am:

    While I almost never agree with Mark Brown, he’s long time associate and pal, and this essay is thoughtful and spot on. It’s not that anyone doesn’t have anything to say or think about this, but for the first time in my memory, people don’t want to even talk about it much.

    That’s how deeply disappointed people are. Because it’s him (Hastert) or we’ve reached a point of saturation? I’m not sure. A sad and disappointing spectacle this is though, that’s for sure. It’s just plain ugly.

  5. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:10 am:

    Bingo, Fed. As for the heading: Good

  6. - Objectivist - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:11 am:

    [This commenter has been banned for life.]

  7. - TheRealWorld - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:12 am:

    The consequences of the not guilty plea will be as heavy as the monkey he carried on his back for forty years. I don’ wish anybody that regardless of the crime.

  8. - VanillaMan - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:13 am:

    He knew these days would come. That’s why he paid millions to blackmailers to avoid it.

  9. - x ace - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:13 am:

    Yep, Federalist , fight back like the “wrongfully accused” Blagovich.

  10. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:17 am:

    ===or all we know, Individual A was eighteen at the time===


    Yeah. $3.5 million for a consensual affair with an adult.


    If it helps you sleep at night, fine. But don’t post that here.

  11. - Aldyth - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:19 am:

    There are no winners here. Only sadness for everyone involved for what it has done to their lives.

  12. - 47th Ward - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:19 am:

    I hope his friends and family keep a close eye on him. A man facing this predicament might be tempted to try to find a permanent way out of his troubles. I would hate to see that happen.

  13. - phocion - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:22 am:

    Folks, he is being accused of structuring withdrawals and lying to the FBI. He is not on trial for his alleged “misconduct.” That is not to excuse it if he did those dastardly deeds. But this whole spectacle is a troubling display of federal power at its worst. It’s not clear that this isn’t a politically inspired ploy designed to humiliate. Payback for politically inspired prosecutions by the Republicans when they held power? A cautionary tale to sex offenders that they’ll pay even if the statute of limitations expires? A hat tip to extortionists that they can use the feds to achieve their objectives? Maybe I’m just a contrarian, but this seems to reek for a variety of reasons.

  14. - Amalia - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:24 am:

    Frightened and humiliated in ways that cannot possibly compare with those whom he allegedly wronged. I feel deeply sorry for the sister of the former Hastert student—right hand man— who died. what a sadness to have a family situation like that and to feel powerless for so many years to call into public shame the man who hurt her brother!

  15. - Mouthy - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:25 am:

    I’ve seen this movie before. Apparently the coach had a Mr. Hyde in him. I’ve seen enough. The movie never ends well…

  16. - Federalist - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:26 am:

    - x ace - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:13 am:

    Yep, Federalist , fight back like the “wrongfully accused” Blagovich.

    I said what I would do if I were innocent. I am NOT Blago so your comment is irrelevant and misses any point!

  17. - Snucka - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:28 am:


    So you’re saying the Jews are out to get Denny? LOL.

  18. - Wordslinger - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:32 am:

    He’s not going to trial.

    There’s a paper trail for every withdrawal. If he didnt give it away, where’s the cash? They have him dead to rights on the money and lying about the money charges.

    I imagine the federales wouldn’t let him cop without a perp walk, at least. The fight now will be over what else he has to cop to outside the scope of the indictment to get his plea deal.

  19. - gg - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:33 am:

    I agree with phocion.

    This is National Enquirer Justice.

    If it bleeds, it leads.

    This will physically kill Hastert.

    I refuse to applaud.

  20. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:35 am:

    Snucka, thanks for that. I didn’t realize what he was saying.

    The racist has been banned for life.

  21. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:37 am:

    “There are no winners here’. Bull. Let’s start with journalists and some lawyers

  22. - walker - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:43 am:

    ==Payback for politically inspired prosecutions by the Republicans when they held power?==

    I dislike the Fed prosecutorial processes as much as anyone, but it’s foolish to think they don’t go both ways, regardless of who’s in the White House.

  23. - Robert the Bruce - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:49 am:

    ==But this whole spectacle is a troubling display of federal power at its worst.==
    There may be tens of thousands of tax cheats that did similar financial crimes with a slap on the wrist, but I don’t mind the feds going after this one.

  24. - OneMan - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:53 am:

    Was struck by how much he had aged.

  25. - IrishPirate - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:54 am:

    There are some nutty comments here.

    The federal prosecutor’s motivation is simple. Structuring withdrawals like that is a crime. Whether it should be is another question. The feds even go after people who do that with no underlying criminal intent or with nothing they’re trying to hide. There was a case in Indiana where feds charged and took away the house of a Russian immigrant who was taking money out of her Citibank account in big chunks because Citibank in Russia wouldn’t release the money in a lump sum because of a name change.

    Read that and the Judge’s comment on “inspector Javert” justice in the piece. Sometimes the feds charge simply because they can. Our current US Attorney has shown himself to be more sane and compassionate than his predecessor Patrick The Righteous. It’s a low standard.

    Now am I disturbed that the feds are going after Hastert over the money withdrawal aspect of this? Yes, I am. I think the law needs to be changed to limit its scope.

    That doesn’t mean that I don’t think Coach/Speaker Hastert is not sitting at the station as the 45 year old Karma Train pulls up to him because of his past. I’m not generally the “ends justifies the means” guy and I’m disturbed at the federal use of the law here, but Hastert clearly brought this on himself.

    I wish none of this dating back 45 years happened.

  26. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:54 am:

    ===Payback for politically inspired prosecutions by the Republicans when they held power? ===

    You mean the prosecution of a Republican governor under a Republican president? Or the prosecution of a Democratic governor under a Democratic president?

    Don’t be daft.

  27. - Wensicia - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:55 am:

    He chose to lie to the feds; that’s why he got the perp walk.

  28. - Wordslinger - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:55 am:

    It occurs to me that in negotiations with the federales, Hastert holds the ultimate hole card of just pleading guilty to the charges in the indictment before trial and taking his chances with the judge at sentencing.

    I wouldn’t want to be that judge.

    Are you going to throw an old man of his stature with no criminal record in prison on those Mickey-Mouse banking charges?

    How could a judge possibly consider in sentencing the published anonymous or third-party allegations of sexual abuse of minors, when no evidence of such has been entered into the proceedings, much less subjected to cross-examination?

    That’s a powerful card, as I imagine the federales want some admission of sexual abuse to justify their years-long pursuit of relatively minor banking charges.

  29. - Streator Curmudgeon - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 11:59 am:

    This still doesn’t answer the question why the person extorting the money from Hastert hasn’t been charged with a crime.

    Even if the Feds made a deal with Individual A, does that negate the possibility of a state of Illinois prosecution? Why would the Feds have the authority to do that?

    When I think about the true victims in this case, I can’t generate much sympathy for Dennis Hastert now.

  30. - Wordslinger - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 12:05 pm:

    – people don’t even walk to talk about it much–

    I guess that explains the international press coverage and the 1,614 news article links on google.

    You have no problem saying the craziest things.

  31. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 12:16 pm:

    There are absolutely winners in this. Justice, for one.a rule of law, for another. Sex offenders thrive under the cloud of secrecy their actions cause. The shame of going forward with allegations, the fear that your family and friends might not believe you, or worse, choose to side with the perpetrator.

    Hastert, if guilty, deserves everything coming to him. The alleged victims would be the ones deserving of sympathy- not the perpetrator.

  32. - A guy - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 12:16 pm:

    Sling, the media is always willing to talk about anything. I was talking about regular folks. That explains why you didn’t pick up on it. You’re super duper.

    There’s queasy feeling about this one.

  33. - Amalia - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 12:17 pm:

    the charges are simple compared to what he has allegedly done in the long ago past. but that may be the point. the statute of limitations is long gone on the sexual abuse charges. but these relatively simple ones connected to crimes past charging time at least make him pay for his acts.

  34. - Tommydanger - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 12:23 pm:

    All the kings horses and all the king’s men could not put Humpty Hastert back together again.

  35. - Fred - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 12:25 pm:

    At least he can save money by not having to make the blackmail payments.

  36. - pundent - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 12:29 pm:

    Streator Curmudgeon - How do you know that “Individual A” hasn’t been charged with a crime? Further, it’s not outside the realm of possibility that Hastert wasn’t being extorted. For all we know he could have very well offered up payment voluntarily.

  37. - Waldi1 - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 12:41 pm:

    What is really sad is that there was a way he could have legally made these payoffs if he had hired the right attorney. Maybe I’m naïve, but that just doesn’t seem right.

  38. - 60611 - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 12:53 pm:

    pundet @12:29: I agree that extortion is not a given based on what we know. Hastert could have been paying the amounts as “settlement” of a potential lawsuit. People settle threatened lawsuits all the time without that being extortion. Of course, who knows what was going on here.

  39. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 12:58 pm:

    Feel sorry or sympathy for another disgraced pol, who made millions off of government service. Not from me.

  40. - Kerfuffle - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 1:03 pm:

    === But Hastert already looks like he’s doing time === I think he is probably doing the most difficult time right now, even though he has not been convicted. His worse fears have been realized now that this is all public and not knowing what will happen next has got to be weighing heavily upon him.

  41. - Team Sleep - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 1:16 pm:

    I find it odd that the payouts didn’t start until well after Speaker Hastert was out of Congress - and making a much healthier salary/living. Hmm.

  42. - Ginhouse Tommy - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 1:20 pm:

    The title of this piece describes how his victims must have felt.

  43. - Weltschmerz - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 1:27 pm:

    Nothing that happens to him is bad enough for a person who abuses a child. Side note - Anyone else see his son on the news last night;; former lobbyist?

  44. - Austin Blvd - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 1:28 pm:

    This thing has had to turn his world upside down. How do you explain this to your family?
    I did it but now I’m reformed?
    I didn’t do it. It’s just politics?
    Imagine what his family must be going through.

  45. - burbanite - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 1:43 pm:

    There should be no statute of limitations on child abuse. If the Feds are charging him with this b/c the statute ran so they couldn’t charge him with the abuse, I am ok with that.

  46. - Wordslinger - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 1:43 pm:

    Guy, you’re under the delusion that whatever goofy thing pops into your head is a universal truth.

    The “regular folk” here seem to be talking about it. I’m pretty confident that there is some sort of relationship between the amount of media coverage and public interest.

  47. - West Sider - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 1:49 pm:

    I have no idea who Dennis Hastert is. And neither do any of us, because, Hastert has had to hide obfuscate, or politically triangulate for the whole of his teaching, and political life.
    Mark Foley and abuse in the House sure- all of that, but think about this in the larger context. The Speaker is constitutionally third in the Presidential line of succession. And his whole life was consumed with keeping a personal secret. Yikes

  48. - Under Further Review - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 1:49 pm:

    The problem is that the unnamed misconduct is all speculative.

    If Hastert engaged in acts with a student from the school where he served as a coach and a teacher, it is one thing.

    If it was consensual matter and he wound up paying blackmail, it may be a different case, but he still may have violated banking laws in structuring the withdrawals.

    I never especially liked Hastert because he seemed to be another go along, get along politician. I do wonder if some of those who are up in arms right now were similarly outraged when Congressmen Frank and Studds were accused of inappropriate behavior.

  49. - plutocrat03 - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 2:06 pm:

    All the speculation about what Hastert did 50 years ago is an allegation. He will never be adjudicated in a court of law for those crimes. A shame since those types of crimes are amongst the most heinous that can be committed to a young person. If the charges were to be false, it is the perfect character assassination.

    The case against him for disbursement of his own monies seems to be outside the original purposes of the statute. As far as lying to the FBI, there are people who have spent time in jail who answered I don’t know to a question. It is disquieting.

    Makes me rethink the book Three Felonies a Day…..

  50. - William j Kelly - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 2:25 pm:

    I guess it is obvious now why the illinois republicans have never accepted me in their little club and all I can say is, THANK GOD!!

  51. - A guy - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 2:39 pm:

    I agree about your comment about his likelihood of going to trial. Not too likely.

    On the scuttlebutt, it’s just not grabbing that much attention from people. I’ve been to many events, township meetings, etc. and folks just aren’t talking about this. The stalled GA is a bigger topic. Think what you wish. It’s just not being discussed that much.

  52. - WhoKnew - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 2:53 pm:

    & i just wonder, “Where’s Illinois 3.75% in all of this!! /SNARK/

  53. - facts are stubborn things - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 3:09 pm:

    Innocent until proven guilty…that is our system of justice.

  54. - MrJM - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 3:10 pm:

    “There should be no statute of limitations on child abuse.”

    That feeling is perfectly reasonable and understandable.

    But under the law, statutes of limitation exist to ensure that criminal convictions are based upon upon evidence that has not deteriorated with time. The physical evidence and eyewitness testimony in child abuse cases is especially susceptible to such deterioration.

    The presence of a statute of limitation for the crime of child abuse should NOT be interpreted as a judgment on the extreme seriousness of the crime.

    – MrJM

  55. - Cannon649 - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 3:15 pm:

    As other have mentioned I also find the timing of this interesting. Hastert in Congress makes a tenth of what he makes in “retirement”. The proposed victim, who now is an extortionist, waits for their mega payday and gets it. Plus they more than like sells the rights to this and make a lot more.

    As a taxpayer we “pay/elect” these guys till they get “real” paycheck. Illinois has so much of this and never seems to end.

    Terms Limits would be a start and the citizen do not even need a law - just remove everyone at the end of two terms - period. Find other work.

    The big winner here are some lawyers and the media who now have something else to talk about.

  56. - IrishPirate - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 3:20 pm:

    Under Further Review,

    people make judgments all the time regarding sexual misconduct. Clinton or Gingrich carrying on with adult staffers is fundamentally different than a high school teacher being involved with a student. As for Frank he carried on with an adult prostitute and I just looked up the Studds case that was a 17 year old intern who apparently didn’t feel abused.

    Mel Reynolds was initially charged with sexual conduct with a 16 year old who was literally weeks way from her 17th b-day. He had no teaching or supervisory position over her. These things are all fundamentally different than where the Hastert situation seems to be going.

    One of my friends was a teaching assistant in grad school. He ended up dating and marrying one of the students from one of his classes. He was roundly punished for it with 23 years of marriage and counting and 4 kids.

    There are literally tens of millions of people in this country who have engaged in some form of “sexual misconduct” involving adultery, prostitution or a co-worker etc. I doubt and fervently hope that there aren’t tens of millions who’ve done what we all suspect Hastert did.

    Bill Clinton survived impeachment because people were able to differentiate between various forms of sexual misconduct. It didn’t hurt that such paragons of sexual virtue like Gingrich, Livingston, Hyde, McCain etc were all gunning for him.

    While the constitution posits that all men are created equal the laws and social norms do not posit that all sexual misconduct is equal. I could care less that Frank had an affair with a prostitute. I can’t say the same thing about a teacher or coach being involved with a younger teenager.

  57. - What is to be done? - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 3:38 pm:

    How do you ever even run for congress with that in your past? That guy had a set. Will leave it at that……

  58. - One of the 35 - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 3:53 pm:

    Cannon 649. Bingo! No career politicians = no lucrative post career pay days. The founding fathers never envisioned long term office holders. You served your term and went back to your regular job.

  59. - Midway Gardens - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 4:09 pm:

    At least we are going to save the half million the State was headed to pay for a statue of Hastert. So there’s a silver lining.

  60. - 47th Ward - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 4:53 pm:

    ===The founding fathers never envisioned long term office holders===

    Somebody forgot to tell that to Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, John Q Adams, etc. Before each became President, he served in several elective offices, including governors, Senate, the House, etc. In Adams’ case, he served in Congress after leaving the White House.

    When you don’t know what you’re talking about, it’s best to stay silent.

  61. - Plutocrat03 - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 4:55 pm:

    At least we are going to save the half million the State was headed to pay….

    Could our dysfunctional legislature pass a bipartisan rule not to build monuments to themselves until 100 years after their death?

  62. - Wensicia - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 5:11 pm:

    I’m no fan of Hastert, but the feeding frenzy by the press as he entered and left the Courthouse reminded me of Henley’s “Dirty Laundry”.

    “People love it when you lose”

  63. - Six Degrees of Separation - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 5:36 pm:

    Could our dysfunctional legislature pass a bipartisan rule not to build monuments to themselves until 100 years after their death?

    These “monuments” cost nearly what the Hastert monument would cost.

  64. - Anon - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 5:55 pm:

    If you want to understand how someone like Hastert got as far as he did, you owe it to yourself to read Tom Roeser’s column on Denny which can be found at:

  65. - Wordslinger - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 6:53 pm:

    UFR, you do understand the concept of age of consent, I hope? On one side of tnat line, there is no “inappropriate behavior” category.

    Guy, your contention that “nobody is talking about this” is weird and preposterous. What possible motivations could you have for spouting such delusional nonsense? Is it somehow “better” if “no one is talking about it.”

  66. - DuPage Dave - Wednesday, Jun 10, 15 @ 7:27 pm:

    Of course he looks frail. I’m surprised he didn’t show up in a wheelchair with an oxygen tank. The aging politicians are all vim and vigor until the FBI shows up.

    Overall I’ll go with my Grandma’s saying: Good riddance to bad rubbish.

  67. - Dupage Rob - Thursday, Jun 11, 15 @ 6:36 am:

    Where is Lisa Wagner in all of this?

  68. - Bored Chairman - Thursday, Jun 11, 15 @ 7:14 am:

    Justice? Perhaps.

    Rule of law? Not by a longshot.

  69. - burbanite - Thursday, Jun 11, 15 @ 7:45 am:

    Didn’t Martha Stewart do time for lying to the Fed?

  70. - Conusone - Thursday, Jun 11, 15 @ 2:37 pm:

    What’s that Nixon Chief of Staff, H.R. Haldemann once said? “Once the toothpaste is out of the tube, it is rather difficult to push it back in.”

    So it goes:

Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.

* Pritzker backs legislative efforts to ban flavored e-cigarettes
* Taking the long view
* Question of the day
* Without debate or specifics, Gaming Board recommends state alter Chicago casino tax structure
* "What I said is 3% compounded annually is a tough climb"
* Pigeon poops on pol's parade
* It's just a bill
* Ric Ocasek
* Looking on the bright side
* Fun with numbers
* OK, but how do you draft the law?
* State's red flag law is a "public health tool"
* "Do not assume that what you look at on the outside is what’s going on on the inside"
* Pritzker orders budget cutting scenarios
* Yesterday's stories

Visit our advertisers...





Main Menu
Pundit rankings
Subscriber Content
Blagojevich Trial
Updated Posts

September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005


RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0

Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller