Oh horrors! Al Franken gives the Democrats control of the Senate, and at least one Republican, Frank Feehery, knows just what that means, that the Democrats will force us all to count using base ten. Woe is us. Hide the women and children, bring the dog in for the night, and careful that Aunt Lily is taking her medicine. Yawn! From Feehery’s commentary at CNN:

The metric system is the kind of thing that you can expect from the 60-vote filibuster-proof majority Democrats now have in the United States Senate.

After the Watergate scandal in 1974, Democrats trounced Republicans in the mid-term elections, getting 61 seats in the Senate and 291 in the House.

In the Senate, they adjusted the rules to make it harder for Republicans to filibuster (reducing the magic number from 67 to 60 to invoke cloture, which ends debate). In the House, they passed all kinds of reforms to take power away from senior members and give it to junior members. And Congress mandated that the American people embrace the metric system.

The only thing worse would be gay men fencing with meter length measuring sticks on Broadway while singing about grams and liters. But I do understand the Republican fear of the metric system. It would bring them into the 18th century, and that was certainly a scary place to be. Why, there was a revolution back then, with real live tea parties that didn’t involve Republicans sucking on balls! The fine, fine thing about Feehery’s column is that he agrees that the Republicans suck, and that they are ultimately responsible for the Democrats getting 60 Senate seats:

This is a good time for such self-reflection. Republicans lost three top-notch senators in the last election — Norm Coleman, Gordon Smith and John Sununu — who lost not because they were bad senators, or because they had scandals, or because they had lost touch with constituents. All three lost because they were Republicans.

In other words, the brand killed them. And if you look at the latest polls, the GOP brand hasn’t gotten any better in the last six months. In fact, according to Gallup, even 38 percent of Republicans have a negative view of the Republican Party.

OK, Feehery is a bit loony to think Coleman was a top-notch Senator. But he is right that the Republican brand is suffering, and further that there seems no recovery in sight. Not with “just say no” ruling the Republicans on the national level and scandals plaguing them out beyond the bletway. Feehery cites 38% of Republicans who are dissatisfied with their own party. That just isn’t a small number.

Meanwhile, Happy Independence Day to Al Franken and to all of us who are tired of Republicans and their fears. This weekend my family will be down the shore. Young Jack will take part in a small ceremony of conversion to the Jewish faith. Alas, we will not be using a traditional mikvah for his immersion, but the Atlantic ocean. Well, as you can see, the boy likes the beach enough, so he should like the ocean as well. We’ll see.

Hmm, we could start a War on Independence Day, couldn’t we? I mean, it is the wrong time of year for a War on Christmas, but the Republicans always want a war on something. Maybe just a Duel on Independence Day would do, sparklers at ten paces and all that. Hmm, I’ll have to check into it.

Glenn Beck recently claimed that the Tea Bagging movement was not just “stupid people with pitchforks.” I’ll have to agree. It’s also about many other kinds of stupid people. One of them is Joe Wurzelbacher, aka “Joe the Plumber,” who claims that God’s plan for him is to work in the faux grassroots Tea Bagging movement. From WingNutDaily:

“Americans in general have a short memory,” Wurzelbacher said. “After Sept. 11 happened, we were patriots for six months, and then half of them fell off. Now there’s a very real threat to our country. I don’t believe any one nation can take us out, but I definitely think we can take ourselves out.”

Asked if he has plans to run for public office, he replied, “I hope not. You know, I talked to God about that and he was like, ‘No.’”

He continued, “I believe he’s gotten me on this grassroots movement. If I can encourage leaders to step up, that’s what I would like to do. That’s a heavy role. That’s something I don’t know if I am prepared to do yet.”

But Wurzelbacher said he will keep that door open if God ever calls him to be that leader.

“I just know whenever I fall off his path, things get really hard,” he said. “So I just stick with what God tells me to do.”

OK, there’s more important stuff here than God being a teabagger. Joe Wurzelbacher says God has not given him the go-ahead to run for office. Oh, sure, Joe Wurzelbacher says he’s open to the notion of running for office if God whispers in his ear, but it seems clear we’re not going to see that happen in the near future. And that’s a shame. Every minute Joe Wurzelbacher is the face of conservatives is a bright day for liberals and Democrats. As such, God telling Joe not to run for office just might be a sign that God hates liberals and Democrats.

I apologiaze to anyone who now has an image of Joe the Plumber int he act of teabagging running around their brain. That image might be just as ugly as one of the man talking, and for that I apologize as well.

In Wausau, Joe the Plumber got his history a bit altered. From the Wausau Daily Herald, via Wonkette:

Conservatives in Wausau on Thursday decried President Barack Obama’s economic policies at a gathering hosted by the conservative free-market group Americans for Prosperity.

The event, called “Pints and Politics,” brought to town Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher, known during the 2008 presidential campaign as “Joe the Plumber.”

. . .

Wurzelbacher has a reputation for being a blunt, politically incorrect speaker. Referring to Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., more than once, Wurzelbacher asked, “Why hasn’t he been strung up?”

And he glosses over facts. Referring to the Constitution as “almost like the Bible,” Wurzelbacher said of the Founding Fathers: “They knew socialism doesn’t work. They knew communism doesn’t work.” The Constitution predates the origins of socialism by nearly 100 years.

I’m guessing Joe had a pint too many, and while it is mildly disturbing that Joe doesn’t know his history, that isn’t surprising. He was likely raised on a freeper diet or something. But suggesting that Chris Dodd be strung up? That’s too much. Still, not unexpected. Joe’s role appears to be to rile up the great core of the GOP, the ones who threatened all sorts of things during the election. Maybe DHS should have an alert that anyone who nods when listening to Joe the Plumber should be watched.

Some columns are easier to write than others.

This is one of them.

Providing all of my research were the “family values” Republicans.

This week, second term Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina disappeared for six days, leaving the state without a chief executive who could make decisions in an emergency. His Republican lieutenant governor didn’t know where he was, and had not been given any authority to make decisions in his absence. The state police said they had not been informed. His wife told the Associated Press she didn’t know where he was, wasn’t worried about him, and thought he was “writing something and wanted some space to get away from the kids” over the Father’s Day weekend. His senior aides said he was walking along the Appalachian Trail to “clear his head.”

But it wasn’t his head that he was clearing. When he returned, after first lying to a reporter for the Columbia State who caught up with him on his return to the Atlanta airport, he finally admitted he went to Argentina to meet with a long-time lover. His wife, who was not by his side when he held an early afternoon press conference, later said she and the governor had separated two weeks earlier. The State later produced e-mail love letters it had been keeping since December.

The rising young star of the Republican party who was seen as a presidential contender in 2012, the man who was head of the Republican Governors Association until the day after he acknowledged his extramarital affair, the man who had wanted to deprive his state of $700 million in federal stimulus funds as a political message to President Obama, the man who had established himself as a beacon for the sanctity of marriage and the values of the oh-so-pure Religious right, was not only an adulterer, but for at least the second time had left his state at risk since there were no contingency plans of how to reach him in an emergency.

Alas, Gov. Sanford isn’t the only “family values” philanderer. Slightly more than a week earlier, Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) admitted he had a nine month extramarital affair with one of his campaign staff. Ensign, who was contemplating a run for president in 2012, had been chair of the Republican Policy Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Like Gov. Sanford, Sen. Ensign only admitted to the affair after information had been leaked to the media.

This is the same John Ensign who, as a congressman, had curled his lips in revulsion at Bill Clinton’s affair, and demanded he either resign or be impeached. “He has no credibility,” Ensign told the Las Vegas Review–Journal in 1998. Six years later, now a senator, Ensign supported a federal ban on same sex marriages by declaring, “Marriage is the cornerstone on which our society was founded . . . . [M]arriage, and the sanctity of that institution, predates the American Constitution and the founding of our nation.” Ironically, Ensign is active in Promise Keepers, an evangelical group.

Also vigorously calling for President Clinton’s impeachment, while having had their own extramarital affairs and covering them up or lying about them, were:

● Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), chair of the House judiciary committee and the “house manager” for the impeachment, who lied about his own four-year affair with a married woman and then when a newspaper published details in 1998 called the affair in the 40s nothing more than a “youthful indiscretion.” He retired in 2007 after 17 terms in the House.

●Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.), who was the first legislator in Congress to call for Clinton’s resignation and then became one of the leaders of the impeachment movement. Barr’s background, however, wasn’t family values pure. He never denied committing adultery with his second wife, and later, while married to his third wife, was photographed at what passed as a charity event licking whipped cream off the breasts of two women. Barr left office in 2003, after four terms.

● Rep. Helen Chenoweth (R-Idaho), who was one of the first to call for Clinton’s resignation, told the Spokane Spokesman-Review that God had pardoned her sins for her six-year extra-marital affair. Chenoweth left office in January 2001 after keeping her promise not to serve more than three terms.

● Fourteen term Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind), chair of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, who not only had a long-time affair with a state employee but had fathered a son from that affair. His website once screamed, “Above all, Dan Burton believes the people have a right to principled leadership and that character does matter.”

● Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho), who told Tim Russert on NBC-TV’s “Meet the Press” in 1999 that “The American people already know that Bill Clinton is a bad boy—a naughty boy. I’m going to speak out for the citizens of my state, who in the majority think that Bill Clinton is probably even a nasty, bad, naughty boy.” However, Craig himself was a “bad boy.” In September 2007 he pleaded guilty, and then tried to withdraw his conviction on charges that he solicited a man in the Minneapolis–St. Paul airport. Several gay men later told the Idaho Statesman that Craig, who was married since 1983, had previously tried to solicit them or had sexual relations with them. Craig resigned in September 2007, and then reversed himself, staying in office through 2008. He did not run for re-election.

● Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), House speaker from 1995 to 1999, who may have had an affair while his first wife was in the hospital recovering from cancer. Gingrich later cheated on his second wife with the woman who became his third wife during the time he was pushing for Clinton’s resignation.

● Rep. Bob Livingston (R-La.), who was Gingrich’s designated successor until he admitted his own infidelities and eventually resigned from the House.

● Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), who was elected to Livingston’s House seat and served three terms before being identified in a prostitution scandal in Louisiana. In 2004, he was elected to the Senate, three years before Hustler magazine linked him as a client of a prostitution service in Washington, D.C.

● Rep. Don Sherwood (R-Pa), who had a five year affair with a woman 35 years his junior. She later charged that Sherwood had assaulted her several times. He eventually settled for what AP reported was about $500,000. Among those who supported Sherwood during his primary re-election were Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), one of the leaders of the conservative coalition who in November 2005 said that “Compassionate Conservatism relies on healthy families,” and President George W. Bush who went to northeastern Pennsylvania to help raise funds for Sherwood. However, in the general election of November 2006, Sherwood was defeated for a fifth term.

Add to the list of morally bankrupt Republicans:

● Five term Sen. Bob Packwood (R-Ore.) who resigned in September 1995, three years before the Clinton impeachment, after the bipartisan Ethics Committee unanimously recommended his expulsion following charges of sexual abuse and assault by 10 women, most of them either former staffers or lobbyists.

● Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.), a six-term congressman, and co-chair of the Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucus, who had sent sexually explicit e-mails and text messages to a 16 year-old male Congressional page. Foley resigned in September 2006, two months before the general election, long after the Republican leadership had failed to discipline him, and only after a blog (stopsexpredators.blogspot.com) and ABC-TV news exposed his hoped-for affairs may have included other staff dating back at least a decade.

● Rep. Robert E. Bauman (R-Md.), publicly homophobic founder of Young Americans for Freedom and the American Conservative Union, who admitted he had solicited sex with a 16 year old male. Bauman lost the general election in 1980 and later declared himself to be gay.

● Rep. Donald Lukens (R-Ohio), who was convicted in 1989 of a misdemeanor for having sex with a 16-year-old girl. The “affair” may have begun three years earlier. Lukens finally resigned in October 1990, after having lost the Republican primary several months earlier.

Republican leaders aren’t the only ones who commit adultery, nor are conservatives or members of the Religious Right, including preachers, solely the ones to have violated the seventh and tenth Commandments. But, it is the “family values” Republican leaders, who have led the party of right wing moral indignation; it is the Religious Right that has overtaken the party and wears the now-tarnished shield of righteousness to protect itself against anyone who doesn’t share their own views of the world, including moderate and liberal Republicans, and anyone belonging to another political party.

The hypocrisy and moral turpitude of the leaders is just one reason why only 21 percent of Americans identify themselves as Republicans.

[Walter M. Brasch is a university professor of journalism, social issues columnist, and the author of 17 books. His current book is Sinking the Ship of State: The Presidency of George W. Bush, available from amazon.com, bn.com, and other stores. You may contact him through his website, www.walterbrasch.com]

With the recent revelations of John Ensign and Mark Sanford, both all for family values, both considering a run for the Presidency in 2012, and both guilty of having affairs, one has to wonder who is next. Which Republican will commit political hari kari next by chasing after an illicit piece of ass? Let’s calculate the odds.

30:1 Sarah Palin. She’s too much in the spotlight to pull it off, and she’s already got plenty of family cvalues problems. Still, I expect she’ll be travelling without family over the next couple of years, and there will be opportunities. But would she admit to it and tell the truth? Not a chance.

20:1 Mike Huckabee. Mike is more likely to be caught in bed than any of the others. He works at Fox, for crying out loud. Because Huckabee is an ordained minister, though, he’ll keep his pants on. He knows his base and knows he has no chance if even the slightest hint of impropriety is suspected.

2:1 Newt Gingrich. Everyone’s favorite. Reporters will be waiting to see if his wife is sniffling, then following Newt to see if they can catch this hound in the act. If his wife goes int he hospital, watch out!

80:1 Charlie Crist. He’s been lying about sex for so long he’s got it figured out. There’s not a chance Charlie Crist will get caught, and certainly no chance he will admit to boning some blonde surfer boy. Still, Crist obviously gave Sanford advise about tanning, so maybe he’ll be tainted with the association.

35:1 Mitt Romney. The man was raised Mormon, and while that does not give him any inside track to morality, I’m betting here that the special underwear instilled some kind of discipline in the Mittster.

2:1 Rudy Guilliani. How long has Rudy been married this time? I’d say he’s due. But should he even be on this list? No, he has no shot in 2012 unless all the others take a tumble in the hay together. That would take gay marriage passing in every state in the union and all their marriages failing at once.

15:1 Bobby Jindall. Bobby is young and presumably has his hormones working. Still, this guy doesn’t seem the horndog one little bit. He also is no communicator, but if the Republicans keep shooting themselves in the feet, serially, then he’s got a chance in 2012.

3:2 Tim Pawlenty. I’m going to use Pawlenty and Gingrich as one entry and figure one of them gets caught and goes on TV dripping crocadile tears about how horribly he’d harmed his family. Pawlenty has been under fire for not naming Al Franken the winner, and he’s primed for a big emotional failure.

50:1 Jeb Bush. Not a chance he is cheating. Wouldn’t it be a hoot if he got the Republican nomination because everyone else was caught screwing someone they shouldn’t?

Certainly any self-respecting blogger cannot refrain from writing about the biggest story in the news, the demise of the marriage of Jon and Kate, parents of eight cute little darlings. And I’ve got the scoop. Jon had an affair, then they went out with friends Adam and Steve, Kate got the payback thing going and wanted to do some good old fashioned swapping, like in that old movie, and Jon just couldn’t handle it. Divorce ensued, playing havoc with the TV ratings for TLC. First TLC gets MONGO ratings, then the put the Jon and Kate sans Jon show on hiatus. The world has now stopped revolving, and we are yet to hear from the Southern Baptist Convention.

The conventional wisdom is that Jon and Kate Gosselin, the parents of oodles of kids who have kept America in AWWW for years, have seperated because Jon was hanging out in bars and straying with waitresses. Or maybe Kate was doing the nasty with the bodyguard. Whateva! Jon had come upon the middle aged crazy thing early, or the stresses of multiple rugrats was getting to him, or somesuch nonsense. Or maybe Kate just wanted a little extra, if you know what I mean. But I’m here to break the big news, that the whole divorce thing is all because of teh gay. And I’m sure the Southern Baptist Convention could have prevented all this.

There’s the big question. Does the church the Gosselin’s attend, play a role in this? I’m not saying that Glad Tidings Assemby of God Chruch in West Lawn, PA is accepting of gay parisioners, but I’m not seeing that they’ve gone far enough to condemn teh gay in order to save Jon and Kate’s marriage. Oh the Horror! All those kids having to negotiate shared custody the rest of their lives! Glad Tidings Senior Pastor Bryan D. Koch better watch out for his own marriage, though. Just as “Jon” is teh gay spelling of “John,” a fine biblical name, so is “Bryan” a gay bastardization of the name of that important biblical figure “Brian.” There’s some fooling around going on here, and even the spellings of names can lead to teh gay and the end of marriages in divorces.

The Souther Baptist Convention has it right, though. It isn’t enough for a church to refuse to welcome members who are gay, nor is it enough for them to refuse to publish pictures of gay couples for their directory. Heck, refusing to publish pictures of heterosexual couples will get a congregation kicked out of the Souther Baptist Convention. That’s what happened to Broadway Baptist Church in the steamy, gay-ridden hotbed of Fort Worth, TX. The fine upstanding folks at Hepzibah Baptist over in Wendell, NC dropped the dime on Broadway, and they refused to bend over to pick it up, instead insisting that Broadway be kicked out of the SBC! Oh, sure, there is whining out there that this is all about some whiney internet rumor and innuendo, but we all know what the real cause here is, just as we know it in the case of the Gosselin divorce, that teh gay is insidious and will get even a fine church like Broadway Baptist.

I can’t close this little rambling assault on teh gay and marriage and couples who pop them out like a Pez container without mentioning that Monica Yant Kinney is also to blame. In her most recent column Ms. Kinney slyly makes fun of the theory that gay marriage will lead to people marrying their lawn mowers. That kind of attitude is what leads to events like the Gosselin divorce, which likely will be seen soon as a Broadway musical (not affiliated with Browday Baptist Church). And I am still not buying tickets.

Robert Bork was interviewed by Newsweek concerning the Sonia Sotomayor nomination to the Supreme Court. This guy has made a career out of being deemed unfit for the Supreme Court. I’m not sure I’ve heard of failure catipulting anyone so far. Surely Bork being interviewed about another Supreme Court nominee is like a failure like former FEMA Director Mike Brown being interviewed about disaster preparedness. Still, the interview is revealing concerning exactly why Mr. Bork got borked. First, he evidently doesn’t know the difference between sympathy and empathy. From Newsweek:

President Obama has spoken of empathy as his key standard for choosing judicial nominees. What do you think of that approach?

I don’t know exactly what empathy means. I suppose at a minimum it means you want a judge who will depart from the meaning of the constitution when a sympathetic case arises. It does seem to raise a warning that we’re talking about a judge who does not follow the law.

Pretty basic english language skill, to tell the difference between “sympathy” and “empathy,” but there’s some real trouble with getting the english language right over on the conservative side of the political spectrum, so maybe Bork has just been infected by Pat Buchanan and his extremist Republican compadres. It appears that for Bork “empathy” means an opportunity to take political potshots at someone with whom he disagrees. And since that’s the standard Republican definition nowadays, I’d say the Senate was right back in the day to Bork this guy. But it gets better. Here’s Robert Bork on his favorite Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas:

How have you been struck by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito since they were appointed?

My general impression of them is quite good. The justice up there who I most admire is Clarence Thomas. I notice that when he and Scalia differ—it’s not that often, but when they do—I tend to agree with Thomas.

There’s a damned good reason that Bork was borked. He’s clearly certifiable to think Clarence Thomas is the prize on the SCOTUS. I’m not sure you could find one other person out there who would agree with that assessment who is not the member of some whackjob conservative group. I suppose with that answer one has to wonder at the journalistic acumen Newsweek uses to decide to interview Bork. What, and give this kind of whackjobbery legitimacy? Maybe that’s what’s wrong with journalism today, that they think they must get an opposing view, and from as famous a name as possible, regardless of how extremist or insufferable the famous name is.

Mark Sanford, Governor of South Carolina and widely speculated to be a candidate for President in 2012, is missing. He has been gone for the last several days, including Father’s Day, a holiday a family values candidate would not be likely to miss. From reports, even his wife does not know where he is. From the AP wire, it seems Mark Sanford is pouting:

His spokesman Joel Sawyer released a statement saying the governor was taking a break after losing the fight.

“Gov. Sanford is taking some time away from the office this week to recharge after the stimulus battle and the legislative session and to work on a couple of projects that have fallen by the wayside,” Sawyer said.

Sawyer wouldn’t say where the Sanford was, but said in another release the governor let his staff know where he was going before he left last week and said he would check in.

A post-session wind-down isn’t uncommon and he goes “out of pocket for a few days at a time to clear his head,” Sawyer said. “Obviously, that’s going to be somewhat out of the question this time given the attention this particular absence has gotten.”

Sawyer didn’t immediately respond to further questions. Law enforcement officials who handle his security also declined to comment.

Sanford typically is open about his whereabouts, and his office makes no secret of time spent on vacation or out of state.

But politicians, including the lieutenant governor, said they did not know Sanford was taking time away from his office.

So Mark Sanford didn’t get his way on refusing the Obama stimulus money, and now he’s gone off to pout? That seems to be the explanation, though a big family man like Mark Sanford would be unlikely to miss Father’s Day. Perhaps this is a mystery designed to get the media all heated up about the guy and give him an air of mystery? Stay tuned.

First a small focus on the incendiary words Charles Krauthammer uses in arguing against Barack Obama’s steady and unruffled policy towards Iran. The title to Charles Krauthammer’s article is “Obama’s Immoral Silence,” and just from that we get a hint of Krauthammer’s panicky and irresponsible hyperbole, for Barack Obama has not in fact been silent concerning the elections in Iran. Yes, Krauthammer’s argument is insulting in its use of straw men and exaggeration, but that’s nothing surprising with the neocon bunch. Here’s just one of those irresponsible passages from Krauthammer’s article today, from the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Then, after treating this popular revolution as an inconvenience to the real business of Obama-Khamenei negotiations, the president speaks favorably of “some initial reaction from the supreme leader that indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns about the election.”

Where to begin? “Supreme leader”? Note the abject solicitousness with which the American president confers this honorific on a clerical dictator who, even as his minions attack demonstrators, offers to examine some returns in some electoral districts - a farcical fix that will do nothing to alter the fraudulence of the election.

Krauthammer’s assumption is that Barack Obama honors the leaders behind the scenes in Iran, when there’s simply no indication of that at all. The use of the phrase “Supreme Leader,” a phrase used by everyone when discussing the clerics who actually run Iran, is an excuse for Krauthammer to attack, attack, attack, and attack is exactly what Krauthammer wants as policy, though this time, instead of supporting a military attack, as he did in Iraq, Krauthammer wants some sort of rhetorical attack. What a freaking putz.

Charles Krauthammer advocated the invasion of Iraq on various occasions for various reasons. He was vocal about the connections of Iraq to 9/11, and was proven wrong, he was vocal about the notion that Iraq had WMD, and was proven wrong, and he was vocal that conquering Iraq would be the first step in a Democratizing Domino Theory that would result in free and fair elections throughout the Middle East. Yeah, Krauthammer was wrong there, as well. It is this last theory that he’s pushing as part of his whine to get Barack Obama to step up the rhetoric about Iran.

Yeah, Charles Krauthammer is pounding out the drumbeats of war yet again, and along the way he’s writing irresponsible drivel filled with straw men and whacked out rhetorical accusations. But he does the Philadelphia Inquirer proud representing the conservative cause — that’s what they want, a cadre of conservatives, no matter what dishonest whackjobbery they throw out there, to balance the nonexistent liberal voices on the paper. If the Washington Post and the Philadelphia Inquirer want a enocon whackjob frothing at the mouth on their opinion pages, they’ve got one in Charles Krauthammer, a Republican Pundit Gone Wild.

Senator Ensign had an affair with someone employed by him. There’s money involved, and also there’s some complaining by the husband of Ensign’s paramour. Here’s a section of a letter Douglas Hampton wrote to Fox News, practically begging them to investigate. From the Las Vegas Sun:

There is a tremendous amount (sic) of details and critical facts associated with this story and their relationship that will not be addressed in this letter but are very important and need to be further explored if you choose to meet with me. The purpose of this letter is to establish the framework for discussion and provide enough information to warrant a meeting with you and Fox News. This is the only letter of its kind and no other news stations have been contacted with this information. I have great respect and affection for Fox News and many of your collages (sic). I’m sending this to you because you have a legal back ground (sic) and this story has several legal elements.

The unethical behavior and immoral choice of Senator Ensign has been confronted by me and others on a number of occasions over this past year. In fact one of the confrontations took place in February 2008 at his home in Washington DC (sic) with a group of his peers. One of the attendee’s (sic) was Senator Tom Coburn from Oklahoma as well as several other men who are close to the Senator. Senator Ensign’s conduct and relentless pursuit of my wife led to our dismissal in April of 2008. I would like to say he stopped his heinous conduct and pursuit upon our leaving, but that was not the case and his actions did not subside until August of 2008.

The actions of Senator Ensign have ruined our lives and careers and left my family in shambles. We have lost significant income, suffered indescribable pain and emotional suffering. We find ourselves today with an overwhelming loss of relationships, career opportunities and hope for recovery. Our pursuit of justice continues to place me and my family in harm’s way as we fear for our well being (sic).

Articles discussing the case can be found at Politico and at the Las Vegas Sun, among other places. For the record, Fox News is denying it ever received Douglas Hampton’s letter. Hey, nobody imagines they would do investigations into a case of adultry on the part of a Republican. Denial works well for them, I’d say.

I’m thinking we have some lying liars involved here, and that John Ensign is one of them. Will this story explode?