:: Has the whole world gone mad or is it just me. ::

:: Saturday, August 23, 2003 ::

:: Beauxbeaux's Daddy 5:58 PM [+] ::
...

North County Times - North San Diego and Southwest Riverside County News: "Bush has no plan for Iraq except oil

Living without electricity would make life pretty miserable: no water, no refrigeration to keep food fresh, no air conditioning in the summer, no transportation, raw sewage running into the rivers, looting, medical help curtailed, sleeping outdoors with mosquitoes and no jobs because industry cannot operate.

Now the people in the Northeast United States and Southeast Canada know what the Iraqi people have been going through ever since the Bush invasion. Both tragedies have been caused by lack of planning by the Bush administration.

In the rush to invade Iraq, a postwar plan to protect facilities and provide basic services for the people was never developed, except for the oilfields. Months later, in most of the country basic services have still not been restored. People are living in 120-degree heat without enough water. Thanks to poor planning on the part of the Bush war machine, Iraqi children are dying every day from dehydration and dysentery.

George Bush indirectly admitted that his administration was at fault for the recent power failure in this country by stating that our national electrical energy system needs modernization. The first thing needed before that can happen is a national energy policy, which he has never developed. His version of an energy policy is to drill more oil wells and invade other countries. Because of the $100 billion that has been spent on the invasion and another $200 billion needed to rebuild Iraq, there is not enough money left to rebuild our own aging electrical system. Perhaps Bush would like to start by donating some of the hundreds of millions of campaign dollars he has raised from his oilfield buddies.

GENE GEROW
"
:: Beauxbeaux's Daddy 6:01 PM [+] ::
...

washingtonpost.com

Security May Not Be Safe Issue for Bush in '04


By Dana Milbank and Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, August 22, 2003; Page A01





The wave of violent death this week in Iraq, Israel, Gaza and Afghanistan brought to the fore a reality that President Bush has been reluctant to discuss: Peace is not at hand.



A confident Bush stood in the Rose Garden less than a month ago, saying, "Conditions in most of Iraq are growing more peaceful," boasting of "dismantling the al Qaeda operation" and pronouncing "pretty good progress" toward Middle East peace and a Palestinian state within two years.



Those sunny characterizations may yet prove true, but Bush allies and foes alike are coming to the conclusion that the progress may not be noticeable by the time Bush faces the voters again in 15 months. For a president who has staked his reputation on making "a tough decision to make the world more peaceful," this could be a big problem.



Both Republican and Democratic strategists have begun adjusting their plans for what they once viewed as unthinkable: that Bush's handling of national security in general, and the war in Iraq in particular, could become a vulnerability rather than an asset in his reelection race.



One presidential adviser said the suicide attacks hours apart in Iraq and Israel, which undermined the two anchors of Bush's ambitious effort to transform the Middle East, made Tuesday "by far the worst political day for Bush since 9/11."



In one of the new Democratic charges, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.), ranking minority member on the Foreign Relations Committee, said the images from Iraq are making it ever plainer to the public that Bush's plan for a more peaceful world "has clearly not occurred." On the contrary, he said, "the world is more apprehensive about our leadership."



Bush will have a chance to refine his portrayal of the stakes in postwar Iraq when he addresses a friendly audience of veterans, the American Legion's national convention, Tuesday in Missouri, a crucial state in the presidential race. Some foreign policy experts, even conservatives who support Bush's policy, say he should begin to prepare the country for a long haul. "We should not try to convince people that things are getting better," said former Reagan official Kenneth Adelman, who is close to several Bush officials. "Rather, we should convince people that ours is the age of terrorism."



To be sure, there is plenty of time for events in Iraq and elsewhere in the region to improve, as yesterday's announcement of the capture of Ali Hassan Majeed, Iraq's "Chemical Ali," confirmed. If former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein is killed or captured and the illicit weapons uncovered, it is possible that resistance would fold quickly and U.S. troops could return home.



Even without that, GOP pollsters say, there is no cause for alarm. A poll taken in late July by Public Opinion Strategies found that the number of people calling the war and its aftermath a success had fallen from 85 percent in April but was at a still-strong 63 percent. "Americans are quintessential optimists," said Bill McInturff, who conducted the poll.



Still, after this week's violence, several Republican officials said they are rethinking calculations that Bush's vulnerability is the economy. "A couple of months ago, everyone believed national security was the president's trump card," said one Republican with ties to the White House. "Now, we could be in a position where the economy is growing very nicely, well in advance of the election, and the vulnerability could be on the national security side."



Independent experts see more political trouble than advantage for Bush in Iraq. "There is a substantial potential for the occupation of Iraq to become a deep political problem for Bush," according to Ohio State University's John Mueller, an authority on public opinion and war. If things go well, people will lose interest, but if things go badly, "people are increasingly likely to see the war as a mistake, and starting and continuing wars that people come to consider mistaken does not enhance a president's reelectability."



The matter is politically important to Bush because he has made the peaceful transformation of the Middle East the main justification for war in Iraq. With the failure to find forbidden weapons in Iraq, Bush and his aides have said the invasion of Iraq will allow it to become the linchpin of a stable and democratic Middle East. In one version of this argument, Bush said last week that in deciding to go to war in Iraq, he made "a tough decision to make the world more peaceful." As a result, continued violence in Iraq and the Middle East would deprive the administration of another key justification for the war.



Bush seemed to acknowledge the political importance when he gave himself a deadline for showing results. "We've got a year and a while during my first term to make the world a more peaceful place, and we'll do it," he said earlier this month.



Though Bush has consistently cautioned Americans that the war on terrorism will be long, he has been upbeat about progress. In his May 1 speech proclaiming "victory" in the war in Iraq, he also said "we destroyed the Taliban" in Afghanistan, and predicted that in the war on terrorism, "we do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide."



Top Bush aides have begun to talk about a long and expensive U.S. presence in the Middle East, a generational commitment akin to the half-century presence in Europe during the Cold War. "Today America and our friends and allies must commit ourselves to a long-term transformation in another part of the world: the Middle East," national security adviser Condoleezza Rice wrote this month in The Washington Post.



Foreign policy expert Richard N. Perle, who has close ties to the administration, recommended that Bush caution Americans about the lengthy commitment. "It may be a very long time before we've so substantially eliminated the source of terror that we can pronounce that we are safe," he said.



Bush, however, has not emphasized that point -- which, opponents say, means Americans may believe that he played down the commitment. "Iraq is going to be a long slog," said Democratic pollster Jeremy Rosner. "He hasn't prepared the nation for the reconstruction of Iraq."



Democrats, while still approaching the subject gingerly, are increasingly willing to take on Bush for his choices overseas.



Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.) said from the campaign trail in Las Vegas that at event after event, voters who are supportive of the military ask him when the troops will be coming home from Iraq. "The president seems oblivious to the fact that we're over there almost alone," Gephardt said. "We're not getting less violence, we're not getting the country put back together, people are getting killed, and the forces are stretched thin."



Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), former political adviser to President Bill Clinton, said, "Presidents get the benefit of the doubt in any war. But they don't get blind loyalty when Americans think they were given a false sense of security or led into a situation that made them more vulnerable."



Republican officials, while acknowledging this has been a terrible week, say this week's attacks prove Bush's point that he is taking on a global struggle. His advisers say they are not worried that Bush's popularity will be tied to his handling of international relations. Of course, a failed foreign policy would undo Bush as surely as it did President Jimmy Carter during the Iranian hostage crisis, one adviser said. But Bush is a long way from that -- and his allies still believe that Democrats challenge his foreign policy performance at their peril.



"Democrats could find themselves more willing to attack on national security concerns than the economy if we have several months of strong growth and declining unemployment," said Vin Weber, a former Republican House member from Minnesota. "But that will mean they are fighting the campaign on an issue that has long been Republican turf."











© 2003 The Washington Post Company
:: Beauxbeaux's Daddy 5:50 AM [+] ::
...

 
JAMES O. GOLDBOROUGH
Why we aren't winning the peace in Iraq



James O. Goldsborough
THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE

August 21, 2003


What terrible irony that the United Nations, which stood so steadfastly against George W. Bush's war, should be the target of Tuesday's suicide attack in Baghdad. Turning on your defender is an act of total desperation.

In a war that makes no sense, targeting Sergio Vieira de Mello, the U.N. mission leader in Iraq, is like targeting Mother Theresa. A man of great humanity, he was in Iraq to help save the situation into which Bush has placed our nation. To the bombers, however, he was just one more faceless symbol of foreign occupation.

As several U.S. and British reports have indicated recently, Bush's war will inevitably lead to an increase in worldwide terrorism. It has animated and coalesced terror groups, drawing them into Iraq as they once went into Afghanistan.

This problem, of course, is precisely what the U.N. Security Council worried about. However much Bush's advisers may have disliked Saddam Hussein, war and occupation were always likely to create more problems than they solved.

The Bush administration has lost all sense of reality about Iraq. This is perhaps human nature: One tries to defend bad choices by plunging in deeper – what's called "averaging down" on Wall Street and "doubling up" in gambling. The "Charge of the Light Brigade" mentality is strong among decision-makers back in London or Washington.

Examine Bush's use of the word "terrorists" to describe those attacking U.S. forces. What makes people opposing occupation of their land terrorists? Was French, Yugoslav and Greek resistance to Nazi occupation terrorism? Was Native American resistance to white "manifest destiny" terrorism? Is Palestinian resistance to Israeli settlements on the West Bank terrorism? When defeated fighters take up other means to oppose the occupier, do they become terrorists? Who are the terrorists in such situations?

Terrorism is sometimes defined as war against civilians, but what if the civilians are illegal settlers? War should be fought only by professional armies, but scorched earth tactics are common to every war. We learned recently from the Union-Tribune's James Crawley that the U.S. military used chemical weapons (napalm-type) against Iraq in a war fought putatively to deprive Iraq of chemical weapons that may not exist. Who is the terrorist?

Bush has us in a no-win situation, and no fiddling with words will make things better. This war was conceived by those in the administration who believe it is America's job to remake the Middle East according to their design, and such projects have no record of success in our time. To compare Iraq to postwar Germany or Japan is absurd. Bush's war is imperialism by another name, and the distinction is lost on Iraqis.

The problem here is the problem with most imperialist wars: the military part is the easy part. But what then? Two centuries ago, the British could name Victoria Queen of India, and the French could annex Algeria as part of France. A century ago the British could claim Palestine and Iraq as the fruits of war, and the French could do the same with Syria and Lebanon. Let them try it today. Military victory would be just as swift (excepting India), but what then? Talleyrand still said it best: You can do everything with bayonets except sit on them.

Paul Wolfowitz and his fellow schemers, whose orders are carried out by L. Paul Bremer in Baghdad, are fighting for Iraqi hearts and minds. It is a battle they cannot win because however noble they think their intentions, they still have turned our nation into invaders and occupiers. Did not Pericles seek to bring democracy to Sparta? Did not Rome seek to civilize Europe in the Roman fashion? The French and British empires were said to be "civilizing" missions, though their true goal was raw materials.

What makes our times different is the United Nations. We must establish rules, said the World War II victors, led by the United States. We will create a Security Council which alone will have the authority to make war. When a nation starts a war of aggression, the council will act to stop it.

It hasn't worked that way in practice because council nations tend to be the major aggressors, but at least the U.N. Charter provides a benchmark for war legitimacy. The council overwhelmingly believed Bush's war was illegitimate and would make a more dangerous world, and so it has.

The United Nations is in an awkward situation. Iraq is not Kosovo where the council helped stop the fighting and create the peace. In Iraq, America brought the fighting and ruined the peace. The council knows after Tuesday's bombing that even if Bush agreed to hand over authority in Iraq to the council, as in Kosovo, which he won't, U.N. troops would be no safer from attack than Americans.

America is engaged in a futile process, which anyone with a sense of history could foresee. Our authority is resented, and anyone we elevate alongside us will become an equal target. Our forces live behind walls and wear armor outside them. We are an occupying army attempting to foist our ideas and ways on an ancient people known for its xenophobia.

We should not be surprised that the situation is unraveling.

Goldsborough can be reached via e-mail at

jim.goldsborough@uniontrib.com.



Copyright 2003 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.









 


 













 

Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/thu/opinion/news_mz1e21golds.html

 
:: Beauxbeaux's Daddy 6:39 AM [+] ::
...

North County Times - North San Diego and Southwest Riverside County columnists: "Why Bush is protecting the Saudis

According to newspaper reports, George Bush withheld 28 missing pages of the 9-11 report that confirm Saudi connections to the attack in the name of national security. He is afraid of further investigations into Saudi support for al-Qaida and his own Saudi connections.

James R. Bath, a wealthy Texan and legal representative of Khalid bin Mahfuuz, invested $50,000 in Bush's Arbusto '79 and Arbusto '80 Ltd., set up to avoid income taxes. Then Abdullah Taha Bakhsh capitalized Harken Oil in 1987. Bakhsh was the partner of Mahfuuz and Ghaith Pharoan, key figures in the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), helping fund al-Qaida. In 1992, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations recommended further investigation of BCCI money laundering, arms trafficking, drug trafficking, tax evasion, fraud and use by the CIA before BCCI was liquidated in 1991.

FBI Director of Counterterrorism John O'Neill was told to back off his Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida investigations. He quit the FBI In August 2001 over administration stonewalling of the USS Cole bombing. O'Neill became the security chief of the World Trade Center - where he died on 9-11.

Americans deserve the truth for the sake of all who have died since that fateful morning.

RADON TOLMAN

Oceansid
"
:: Beauxbeaux's Daddy 7:17 PM [+] ::
...

Few keeping Enron contributions: "

















Posted on Sat, May. 11, 2002








Few keeping Enron contributions

By JAY ROOT
Star-Telegram Austin Bureau



AUSTIN - The nation's top Republican and the state's highest-ranking Democrat have joined an increasingly exclusive group of politicians: those who still haven't given up campaign contributions from failed energy giant Enron.


Texas House Speaker Pete Laney, D-Hale Center, took a relatively meager $8,000, while President Bush received hundreds of thousands of dollars in political contributions from Enron interests in recent years.


But both are among a few officeholders in Texas and elsewhere who have resisted calls to contribute the money to charity, to Enron employees or back to the bankrupt company. 'The president is looking forward and not backward,' White House spokesman Taylor Gross said. He added that Bush supports 'tough enforcement laws to protect consumers' but declined to say whether returning the money was possible. Bush received more than $400,000 in Enron donations for his gubernatorial and presidential bids, the most of any candidate by far, records show.


Laney hasn't 'ruled out any options' regarding the Enron money he received, Laney spokesman John Bender said.


He said the money was 'received and spent in campaigns several years ago, and it's certainly nothing like the hundreds of thousands of dollars that others have received.'


Elsewhere, U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla, R-San Antonio, has not returned about $7,250 he received from Enron interests, and U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land, has said in the past that he had no plans to return the $28,900 he got. A similar amount was received by Rep. Joe Barton, R-Ennis, but his campaign did not provide information about the donations Friday.


The ranks of those not giving up their Enron money thinned considerably this week when two longtime holdouts, Gov. Rick Perry and Attorney General John Cornyn, reversed their opposition to the idea.


Perry, a Republican, had vociferously resisted giving the money up because he said there was nothing wrong with taking it in the first place and thus there was no reason to give it back after the company imploded and wiped out the savings of thousands of retirees.


Now, 'after the initial swirl around the company's collapse, it has become clear that the company's management took inappropriate and unacceptable actions,' Perry spokesman Ray Sullivan said.


The campaign gave about $85,000 - representing donations since 1998 - to a special scholarship fund for the children of Enron employees. Perry had received more than $200,000 from Enron interests for his state political campaigns, records show, but Sullivan said the pre-1998 money had all been spent.


Aides to Cornyn, the Republican nominee in the state's U.S. Senate race, acknowledged this week that the candidate had quietly given $200,000 in mid-April to the Greater Houston Community Foundation's Enron Employee Transition Fund.


That's more than the estimated $150,000 in Enron contributions he had received for his attorney general campaigns, records show. Cornyn changed his mind about keeping the money because he heard about the plight of the ex-employees and thought giving the money to them was 'the right thing to do,' campaign spokesman Dave Beckwith said.


The holdouts joined a long list of politicians who had earlier given their contributions to charities helping Enron employees. Among them are Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, Railroad Commissioner Tony Garza and Comptroller Carole Keeton Rylander.


'To me, from day one, it was just common sense,' Rylander said. 'There are Enron employees who are hurting out there.'


Jay Root, (512) 476-4294 jroot@star-telegram.com












© 2002 Star Telegram and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.dfw.com

"
:: Beauxbeaux's Daddy 5:34 AM [+] ::
...

Cheap shots: "Union-Tribune Editorial
Cheap shots



Simon starts candidates' mugging of opponents






August 19, 2003



Where does Arnold Schwarzenegger stand on Proposition 13, the 1978 initiative that capped California property taxes? 'With regards to my position on Proposition 13, my position is rock solid in support of that initiative,' Schwarzenegger declared on Sunday, elaborating on a statement issued earlier by his campaign reiterating his 'strong, unequivocal support' for the tax limitation measure.

Schwarzenegger's position on Proposition 13 is plain enough to us. He's 'rock solid' in support of it. Why, then, is rival GOP gubernatorial contender Bill Simon accusing Schwarzenegger of plotting to 'triple our property taxes'? In his first radio spot of the campaign, Simon tries to portray Schwarzenegger as a 'liberal' who opposes Proposition 13.

Running a distant fourth in the polls, Simon hopes to trip up Schwarzenegger by exploiting comments made last week by Nebraska investment guru Warren Buffett, the newly announced chief economic adviser to Schwarzenegger. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Buffet offered his own view that California's property taxes are too low %u2013 a view promptly repudiated by Schwarzenegger.

As cheap shots go, Simon's ad is pretty much in keeping with the dismal caliber of California's campaign discourse. In fact, Simon's mugging of Schwarzenegger is an instant replay of Gov. Gray Davis' savage assault last year on former Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, whom Davis characterized as a liberal big spender. In both cases, the prime casualty of the negative campaigning was the truth.

But the truth is not the only casualty of cynical politics. So, too, is the democratic process. That's because such manipulative campaign tactics alienate voters from the electoral process.

Just consider the 2002 gubernatorial food fight between Davis and Simon, which was marked by one character attack after another, with scant debate about the real issues confronting California. Not surprisingly, voter turnout in last year's race for governor was the lowest ever recorded %u2013 44.8 percent of the electorate. That represented a dramatic drop of almost 13 percentage points from the 1998 gubernatorial election.

The truth is, Simon's Proposition 13 ads are meant to mislead, not enlighten, the voters. He should pull them off the air. Then he should spell out in detail how he would address California's multibillion-dollar structural deficit, how he would improve our schools and business climate, and how he would pay for the increased infrastructure needed to support the state's population growth.

Every other candidate should do the same, most especially Schwarzenegger, who as an outsider is still a largely unknown political entity. And before this truncated campaign to recall Davis ends on Oct. 7, there should be a series of debates in which the major contenders are forced to defend their positions and challenge those of their rivals %u2013 on matters of substance."
:: Beauxbeaux's Daddy 5:16 AM [+] ::
...

washingtonpost.com: Utility Officers Gave to Bush: "washingtonpost.com

Utility Officers Gave to Bush




Tuesday, August 19, 2003; Page E02





The top two executives of FirstEnergy Corp., the Ohio-based utility that is a focus of investigations into last week's cascading blackouts, are key financial supporters of President Bush, according to campaign records.



H. Peter Burg, chairman and chief executive, was one of three hosts of a $600,000 fundraiser for Bush's reelection campaign in Akron, Ohio, on June 30. Vice President Cheney was the featured speaker.



Anthony J. Alexander, FirstEnergy's president and chief operating officer, was a 'Pioneer' for Bush's last campaign, meaning he raised at least $100,000. Alexander also contributed $100,000 to Bush's inaugural committee.



The Energy Department has dispatched teams of investigators to the Midwest and Northeast. Democrats have questioned whether Bush's administration coddled electric companies because of his long personal ties to the energy industry. FirstEnergy's ties could increase Capitol Hill scrutiny of the White House handling of the blackout aftermath.



Bush's campaign had no comment.



Records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show that FirstEnergy executives contributed about $50,000 to Bush's last campaign. Energy and natural resource interests gave the campaign more than $3.6 million, according to the group's figures.



When Bush was Texas governor, employees of the now-collapsed Enron Corp., the energy-trading company, were his most generous career patrons.



-- Mike Allen











© 2003 The Washington Post Company "
:: Beauxbeaux's Daddy 8:18 PM [+] ::
...

Schwarzenegger feels sting of being a front-runner Poll, criticism point to a tough campaign: "Schwarzenegger feels sting of being a front-runner Poll, criticism point to a tough campaign



By Kathy Kiely
USA TODAY




LOS ANGELES -- Suddenly, the Terminator looks vulnerable.

Arnold Schwarzenegger, who just last week seemed likely to flatten the opposition in the gubernatorial recall election, has come under fire, and his once formidable lead in the polls has disappeared.

Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, a Democrat who says he wishes he had Schwarzenegger's physique and his wallet, led the actor-turned-Republican candidate 25% to 22% in a Field Poll of California voters released over the weekend. The poll had an error margin of /--5%. The rest of the 133 candidates vying to become governor if voters oust Democratic incumbent Gray Davis trailed far behind.

The results appear to be highly volatile: 44% of those backing a candidate said they might change their minds.

The poll is just one of several signs that the historic recall election is far from over. Schwarzenegger is rich, popular, well-known and well-connected. But the celluloid superhero who bested the cyborg enemy in his latest film, Terminator 3, hasn't yet proven he can overcome the real-life attack of the political spin machine. Over the past few days, he got a taste of the agitation cycle:

* Rivals across the political spectrum pounced when financier Warren Buffett, Schwarzenegger's top economic adviser, criticized Proposition 13, the 1978 ballot initiative that slashed property taxes here. California has struggled to close a $38 billion deficit. Both conservative businessman Bill Simon, one of the Republicans running to replace Davis, and Davis himself defended the measure. Schwarzenegger said Sunday, ''Warren . . . clearly understands my strong unequivocal support for the initiative.''

* Conservative Republicans are making an issue of Schwarzenegger's Democratic connections. ''Mr. Schwarzenegger's surrounded himself with liberals,'' Simon said on NBC's Meet the Press. Besides Buffett, the GOP candidate's high-profile advisers include actor Rob Lowe. His wife, Maria Shriver, is a niece of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

* Schwarzenegger is counting on his macho screen image to win support from young Hispanic males. Hispanics are about 12% of the voters in most California elections. Antonio Gonzalez, president of the Southwest Voter Registration Project, says those voters won't like Schwarzenegger's support for Proposition 187, an initiative passed in 1994 to cut social services, including education and welfare benefits, to illegal immigrants and their children. Though it passed with 60% of the vote, courts struck it down. Gonzalez says it has political ramifications for Schwarzenegger, an immigrant himself: ''It will dramatically hurt him in the Latino community and motivate people to vote against him.''

* On Friday, a federal judge threatened to postpone the Oct. 7 recall election if four California counties do not comply with federal requirements to protect the voting rights of minorities. Another court challenge to delay the election until spring will be heard by another federal judge today. At issue: whether voting should proceed even though some counties have not yet met a court requirement to replace punch-card voting machines. A delay in the election would probably be welcomed by Democrats, who want more time to convince voters that recalling Davis is a bad idea."
:: Beauxbeaux's Daddy 4:27 AM [+] ::
...

Gossip -- With Gregoire!: "The Lowe Down



Compiling celebrity troubles for a gossip column just hasn't been the same since Rob Lowe decided to become respectable a few years back. Well, I'm happy to report that Robbie is back in trouble and back in the headlines! During a break from filming a new movie in Cleveland, the 'West Wing' hottie and some compatriots decided to investigate the city's rich topless bar scene. In fact, the group was apparently so enamored of one fine blouse-restricted establishment that the group was seen leaving with one of the dancers. Unfortunately, they were seen not only by other patrons of the sleaze house but by sleaze factory Star Magazine, who plastered the headline 'Rob Lowe's Sex Scandal With Stripper' in its greasy pages.



So did the maturing Brat Packer indulge in a little infidelity? Absolutely not, says his publicist and, more telling, the stripper herself, Liz Brisbee, who eloquently proclaims, 'I would have loved to have done Rob. He's real hot. But I did it with one of his assistants.' Liz, in this world, you take whatever the good Lord throws at you!



So, Sheryl Lowe, the Robsters wife, can rest easy. Unless, of course, she wonders what Rob was doing in a strip club in the first place..."
:: Beauxbeaux's Daddy 6:17 AM [+] ::
...