Capitol - Your Illinois News Radar » Question of the day
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Question of the day

Thursday, Jul 21, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Sun-Times

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., slammed Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, on Thursday for not endorsing Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump during his convention prime time address on Wednesday night.

“If you are invited to speak at the convention, though, you have to endorse him,” said Kinzinger, who is so reluctant to embrace Trump as his party’s nominee that he has been sitting on the fence for months.

“This is Donald Trump’s convention,” Kinzinger said on CNN. “He won the primary fair and square.”

Kinzinger said he was “blown away” with Cruz’s speech, where he urged Republicans to “vote their conscience” rather than say straight up to cast their ballots for Trump.

“I think it was ludicrous of Ted Cruz to do it, and it’s obviously political posturing for whatever comes next,” Kinzinger said.

Trump himself tweeted that he read the speech beforehand and allowed it to proceed. As I recall, the deal he cut with Cruz a while back to speak at the convention didn’t include any promises that Cruz endorse the nominee. Back in March, Trump rescinded his pledge (agreed to with the other candidates) to back the eventual nominee. And after all that, the Trump campaign scheduled Cruz to speak Wednesday night in prime time ahead of a speech given by Trump’s son and his vice presidential nominee.

All that said…

* The Question: Do you agree with Congressman Kinzinger? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.



  1. - Clark - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:25 pm:

    Voted no. As far as I’m concerned, this is America and Cruz can say whatever he wants, especially if he was invited and already spoke to Drumpf

  2. - Pawn - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:28 pm:

    Voted No. It is the Republican Party Convention, not the Donald Trump Party convention.

  3. - Century Club - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:32 pm:

    I voted no. Cruz will get backlash for not just declining the invite to speak, but Trump knew what kind of campaign he ran against Cruz, and he still put him up there without a promise to endorse.

  4. - Huh? - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:33 pm:

    Voted no because kinzinger is being a hypocrite. Kinzinger hasn’t endorsed trump and has said his endorsement, if and when it comes, will be tepid at best.

  5. - sonny chiss - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:33 pm:

    voted yes, Trump is the nominee. If you don’t want to give some sort of endorsement then don’t speak at the convention. Give your non-endorsement at some other forum.

  6. - illinoised - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:34 pm:

    Voted no, since the last I heard was we had freedom of speech in the USA.

  7. - Saluki - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:36 pm:

    didnt vote. it’s all white noise.

  8. - Wensicia - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:37 pm:

    No. It’s not like Trump expected the endorsement anyway and in turn he probably benefited from Cruz’s speech. Cruz didn’t hurt Trump, only himself.

  9. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:37 pm:

    No. It was the incompetence of the Trump campaign to let anyone near the stage who they didn’t have 100% confidence in. Kinzinger and others can try to spin this any way they want, but the reality is that Donald Trump made a huuuuge mistake.

    If he can’t manage a convention, how is he supposed to run an administration?

  10. - A Jack - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:37 pm:

    Voted No. It’s the Republican National Convention, not Trump’s convention. I don’t care for Cruz. But to say that Cruz should endorse Trump sounds like the “political correctness” that Trump has been against.

  11. - Nick Name - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:38 pm:

    Voted no. If Trump read the speech beforehand, then it appears to be a calculated gamble that both men were willing to make.

  12. - JS Mill - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:38 pm:

    Voted “no”, as you stated Trump already reneged on the pledge why does Cruz have to adhere?

  13. - How Ironic - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:38 pm:

    @ Saluki - “…it’s all white noise.”

    At the GOP convention….literally that is true.

  14. - jake - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:42 pm:

    Voted no. Pretty amazing to hear somebody booed for saying “vote your conscience”

  15. - Anon221 - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:43 pm:

    No. Kinzinger is a hypocrite.

    Asked by POLITICO Editor Susan Glasser whether he would be voting for Trump in the fall, Kinzinger said, “I’m not there yet.”

  16. - hisgirlfriday - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:44 pm:

    Kinzinger himself just told Politico he isn’t sure he can vote for Trump now after his NATO comments. Get off the high horse.

  17. - Dance Band on the Titanic - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:47 pm:

    No. Quite surprising how many Republican are willing to compromise their core principles and jump on the Trump bandwagon. He is the antithesis of what the party claims to be.

    Kudos to Cruz, Kasich and Kirk for staying true to their values.

  18. - atsuishin - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:48 pm:

    Yes - Ted is posturing he knows trump is going to lose so he wants to set himself up for 2020 or 2024.

  19. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:54 pm:

    Voted “No”


    The only way a Nominee wants a Cruz speech to happen is to continue the Reality Show feel that is the Trump Campaign and Nomination.

    This is either ridiculous, gross malpractice, or a “script” of the “unscripted” show.

    Both are… well, silly.

    Both are unforced “errors”

    Voted “No”

  20. - Sue - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:55 pm:

    As they say in the arsenate- the reason most people instantly hate Cruz is because it saves time

  21. - Jon - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:55 pm:

    No vote here, while normally a tin-foil hat idea and seeing that Trump saw the speech prior, this is more of a media grabbing attention ploy from the Trump campaign. I don’t suspect Cruz is a willing participant, but who knows anymore. It’s really a win-win for Trump and Cruz, I imagine more people tune in to see tonight’s craziness as a result and it also gives Cruz another newscycle.

  22. - Archiesmom - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:56 pm:

    No - and he wasn’t the only speaker not to endorse last night. Astronaut Eileen Collins’s distributed speech had a Trump endorsement (or very close to it) and her speech as delivered was missing those lines. This was an uncontrolled mess of a convention that found few speakers other than those with future political aspirations, such as Adam Kinzinger. When you need to fill slots with every family member, you’re going to have a lot of issues like this.

  23. - @MisterJayEm - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 2:58 pm:

    Voted no.

    If Trump wanted Cruz to explicitly endorse him in exchange for a live, prime-time speech at the RNC, then Trump should have negotiated a better deal.

    – MrJM

  24. - Honeybear - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:01 pm:

    No, people this is WWE style political theater. Guys you’ve got to have a villain in these shows. You’ve got the good guy, you’ve got the bad guy. He knows full well that Cruz’s ego alone wouldn’t let him concede. If/when Trump loses Cruz stock will go up. Only if Trump wins will Cruz lose. It’s a pretty good bet. In the meantime Trump gets his villain. It’s a win win.

  25. - A guy - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:03 pm:

    Voted Yes. But not surprised by these results here. The winner runs the convention. That’s been the case for quite some time. Trump saw the speech and knew what Cruz was (not) going to do and welcomed him anyway. Works for Trump in this case. Watching Cruz speak to the TX delegation this morning, most of whom supported him, he was not greeted warmly. It was a display of sour grapes. Being invited was a positive gesture. He could have helped himself. He didn’t.

  26. - Honeybear - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:03 pm:

    If you’ve ever seen the smallest amount of professional wrestling you know the campaign strategy and organization of the Trump campaign. Think about it.

  27. - Decatur gal - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:06 pm:

    Voted no. Trump needed speakers so badly, he knew Cruz wouldn’t support him and still had him speak. It made the boring convention more interesting, Trump loves anything that gives him more attention, so it was a win for him I think.

  28. - Ron Burgundy - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:06 pm:

    No. If someone isn’t saying what you want to hear, don’t invite them to speak. Now I have about as much of a problem overall with Cruz than I do with Trump, but some of the attacks on Cruz and his family were beyond the pale. I certainly couldn’t forgive and forget and lean toward I think it was wordslinger’s comment that they were worthy of giving Trump a mouthful of Chicklets. Also, if the roles were reversed, I’m convinced Trump would have done the exact same thing.

  29. - A guy - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:06 pm:

    I do expect next week that Bernie, despite his huge differences, will support the winning nominee. He’s a guy who has a right to feel snookered with the super delegate process on the Democrat side. I suspect he’ll respond in a more principled way than Ted. Oddly, I think Ted and Trump agree on a lot more than Bernie and Hillary do. This is a funny business.

  30. - Ghost - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:07 pm:

    Huh? I mean what Huh? said…. sums up my thought as well.

  31. - Ducky LaMoore - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:09 pm:

    Voted No. 1)Unless of course, an endorsement was required in writing by the campaign (Trump said he read the speech and was okay with it) 2)Trump attempted to link Cruz’s dad with JFK’s assassination. Why would he endorse the guy?

  32. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:09 pm:

    ===But not surprised by these results here.===


    What about the results wasn’t surprising?

  33. - Rabid - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:12 pm:

    Yes the Canadian anchor baby needs to assimilate to America

  34. - Politically Incorrect - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:15 pm:

    I voted NO. Normally, I would have agreed. One does not go to the party with intentions of shaming the host.
    But here, the news is reporting that Cruz made clear that he would not endorse and in fact sent his speech in advance — which Trump acknowledged.
    If Trump did not stop it after reading the script, I can hardly condemn Cruz for his personal grudge over the things Trump said about the Cruz family.

  35. - Thoughts Matter - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:17 pm:

    No. Cruz told Trump in advance he wasn’t endorsing him, whether or not Trump saw the actual speech is immaterial. Trump knew how Cruz felt about him. Never give someone a pulpit unless you can handle the sermon.

    Either rename the party the Trump party or make room for the rest of us under the tent. Cruz isn’t the only Republican who doesn’t support Trump. If you boo Cruz, you boo me- and I’m not a conservative.

  36. - train112 - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:19 pm:


    When is the campaign going to be about something.other than what Donald Trump just said and every GOP politiciandown to Edwards County dogcatcher thinks about Donald Trump just said

  37. - Just Chilling - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:20 pm:

    No. As 47th W and others have said, this was a major tactical error by the Trump campaign and RNC in managing the convention. Unless, of course, knowing that Cruz is already running for 2020, Trump decided to let the speech go forward and allow Cruz to further damage his standing in the GOP.

  38. - A guy - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:21 pm:

    OW, It’s not surprising that most people are voting no. 2 to 1 in the poll, and even more dramatic in the comments. It’s very consistent with the commentary here. Trump isn’t an easy guy to defend for a lot of GOP folks, especially the more conservative ones. He’s very easy to criticize, much of it through his own actions.

    He’s definitely tapped into a discontent feeling in the electorate. I could sense it in the primary. People were quietly rationalizing a reason to support him. And they did. I said on another thread how “uncanny” it seemed to me that so many critics were so intensely watching the convention. They’ve been so boring for so long that few networks even covered them. You had to watch C Span for heaven’s sake.

    And here we are. People will watch next week just to see and compare this week. Politics is interesting to a lot of people who have tuned out for a long time or never tuned in. Something great may be happening here. It’s unpredictable, that’s for sure.

  39. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:22 pm:

    ===Trump saw the speech and knew what Cruz was (not) going to do and welcomed him anyway.===

    Lol, if you believe that you probably have a degree from Trump University on your wall.

    ===Oddly, I think===

    LOLOL, you should have just stopped typing right there (or instead said “I think oddly). The rest of that sentence makes zero sense to anyone who’s been paying attention.

  40. - FormerParatrooper - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:24 pm:

    The speech was presented before he gave it. He was allowed to give his speech at the forum. So I voted No. Trump knew it would become a subject of conservation, keeps Trump in the public eye for free.
    This election will be a source for study for political junkies for a generation or more.

  41. - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:26 pm:

    ==When is the campaign going to be about something.other than what Donald Trump just said and every GOP politiciandown to Edwards County dogcatcher thinks about Donald Trump just said==

    The first Wednesday of November?

  42. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:27 pm:

    ===Trump isn’t an easy guy to defend for a lot of GOP folks, especially the more conservative ones. He’s very easy to criticize, much of it through his own.===

    Trump could’ve denied Cruz to speak unless “X”

    Trump choosing to let Cruz speak was a choice.

    Cruz made it very clear - no endorsement.

    Trump let Cruz speak anyway. Trump could’ve taken away the podium time.

    These aren’t opinions, or even commentary.

    Your “commentary” on assessing facts… yikes.

  43. - Fairness and Fairness Only - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:32 pm:

    I found new respect for Ted Cruz last night. He was my “winner” of the convention for sticking to his convictions. Trump and his team were the “losers” in this instance. It showed a total lack of planning and management on their part.

  44. - JS Mill - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:34 pm:

    =He’s definitely tapped into a discontent feeling in the electorate.=

    More like fanned the flame of irrational fear.

  45. - AlfondoGonz - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:36 pm:

    No. Contrary to Kinzinger’s claim that it is “Donald Trump’s convention, it is in fact the “Republican National Convention.” Trump won the nomination, not the unconditional support of every Republican in America. I may not agree with anything Cruz says and find him to be abhorrent, but he did the right thing and had every right to do it.

  46. - AlfondoGonz - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:38 pm:

    Despite the %’s being 66% to 33%, I’m only seeing one person explain their “yes” vote. Why am I not surprised that Trump supporters cannot provide reasoning for their positions?

  47. - A guy - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:45 pm:

    ===Trump choosing to let Cruz speak was a choice.===

    I agree with your entire set of facts Willy, especially this one. Time will tell whether the choice was good, bad or indifferent.

    Outside of this forum, Ted isn’t enjoying huge support. I’m not so sure he’s even enjoying much here. lol.

    47, we know Trump saw the speech. We know it didn’t include an endorsement. We know he was still invited to speak. We know he did.

    What great doctorate from what great institution do you possess to dispute those facts?

    The more I read your comments, the more I think you and Ted would be really close friends. /s

  48. - A guy - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 3:46 pm:

    ===Despite the %’s being 66% to 33%, I’m only seeing one person explain their “yes” vote. Why am I not surprised that Trump supporters cannot provide reasoning for their positions?===

    Because it’s such a rewarding experience Gonz!! lol.

  49. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 4:04 pm:

    From the NYT:

    “Trump advisers said on Wednesday night that Mr. Trump had been unhappy with the text of Mr. Cruz’s speech but held out for the remote possibility that Mr. Cruz would make a last-minute endorsement.”

    Hope is not a plan.

    I got my doctorate from the School of Paying Attention. Trump is a pathological liar. Why do you keep defending him? Your BFF can’t run away from him fast enough, I’m surprised you missed the memo.

  50. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 4:13 pm:

    Oops! I accidentally deleted a “Yes” vote commenter. Sorry about that. Was aiming for somebody else and missed.

  51. - Streator Curmudgeon - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 4:18 pm:

    Voted no. After being dubbed “Lyin’ Ted Cruz” by Trump, is it any wonder Cruz didn’t endorse Ronald McDonald Trump?

    Kinzinger is trying to play this for the best advantage to Kinzinger, and so far he hasn’t figured out what that is yet.

  52. - Rabid - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 4:27 pm:

    Yes the Glenn beck teabaggers and constitutionalist have a since of entitlement that they don’t have to play by the rules

  53. - Doug - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 4:32 pm:

    Cruz made a deal,he wouldn’t fight putting his name into nomination if Trump gave him a speaking role. Trump knew what Cruz’s speech was going to say, and more importantly not say.

    What made it a spectacle, is that Trump’s folks had their Whip’s on the floor getting everybody to boo…and that turned a speech into an incident.

    BTW, I’m a diehard Cruz supporter, from when he ran for Senate here in Texas. I think I sighed on to his campaign when he was polling about 6%. I think the speech was fantastic.

    Because, really….if you have an issue with a person telling you to vote your conscience for somebody that will follow the constitution, then you really are supporting the wrong candidate.

  54. - Gooner - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 4:33 pm:

    The Congressman is right in part and wrong in part.

    To the extent that he believes that the speakers should back Trump, he’s right. This was not the time or place for airing of grievances.

    However, this was not Cruz’s fault but Trump’s. Trump’s people had to be in control. They need to run a professional campaign.

    This is yet another example of the failure of Team Trump to run a real campaign.

  55. - walker - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 4:34 pm:


    Conventions these days are amoral political circuses, and the performers should play their parts, or not be allowed in the center ring.

    The error was not Cruz’s, but the show’s director.

  56. - @MisterJayEm - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 4:37 pm:

    “I do expect next week that Bernie, despite his huge differences, will support the winning nominee.”

    Seems very likely since Sanders has already endorsed HRC, e.g.

    “He’s a guy who has a right to feel snookered with the super delegate process on the Democrat side.”

    During the Democratic primaries, HRC won 2,205 pledged delegates and Sanders won 1,846. If Sanders had won a majority of pledged Democratic delegates, one could make a principled argument about whether the super-delegates should switch their votes from HRC. But he didn’t.

    “I suspect he’ll respond in a more principled way than Ted.”

    Apparently, admonishing Americans to “Stand and speak and vote your conscience” strikes some as unprincipled. Okay.

    “Oddly, I think Ted and Trump agree on a lot more than Bernie and Hillary do.”

    According to data, Bernie Sanders voted with Hillary Clinton about 93 percent of the time during the years when their Senate careers overlapped.

    By contrast, in 2004, when Ted Cruz was serving as the Republican Solicitor General of Texas, Donald Trump told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, “In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat. It just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans.”


    – MrJM

  57. - burbanite - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 4:44 pm:

    While I find Cruz to be a bit creepy, he did what he believed was morally right and didn’t sell out. Chris Christie on the other hand, couldn’t sell out quick enough.

  58. - Excessively Rabid - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 5:06 pm:

    You knew what he was when you picked him up.

  59. - anon - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 5:38 pm:

    voted yes. I’m not generally a Trump supporter, and he has nothing to do with my reason.

    It’s just bad form, no matter who the players are.

    He should have just declined to speak or not gone to the convention at all.

  60. - Amalia - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 5:50 pm:

    Bernie was not snookered by the delegate process. that is a myth. he lost the elected delegate count by more than Obama beat Hillary on elected delegates. super delegates in 2008 switched to Obama. and Michigan had some problems in delegate allocation which should have meant more for Hillary but did not. but since Hillary is an actual Democrat, and has been helping other Dems win since the early 1970s, she gets it. and so after a good fight, she folded immediately and supported Barack. Bernie finally got it, learning after years of feeding off the Dems and contributing nothing much. now it’s time for others to join in. Trump is too scary to stomach. if I were a Republican I would feel that way too, especially after today’s NATO comments. Paul Manafort worked for years for Putin’s Ukraine puppet candidate. what does that mean in this equation? more and more scary every day.

  61. - jerry 101 - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 6:31 pm:

    HA! I didn’t even read Honeybear’s comments until now.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if, once the campaign is over, and the tell-all books come out, that is. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Vince McMahon or someone else at WWE was a clandestine consultant to the Trump campaign.

  62. - jerry 101 - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 6:45 pm:

    Mister Jay Em,
    Hillary did win the pledged delegate count, but she and her supporters heavily played up that she was leading with so many superdelegates (who could have easily switched candidates if Bernie were to take the lead in pledged delegates) to help build her air of inevitability. That created an extra barrier for Bernie to hurdle. I would imagine more than a few people just voted for Hillary, or (more likely) skipped voting, rather than voting for Bernie because it seemed like a losing cause. So, that could have cost him some pledged delegates. Enough to overcome her lead in pledged delegates? Probably not, but he has a legitimate gripe. And while I expect that he’ll reinforce his support of HRC, I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t become an activist against the whole superdelegate thing after the fact. I’m not crying over spilled milk here. Bernie did way better than I ever expected he would do, but one thing the Clinton campaign did really, really right was build that aura of inevitability.

    Also, with regards to the 93%. That means rather little. That just means that they normally voted the same on bills that actually made it to the senate floor. How many of those 93% are for naming post offices? What do the 7% consist of? And what about their views on bills that never made it to the floor? How about how they voted in committees or even how they worked to shape legislation. There is a chasm as wide as the Grand Canyon of difference between HRC and Bernie. Voting records mean relatively little when it comes to the core values of a candidate.

  63. - Amalia - Thursday, Jul 21, 16 @ 8:08 pm:

    HRC won the pledged delegate count by a greater margin than Barack won it over her in 2008. do the math. this entire, “people would have voted….if they didn’t think this” , or “if they knew (insert policy here) about Bernie, if the sky were purple and unicorns flew by, Bernie would have won.” wrong. he was not close to winning. it’s just not true.

Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.

* Question of the day
* Bost and Bailey set aside feud as Illinois Republicans tout unity at RNC delegate breakfast
* State pre-pays $422 million in pension payments
* Dillard's gambit
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Live coverage
* Selected press releases (Live updates)
* Illinois react (Updated and comments opened)
* Yesterday's stories

Visit our advertisers...






Main Menu
Pundit rankings
Subscriber Content
Blagojevich Trial
Updated Posts

July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
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