I looked at that list of targeted seats, and they're going after Stephanie Herseth despite her 69% last year? Is this like Rove saying he had "the" math? As the fake president's administration implodes and they put together vulnerability lists that make limited sense to me, my confidence in Rove's unbeatable political skills wanes. If we can stop the election fraud, then I look forward to election day next year.

Or maybe he's still the master the fearful on the Democratic side imagine, and this was put out as disinformation. Except this is turning into a new scandal by itself. Nah, I'm sticking with Rove is just mean, not brilliant.

A PowerPoint presentation on electoral politics conducted for partisan purposes, on federal property, appears to run afoul of that portion of the Hatch Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 7324, which prohibits, among other things, "political activity" engaged in "any room or building in the discharge of official duties by an individual employed or holding office in the Government of the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof." Violation of the Hatch Act carries criminal penalties.

Hidden in plain sight, in the chart titled "Secondary Defense", 14 GOP congressmen, winners in 2006 by margins of 55% to 88%, may not seek reelection in 2008. Among them, Denny Hastert.

My understanding is that Karl Rove is on the federal payroll employed to perform duties on behalf of all the people of the United States. If he is taking work time and using equipment and materials belonging to the federal government to craft strategy for political campaigns, his actions are unethical and illegal. As such, they need to be investigated and possibly prosecuted. I wondered why he was appointed to a government position in the first place instead of working for the Republican Party, since his interests, experience, and "skills" all relate to political campaigning, not to crafting and executing policy in government.

Your teaser: "A legally questionable presentation by Karl Rove's deputy gives a window into Republican thinking about 2006, and a look ahead to 2008."

Come now...don't be disingenuous. There's that little technicality known as The Hatch Act which forbids SPECIFICALLY exactly that kind of action. What about it doesn't meet the legal threshhold for you?

Call me naive, but, this is as clear-cut as can be.