22’s my baby, but the only difficulty is the context – the force of the “should” is both the purpose of the original system and, more directly, his own (failed) reform proposal that would have mandated acceptance or rejection of public financing for the whole cycle (I think).

This was fun. Thomas is a little unwieldy, but it’s still your friend.

I’d say follow the money. What are they doing now, who are their relatives, and who are their lawyers?

i had a question in the mccain/charlie black thread that didn’t get answered—

here’s the comment i posted–

finally, closer to an answer for my question that i asked the other day……

on the link above, called a strongly worded letter-pdf—the fec states the two things that would make it illegal to withdraw from their agreement……

but, another part of the question i have been wondering about, did he state on the loan agreement anything that is a violation of these rules?

the fec letter references two paragraphs from the bank loan agreement. that are in contention.

can’t find it.

does anyone have alink to the bank loan agreement?

4 is brief and to the point, and like Christy, I think 22 is just a perfect example of John McCain, Concern Troll Extraordinaire.

I do really like 16 as well though. Talk about an accidental telling of the truth…

¿ George Francis Bauckham of Oak Ridge, N.J., who received five years probation in 1958 for the unlawfully detention or delay of the mail by a postal employee. . . .

“¿ Marvin Robert Foster of Boca Raton, Fla., who was sentenced to a year of probation in 1968 for making a false statement in connection with a Federal Housing Administration loan. . . .

He’s pardoning people from 1958?

Somehow I missed that part of the Oath of Office. My Bad. I thought it said something about protecting and defending that Goddamn Piece of Paper.