Bush on Blast

I'm glad the speakers at Coretta Scott King's funeral took it to Bush. He lives in a cocoon and yesterday he got an opportunity to see exactly what some folks are thinking about him. It was clear that he wasn't comfortable but he had to know that it was coming. That's why it took him to the last minute to decide to attend the funeral.

I know some will argue that the political grandstanding was the wrong place at the wrong time. But I think, when given a chance to juxtapose the life of Coretta Scott King and the political environment we have today created by President Bush, what better place is there? I know conservatives will have their panties in a knot over this, but they didn't care about the struggle and at best are bystanders of it. So who really cares what they think?

If the King family isn't crying foul, then you can believe that they approved of it - and if it's cool with them, then it's cool with me.


41 Responses to Bush on Blast

  1. nikki Says:
    it was DAMN SURE cool with me. this was probably the first time he's been in the black community since his first campaign run.
  2. Little Miss Chatterbox Says:
    I can't believe you are condoning that kind of behavior at a funeral of all places. Funerals are no place for politics and grandstanding. I just thought it was beyond low.

    And I think its unfair to accuse all conservatives of not caring about the struggle. More Republicans voted for the 1964 civil rights act than democrats among many other things.
  3. James Manning Says:
    Chatter, the party vote on the CRA'64 is a matter of syntax. If you recall, as soon as that act passed, the south switched to the Republican Party... why is that? Why did Ronald Reagan go to Paris, MS and talk about 'state rights'?

    As for political speak at a funeral. C'mon, Coretta Scott King was a political figure and I expected nothing less than some political rants.

    Funerals are for whatever you make them. Personally, I want mine to be a big barbecue bash with the Isley Brothers playing. The problem is that only conservatives are upset... why is that? Why isn't the King family upset and right wingers are? I'll tell you why. Because the criticism was aimed at Bush. Had these folks made general political rants about racism, inequality and the poor - you all wouldn't be upset. But only because Bush's name was mentioned.

    Finally, I think folks are just going to have to disagree on this one. If it were my mom... I would have gotten up there and put Bush on blast.
  4. Bullfrog Says:
    If the King family had no problem with it, what can we say? If ANYONE has a right to be offended by this it would be them.

    As a Bush supporter I didn't like the way he was treated, but don't ALL of our Presidents catch this kind of flack?

    Personally, my funeral better be a party, no negative politically charged rants allowed.
  5. Our Dearly Beloved Mrs. King Says:
    @ nikki:

    President Bush has consistently turned away from the African-American community. I’m surprised people don’t understand that when the President ignores the dominant views of 11% of the population, they will probably voice some concerns when given the chance.

    @ little miss chatterbox:

    What I find beyond low is when people who didn’t care about the life of Mrs. King, and probably called her a “stupid Liberal,” are all of the sudden “insulted” by the comments made by a few speakers at a funeral designed to be a political event.

    President Bush has supported very little of what Mrs. King believed. He was only there to make a political appearance. But to be fair, many others were there for the same reason as well. So what’s the big deal with political comments being made?

    And as far as the 1964 Civil Rights Act goes, are you familiar with the evolution of the two political parties since reconstruction? That point is extremely misleading.

    @ james:

    I 100% agree with you. Why in the world is the Fox News crowd more upset than the King family? This is crazy. They will prostitute any chance they can create, to make themselves look like “victims” of some sort of insidious hypocrisy. It’s worse when considering that Mrs. King herself would probably have been standing up and clapping with the audience if she were still here with us.

    It’s almost as bad as when people prostitute Dr. King’s speeches to say that he would champion some sort of completely “color-blind” society, and proclaim racism is dead today. He was a Black man, and certainly didn’t have the luxury of being color-blind. Nor should his work be manipulated to infer that he was.

    Just as Mrs. King was not a Bush supporter, and worked to support many issues President Bush has not supported.
  6. James Manning Says:
    what he said...
  7. Rell Says:
    i thought his speech was pretty good and powerfully actually...
  8. Anonymous Says:
    Face in the crowd,

    I didn’t vote for Bush, but a funeral is not the place to complain about him. He went to the funeral out of respect. Bush is not going out of his way for blacks but neither did Clinton.
  9. Rashid Muhammad Says:
    Yeah I thought that Bush's speech was cool as well. Plus it let him say "God" 50 times so I know that he was happy. I thought the the best political move all day was when Bush I told Lowry not to quit his day job. THAT was funny.

    Also, the neocons are infatuated with MLK, there is no way that Bush could have missed that opportunity. Wolfowitz, Perle, and Kristol would have all spoken if they had the chance.
  10. James Says:
    I didn't watch coverage of the King funeral; I've only seen clips. I think the disconnect here is cultural first.

    Plenty of funerals within the Black community involve clergy, relatives, and friends of the deceased politicizing the death of their fallen, with song and speech alike. When young Black men are victims of gang violence or military Crusades or simple narcotic indecency, Black people stand behind pulpits and make political points, barely concealed.

    The folk on the twenty-four hour news stations have no frame of reference for such blends of God and country, and as such, find protestations of societal injustice undignified at funerals. Black people die from political causes in this country; it's logical that within the nerve center of the Black community - the Black church - Black people would discuss death in political terms.

    Basically, it's a Black thing.
  11. Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden Says:
    02 08 06

    "I can't believe you are condoning that kind of behavior at a funeral of all places. Funerals are no place for politics and grandstanding. I just thought it was beyond low."

    JAMES, TACKINESS IS NEVER JUSTIFIABLE. Grandstanding and ego gratification peppered with ad hominem attacks on our Chief of State is highly inappropriate and not the forum for a funeral. I have no issue with folks speaking their mind, but if some assholes tried to talk crap about the President at one of my relative's funerals, I would be pissed! The funeral is to honor the dead, not castigate the living!
  12. Mr. Grey Ghost Says:

    You can't be serious, man. Tho' we disagree on just about everything political, I do respect your views. What happened at Mrs. King's funeral was just inappropriate, even Mrs. King never took to attacking Bush when she was in his presence. And believe it or not I would say the same thing if was anybody, not just Bush. And this isn't about liberals attacking Bush, its about exploiting someone's funeral to do so. Like Mahndisa said, it's just tacky and it's further proof of why because of all the hate hurled towards Bush by liberal Blacks, the man just just chooses not to deal them. I mean, who would? And I find it a bit ironic that you make no mention of the fact that the King's themselves never used that sort of incendiary talk and that Bush got up and hugged Rev. Lowry even after he dissed him.
  13. James Manning Says:
    Mr Grey,

    This is just my opinion, but Mrs King was a political activist and I wouldn't expect anything less than a political showcase at her funeral. But remember, there were a lot of speakers and not all of them were bashing Bush. Why not challenge the President of the United States to heed the activism of the woman he is paying tribute to? To gloss over her life and merely speak softly and go about one's business, there was a challenge to continue the legacy she leaves behind. I see no problem with it.

    I'm sure the King family didn't expect a 6 hour service. Personally, I would have stopped it after two hours, but that's just me.

    I just find it ironic that those who would categorize Mrs. King as a liberal moonbat are offended by her funeral. Why not be offended that there is still so much work left to do for which she and her husband literally gave their lives.

    Maybe it is wrong to say, and maybe this is a stereotype, but those that are offended by her funeral didn't support the purpose of her life. At least not in a way that she and many others would consider support. If criticism wasn't aimed at Bush, most of you all would be silent today. If you are that offended, how about joining the cause for which she lived?

    So if you're offended by yesterday, what of today... tomorrow... next week?
  14. Anonymous Says:
    It wasn't the time or place to blast Bush at her funeral...you got to have more respect for a person than that.
  15. Jaimie Says:
    I didn't see the funeral, but in my opinion, her funeral is NOT the place for political rhetoric. What about a nice little town hall meeting down the street, AFTER THE FUNERAL?
  16. Diane S. Says:
    How would it have been possible to pay tribute to the life of Coretta Scott King without paying tribute to the substance of that life - which was a struggle for political and social change? What did the right want someone to say about her? Did they want them to discuss this monumental woman's 'sense of fashion'? her participation in the Tuesday Evening Ladies' Bridge Club?

    This womans entire life was dedicated to the civil rights movement. To have ignored that, would have been to have ignored her life, her husband's life, and that - to me - would have been unforgivable at a funeral.
  17. James Manning Says:
    The problem with a townhall is that Bush wouldn't be there. I say: blast that fool while they have the chance. Nothing will come of it, but it helps for a slow blogging day.
  18. Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden Says:
    02 08 06

    Diane S:
    Paying homage to someone's legacy doesn't necessarily mean that attacks must be made by folks about the President at ones funeral. I can think of ten billion different ways in which her legacy could have been honored without the ensuing tackiness. It seems as though we don't practice discretion in our society anymore. And did you all know that Ms. CS King was at the GOP convention some years ago? Tell me James, how does that affect your perceptions of what was or wasn't appropriate?

    When my great grandmother died, I was away at my first WEEK of college. The family told me to stay there because that is what she would have wanted. And as pissed as I was about it, I KNEW that they were right. My Grannie cherished education so much that she worked as a domestic for abusive White families so she could go to night school. Respecting the legacy of a person has to do with respecting their PERSPECTIVE as well as their wishes (if they had a trust or will.)

    Given the familial secrecy surrounding her ill health and other matters, I think she might have preferred a lower key environment for her funeral. She seemed private and a big hullabaloo where people are ragging on GWB just seems well-tacky!

    One thing I learned a LONG time ago is that ad hominems lead nowhere. When that jerk Tom Amiano ran for mayor of SF, all he did was castigate Willie Brown and insult him right and left. He spent so much time talking about what WB did wrong, that he had no talking points of his own. He looked like a REAL ASS LOSER, which is my point.

    I agree with Jaime, take that mess to the town hall! And just so you all know, when I die, I want my ashes to be thrown into our atmosphere OR into the sea! :)
  19. James Manning Says:
    Manh, we will have to disagree on this one. Because when I die, I'll make sure some political stuff will get said. Then there will be ribs, peach cobbler and some old school on the radio. I'm going to make sure the Super Bowl Shuffle is played as well. OH, I'm going with my Walter Payton Jersey (the one the Jaimie will get me for Christmas located on Champs.com for the low low price of $124.00 - a deal by any standards)

    Ok, some of us agree and others don't.
  20. Rashid Muhammad Says:
    I don't think that they "blasted" Bush. Neocons and even a few Libertarians have tried to hijack King's legacy, but the man was an uber-pacifist and borderline socialist. There was nothing that Lowry said that King wouldn't have said himself, and since this whole thing about the "King Legacy" it didn't come across as too egregious to me. It would have (and should have) been said wartime or not, or if there were no cameras and none of these "dignitaries" falling over themselves for photo ops were there.

    Jimmy Carter's bit about wiretaps was very appropriate too, and got that much more significance when the former FBI bureau chief got up and talked about his utter amazement at Coretta's willingness to work with him and his agency to teach children non-violence.

    I don't think the right knows what they are doing by trying to brand Lowery a "liberal."
  21. nikki Says:
    bush has had plenty of opportunity to hear black folk concerns. he's been invited into the community numerous times and declined, so where are black folk supposed to voice their disagreement and disgruntlement with the man? what, send the boy a letter?
  22. jan brauner Says:
    I thought the dynamics totally distracted from Coretta's beauty, and tarnished her funeral. I thought that using her death as a political forum took away from the message that she tried to bring to America. I found it enormously divisive, ignorant, and classless.And, if you guys thing that Clinton really loves anyone but himself, then you are sadly mistaken.
  23. James Manning Says:

    What message was Coretta Scott King trying to bring to this country? The very people who are making a hoopla about this didn't care to hear the message when she was alive. Now, all of a sudden that want to hear it when she's being put in the ground?
  24. jan brauner Says:
    I simply do not accept that broadbrushed statement. Period. If you think that all liberals "love" blacks and all conservatives are "racists", then I have misjudged the human being that I presumed that you were.
  25. James Manning Says:
    Nah, jan I don't think like that. I'm from Chicago - the home of racist liberals. I'm not that naive. But it is a broad stroke but that's really more for the purposes of simplicity. But let's be real Jan, how many Conservatives were standing behind Coretta Scott King while she was alive. And her going to the Republican convention means nothing more than her do what needs to be done to forward her mission - and since the Conservative agenda in Washington has done nothing to assist her, then I am left to assume that her invitation was for window dressing. You know how the game is played.
  26. jan brauner Says:
    I guess I should mention that I am never with the flow for the sake of being "with the flow." But, it's cool anyway, because I accept that we are not all going to agree on things.
  27. jan brauner Says:

    Tons of conservatives were standing behind Coretta Scott King!

    Do you have any clue about the amount of money going toward the poor now relative to six years ago? Have you looked at our budget? Though everyone spouts off about pork, it is actually miniscule compared to the mandatory entitlements that are in the budget. And, when you hear the term "cuts", they are simply restrictions in escalation, and are not cuts whatsoever.

    If we can't get into a dialogue about what works, rather than who cares the most about the poor, then we might as well all just stop right here and now, and just quit taking my damn money if it isn't helping. I can't pay for college for my kid, and have no idea how I am going to put her through college, and I am not kidding. We gave away our money, and if it isn't helping the poor, I want it back. Maybe I'll give it to children overseas who have flies on their eyeballs and have nothing to eat other than what they can scrounge out of garbage pails. But, at least, I'll have a choice.......You think liberals were behind Coretta cuz they talked the talk. Go see how generous Cinton is with his money? Take a look at his tax returns. It'll turn your stomach. He asked the taxpayers to pay a buttload to pay for his rape and molestation trials along with all of Hillary's ethic's violations. Have you looked at their tax returns?
    Have you looked at their per capita charity giving? They, along with the average liberal in the US, are really really generous with other people's money.

    There has to be room in this country for a difference of opinion upon what works in the real world. When I look at the bottom four quintiles in the world in terms of economic freedoms, I realize how much worse off their people are.Not everyone is as generous as my husband, and is willing to give up 30-40% of everything they earn to help poor people. So, it pisses me off when I hear people who are impressed with those who talk the talk, but sure as hell, don't walk the walk. We did. I know the difference..Trust me..Just don't give me this "whatever" about liberals versus conservatives caring for the poor.I am not buying what you are selling. Talk is cheap, and slick does not impress me at all.

    My Dad loaded all seven of us kids in the car every year to go to Washington D.C. and celebrate MLK, JFK, and civil rights. We had to do without shoes and toys and clothes, but he thought it was important as hell, so we did it.I don't ever remember getting a toy my entire childhood. Yet,you so blythely dismiss an entire part of the country that loves this country and begs to be united as one.

    I hardly know what to say.

    This country should never have gotten into a dialogue about conservative versus liberal in terms of compassion. I love this country too much to see it divided, and its people set against one another, by such a ridiculous and false premise.

    James, I know this is a rant, and you know I love you to pieces. But, I gotta get this off my chest. I will probably get bashed, but so be it.
  28. Little Miss Chatterbox Says:
    Jan: I wholeheartedly agree with everything you said. And you said it very eloquently!! Kudos!
  29. James Manning Says:
    Jan, I've never bashed anyone except for one guy. I disagree and with passion at times, but that's not bashing - so you have nothing to worry about there.

    But here is the thing. You seem to be a very good person, and you don't fit into my perception of conservatives. But I'm not talking about individuals, I'm talking about what is coming out of Washington. So when compare the policies that are coming out of Washington to Mrs. King legacy - they don't match.

    I saw the budget and I disagree with your assessment. Explain to me why the VA is allowed to negotiate with drug companies for lower drug prices but Medicare isn't. Explain to me how we cut Medicare (the reduction in increase is a political play on words) but fund defense projects to the tune of $100 billion that the Pentagon says it doesn't need?

    The battle that liberals and conservatives are having is because Republicans decided that they would play a zero-sum game... and they are winning. When Republicans are caught with their hands in the cookie jar, the response is, 'liberals do it too'.

    When differences in opinion are not taken into account, the only thing left is resentment. And that is where the Dems are at today. So you being a good person is of no consequence to me when you support politicians that do not concern themselves with the issues I believe in. And that's a two way street because it would be the same if Dems were in power doing a lot of dumb crap.This is the world that we live in. I know what we would like it to be, but it aint so. To be honest, I've never been one of those 'we are the world, hold hands across America, lets live in a colorblind society' type of people. I take things for what they are, not what I want them to be.
  30. Our Dearly Beloved Mrs. King Says:
    The fact that people are so very concerned that the President took a little heat, and I do stress a LITTLE heat, is shocking.

    In my everyday life, on the television, and of course through this internet, it’s scary to see that people have demonstrated how little they care about Mrs. King, because they need to manufacture any reason to make the RULING party look like victims.

    To me, this sentiment is symptomatic of how little people care about the work of Mrs. King or Dr. King.

    As Black folks, we should take note. We should listen when we hear people more emotional about a little criticism of the President, at a highly political funeral (and a Black church where that brand of preaching is acceptable) than the life of someone who made OUR lives AND theirs better.

    It’s demonstrative of their thinking.

    @ jan brauner:

    I never find the left/right debate on anything neither helpful nor accurate. The characterizations are usually abstract and ridiculous. Most are based on some unsubstantiated description of what the other side potentially believes.

    Are you aware of how much of the Federal and State budgets go to the poor? It’s not a big percentage; we’re not dealing with programs run-amuck. The Fox News crowd talks as if “welfare” takes as much money as Social Security, Medicare or Defense.

    Have you taken a closer look at what “welfare” really is? Most of it is: Food Stamps, or Aid to Families with Dependent Children… which is poor women with young kids. Perhaps the Fox News crowd will one day get their wish and the government will cut these programs that essentially benefit children.

    Even if that were the case, do you REALLY think your taxes will be lower? And by how much??? And are you prepared for the social consequences of thrusting children into greater poverty and growing up with even more hopelessness? Work closely with these kids and their families, and see for yourself.

    And strange enough, why in the world does the boogey-man Bill Clinton have to do with everything? It’s becoming frightening to see Fox News logic become an accepted way of thinking. Tossing up the former President as if that is an argument that proves ANYTHING is flawed in too many ways to bother to address. What does mentioning that man, Bill Clinton, prove??

    And finally, what makes you think “liberal” families haven’t done all that yours has and more?

    I think most of us can sympathize with your agitation, but the thought that it’s these “The Liberals” who are some sort of boogey-men holding down decent and generous “Conservatives,” is far-fetched.

    It’s dangerous to have one group to blame for all the problems in society, even if for now, it’s just these “The Liberals.”
  31. Dell Gines Says:
    I posted this on Becca's site.

    I disagree with you on this one James.

    My grandmother had some drama in her life when she was younger with my grandfather, as a result I hardly saw him (and his new family) before she died.

    This played a significant part in the structure of our family, my pops, and aunts and uncles, and shaped it in someways more negative than it would been if he had stayed with my grandmother and the drama wouldn't be there.

    That was an important part of her life.

    Image if I would have got up at my grandmothers funeral and started blasting off on my grandfather for being a A*hole, disrespecting her, and not being involved in the life of his children and grandchildren to a sufficient degree.

    He was apart of my grandmothers life, he did have a signficant influence but to do that, at that time (the celebration of her life) would have been totally disrespectful.

    At he funeral you are celebrating life, and to make a mockery of that celebration by using it as a pulpit to advance your own political agenda, attack a president sitting behind you, and other members who were there to appreciate her life for that day is rude, crude and disrespectful.
  32. jan brauner Says:
    Thank you for separating your perceptions about conservatives in general, from conservatives in Washington.I appreciate it that you responded to my rant in such a thoughtful and considerate way.

    And, I do think that conservatives are very involved in the issues that you are concerned with, but they have a different problem solving tack. Honestly, when I look at liberal Ireland, and how pitifully poor it was (50% below the EU average) and then it decided to adopt some different economic principles and it is now more than 20% above the EU and is skyrocketing to the top.The poor there are astronomically better off. That is what I want for America, and I would love for you to at least consider that there is a huge group of us that simply see economics differently than you, and think that we can raise more people out of poverty a different way.

    Stop listening to the big mouths who don't speak for all conservatives. I sure as heck hope that Cindy Sheehan doesn't apeak for you.

    I brought up Clinton, as he received standing ovations at the funeral, and is obviously considered an enormous friend of the poor and blacks. Yet, to me, he and his wife are the epitome of flash without substance. Bill Clinton can empathize better than anyone I have ever seen, but it doesn't translate as far as his wallet goes.Personally, I bet he's a blast to hang out with. I just feel that he is one of the truly great narcissists of all time, and that he and Hillary are charlatans.

    James, here are a few budget numbers for you on an annual basis:
    Education: up 19%
    community development: up 14.4%
    veterans benefits: up 10.9%
    medicaid: up 9.9%
    housing programs: up 16.7%

    Also, the EITC program has been great.

    I think a lot of the time, when things are cut,the programs are ineffective. If there is a program in which over 97% goes to administration, and there is no demonstrable benefit to the recipients, why can't we have a dialogue about a better way, without accusations? I don't get this dynamic. I saw it in Saudi, where they provided medicine for evryone. At first, it started out ok, but it very quickly descended into chaos. When I had my accident, I had to come to the United States to see doctors. Now, if I said to you that I am absolutely against a government run healthcare system, it is because I have lived in three countries that had them, and they were nightmares.

    As to allowing price controls on medicine, what eventually happens is that you get a vaccine crisis, because you drive everyone out of business. Further, creativity is stifled, and new medicines are not created, because there is no incentive.

    I was going to respond to ODBMK, but upon reflection, I decided against it.
  33. jan brauner Says:
    My next door neighbor travels around the world with her husband five times a year. They choose to live in this neighborhood so that they can indulge in their travel fantasies. One day, when I was over there, we were discussing Medicare, and they were outraged. They said that they have plenty of money to pay for their care, but that Medicare forces free care upon them when they do not need it. According to them, most of the people they know are in this boat. Wouldn't it make sense if the government cut back upon those who did not need the government to pay for them? When you hear about a "cut", you immediately assume that it is a cut to someone who is going to be out on the street. When I hear about a cut, I look at documents, and figures, and wonder if it will be people like my next door neighbors. They say that they are afraid of what is going to happen to their grandchildren if this keeps up. That is how I feel.

    Compassion to one person is often cruelty to another.
  34. Stacy-Deanne Says:
    I didn't agree with them confronting Bush at Coretta's funeral. That was downright disrespectful. The lady was being put to rest. It was her time to be honored and the time for her family to mourn. Politics had no business being in the picture. I don't like Bush myself but I don't think people should use anyone's funeral as a debate for politices. Maybe others think so but am I the only one that found that tacky and disrespectful? Come on there is a time and place for everything and shouting politics and confronting Bush is not what you need to do at someone's funeral. I was disgusted by hearing what some people did. They should have shown some respect. Yeah a lot of people hate Bush but that doesn't mean you need to act a fool in places where you should show some reserve. I agree with Little Miss Chatterbox and anyone else who found this disgusting. I would hate to have someone use one of my relative's funerals as a place to spit politics. I think these people just wanted their names in the paper. It was sick. What happened to the world today? No one shows respect for anyone anymore. It's sad to think about. I guess I was raised differently because I sure as heck wouldn't have done something like this. To me it doesn't matter if she was a political figure or not. If a man is a poker player and he's dead. Is it okay to break out the cards and start playing at his funeral? If a porn star dies, is it okay for everyone to start freaking at the funeral? See my point? I don't think so. There should be a line and grown folks should know how to act. Even children know how to act at a funeral. I know some may have found this a good thing to do but I have too much respect for people to even think this was acceptable or that it could be rationalized. I just can't see that and no matter how someone tries to explain the reasoning it still wasn't a decent thing to do. This was Coretta's day to be honored and cherished. It wasn't people's time to get back at Bush. They should protest like everyone else or confront him in other ways. This wasn't the place or the time.
  35. jan brauner Says:
    As to Coretta's funeral...I do think that Lowery should have addressed civil rights, and done so in a powerful way. I think that's appropriate. I also think that he could have done so without singling out one person, as the tragedy of civil rights has been one of an entire nation over centuries. By adding a degree of specificity,as he did, he took his message from the sweeping thunder of a recapitualtion of Coretta's work and dreams and placed it into a political tit for tat. He diminshed what could have been an awesome oratory reminding America where we have been and where we need to go.
  36. Our Dearly Beloved Mrs. King Says:
    @ jan brauner:

    I can't disagree with you on this last comment.

    Well put.
  37. jan brauner Says:
    Our Dearly Beloved Mrs. King;

    Thank you so much for that thumbs up.
  38. Zeezy4Sheezy Says:
    My only gripe with the funeral service was that it was 12 hours long.. Why show respect for the President??? He disrespected the NAACP by being the first President since Roosevelt to not speak at the annual convention. Him and Rev. Eddie Long are ruuning mates anyway and part of the reason why he got re-elected.. So Rev. Lowery comments were on point
  39. jan brauner Says:
    Did Bush get asked to speak at the convention?
  40. jan brauner Says:
    Did you ask a question one day about price controls on drugs? If so, I just found an article that I thought might be interesting.

  41. StarPrincess Says:
    I too was glad! Unfortunately I could not attend but I caught a short recap on E! and loved it. Sad thing he probably wasn't listening.

    James check out my blog...haven't written in a week since I moved to Florida but I will soon.

    CondensedChaos here at blogger