Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 21, 2014, 02:53:08 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Congressional Elections (Moderator: Joe Republic)
| | |-+  Why Joe Lieberman must be defeated
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: Why Joe Lieberman must be defeated  (Read 7812 times)
Rob
Bob
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6321
United States
Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -9.39

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: July 25, 2006, 01:03:52 am »
Ignore

I sure as hell don't understand why Connecticut Democrats would want to reject an experienced voice in the Senate for a single-issue candidate whose only political job was on the New Haven town counsel.

Because change can be a good thing? Voting out a career politician in favor of an outsider sounds pretty positive to me.

I also don't understand why these voters would want to send a message to voters across the country that the Democratic Party is controlled by radicals, not pragmatists.

Not this again. (1) a majority of Americans take the "radical" position of opposing the war in Iraq, and (2) the vast majority of Americans simply don't care about this primary race.

This sends a disturbing message to potential Democratic voters and isolates others.  The fact that our party won't tolerate someone who so much as disagrees with liberals on ONE issue signifies that perhaps we are not the all-inclusive big tent that many would consider us to be.

To quote BRTD:

"Gee, I'm really pissed at Bush and the Republicans and like Cardin/Webb/McCaskill/Brown/etc. but some guy in another state won a primary and beat the more moderate incumbent, because of that all Democrats are now completely tainted and I can't vote for any Democrat. I'm voting for the corrupt Bush rubber stamp."

It is not going to have a national impact, as many Democrats for Lieberman perversely seem to want.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2006, 05:41:05 am by Rob »Logged

Hereís what Sarah Palin represents: being a fat fucking pig who pins ďCountry FirstĒ buttons on his man titties and chants ďU-S-A! U-S-A!Ē at the top of his lungs while his kids live off credit cards and Saudis buy up all the mortgages in Kansas.
opebo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47609


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: July 25, 2006, 01:44:20 am »
Ignore

What is really wrong with Lieberman isn't specifically his support for the war or various other right-wing positions, it is that he is too friendly with the other side.  Republicans are the enemy, and until Democrats get serious about treating them as such, they will not gain power.

From what I have heard of him I much prefer Menendez.  We need to attack, attack, attack.  Leiberman is useless for this purpose, so who needs him?
Logged

The essence of democracy at its purest is a lynch mob

Christmas Bushie 2014
BushOklahoma
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21982
Kenya


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: July 25, 2006, 08:00:23 am »
Ignore

What is really wrong with Lieberman isn't specifically his support for the war or various other right-wing positions, it is that he is too friendly with the other side.  Republicans are the enemy, and until Democrats get serious about treating them as such, they will not gain power.

From what I have heard of him I much prefer Menendez.  We need to attack, attack, attack.  Leiberman is useless for this purpose, so who needs him?

The Republicans aren't all bad just like the Democrats aren't all good and vice versa.  The Republicans are NOT the enemy.  Rather those who oppose the Almighty God of the Christians are the enemy.

I am a part of the religious right and I am going to bring this out and tell the truth.  CHRISTIANITY is the ONLY religion that will survive.  All of these other religions, such as mormonism, islam, buddhism, hinduism, etc, will all one day be eliminated and The Lord God Jehovah will reign victorius.  I don't mean to preach, but I can't be silent on the truth, either.  No offense, but Republicans seem to have more of the Biblical values than do Democrats.  The Bible is pro-life, the Republicans are pro-life, the Bible is anti-gay-marriage, so are Republicans,.  The Bible supports the death penalty, so do most Republicans.  I could go on and on and on, but I'll let everybody else figure it out.  Thats why I believe the majority of America is trending right rather than left.  Conservatism is our real future.

I'm not saying all Democrats are bad.  There are some Democrats who agree 100% with the Bible, too.  However, it seems that when people tout the first amendment freedom of religion, they mean any religion but Christianity.

I'll get off my soap box, now, but it just irks me why people don't care an inkling about God's Word sometimes and say that one party is horrible.

One last thing, I'd rather eat lunch with Jerry Falwell than Howard Dean.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2006, 08:01:57 am by BushOklahoma »Logged

My earlier comment notwithstanding, I do think that the site would be better off if Inks left his position. (The fact that the village idiot has dropped in to express his support for him only confirms this.)
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: July 25, 2006, 08:24:27 am »
Ignore

The Republicans aren't all bad just like the Democrats aren't all good and vice versa.  The Republicans are NOT the enemy
And up to here, I agree with you.
Quote
Rather those who oppose the Almighty God of the Christians are the enemy.
No. I am NOT your enemy either. Get that. Thank you.
Unless of course you were to take arms or whatever to make that prophecy (I've accidentally snipped it, but what followed next in your post) come true. But in that (hypothetical) case, the US government is your enemy too. Bush is your enemy too. Most of the Christian conservatives in congress are your enemy too. This is because your threatening them, not because they or we are threatening you.

Quote
No offense, but Republicans seem to have more of the Biblical values than do Democrats.  The Bible is pro-life, the Republicans are pro-life, the Bible is anti-gay-marriage, so are Republicans,.  The Bible supports the death penalty, so do most Republicans. 
The bible is anti-gay full stop. I seem to recall that the picture on abortion is not quite that black-and-white though. Generally though, of course, my and most people's reply can be summed up as "Aye, so what?" - it's a true fact, but nothing follows. (Or for those who see the Religious Right as the ENEMY - and they certainly exist -, what follows is that the Republicans are not the party to support.) 
Quote
Thats why I believe the majority of America is trending right rather than left.  Conservatism is our real future.
Non Sequitur.
Quote
I'm not saying all Democrats are bad.  There are some Democrats who agree 100% with the Bible, too.  However, it seems that when people tout the first amendment freedom of religion, they mean any religion but Christianity.
What they mean is Freedom from Religion.

Quote
I'll get off my soap box, now, but it just irks me why people don't care an inkling about God's Word sometimes
I do, I just don't see the Bible as containing much of God's Word.

Hope this is enlightening. Smiley
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
GOP = Terrorists
Progress
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1673


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: July 25, 2006, 08:59:52 am »
Ignore

Well, hard concept or not, I sure as hell don't understand why Connecticut Democrats would want to reject an experienced voice in the Senate for a single-issue candidate whose only political job was on the New Haven town counsel.

Well there are two mistakes in that post.  Lamont isn't a single issue candidate.  He wont be the last democrat to fall in line on protecting social security, he wont vote for Bush's crazy energy bills, and he won't increase the power of the presidency.  Further it is Greenwich not New Haven.

Quote
I also don't understand why these voters would want to send a message to voters across the country that the Democratic Party is controlled by radicals, not pragmatists.

Sorry the radicals are the warmongers.  A super majority of Nutmeggers oppose the war and a massive supermajority of our Democrats do. 

Quote
Look, I believed Iraq was a mistake from the start.

BS you've been one of its biggest supporters here red and blue included.

Quote
But we're there now, we're stuck until we can hand off control of the country to the new Iraqi government.

Sorry will never happen and we're not stuck anywhere.

Quote
Pulling out immediately would be a waste of hundreds of billions of dollars, not to mention hundereds of American lives.

Those were already wasted.  Our future actions have nothing to do with it.

Quote
We will have accomplished nothing.  The best alternative is to develop a short-term timeline to exit Iraq.  I believe Lieberman supports this idea, albeit his idea of a "timeline" may be slightly longer than most Democrats would prefer.

Yeah 10+ years is longer than any Democrat wants.  You, Harry, and some others may be big supporters of the war but in reality you're not democrats anymore than Zell Miller is.

Quote
I truly hope that Connecticut voters don't vote this man out of office.  He is not a crazed "war-monger".

Yes he is and yes we will.

Quote
Hell, aside from this ONE issue, he agrees with the liberal wing of the Democratic Party on a variety of things (e.g. pro-abortion, pro-stem cell research, pro-gun control).


So do our Republicans.

Quote
This sends a disturbing message to potential Democratic voters and isolates others.

No it shows the difference between the two parties.  That the GOP supports illegal immoral wars of aggression that kill thousands of American troops and handicap tens of thousands of others while killing tens of thousands of Iraqis and spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer $ for no reason.

Quote
The fact that our party won't tolerate someone who so much as disagrees with liberals on ONE issue signifies that perhaps we are not the all-inclusive big tent that many would consider us to be.

We should not be a "big tent party" that includes people who still support Iraq.  If you support Iraq go join Bush's party.  Or better yet go sign up and go to Iraq cause you obviously support the war more than you do our country or our party.
Logged

only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: July 25, 2006, 09:07:39 am »
Ignore

Uh, how can he have supported the Iraq War on here from the start when he signed on just a year ago?
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
GOP = Terrorists
Progress
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1673


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: July 25, 2006, 09:25:53 am »
Ignore

Uh, how can he have supported the Iraq War on here from the start when he signed on just a year ago?

Quote
Look, I believed Iraq was a mistake from the start.

Quote
BS you've been one of its biggest supporters here red and blue included.
Logged

Sibboleth
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 56816
Saint Helena


View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: July 25, 2006, 09:43:03 am »
Ignore

Can we all get one thing straight, please? Lamont is not an extremist, not an "outsider", not a "radical" and isn't much of a left-winger either.
Reading through some of the comments I've seen on this race, you'd almost think that Lamont was a John McDonnell and not the upper class (and really rather establishment-ish) paternalistic liberal that he actually is...
« Last Edit: July 25, 2006, 04:57:49 pm by Al Widdershins »Logged

"I have become entangled in my own data, and my conclusion stands in direct contradiction to the initial idea from which I started. Proceeding from unlimited freedom, I end with unlimited despotism. I will add, however, that there can be no solution of the social formula except mine."
Virginian87
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3618
Political Matrix
E: -3.55, S: 2.70

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: July 25, 2006, 04:25:06 pm »
Ignore


Sorry the radicals are the warmongers.  A super majority of Nutmeggers oppose the war and a massive supermajority of our Democrats do. 

Quote
Look, I believed Iraq was a mistake from the start.

BS you've been one of its biggest supporters here red and blue included.

First of all, how the hell do you equate "warmonger" by being against an immediate pullout?  Lieberman, as I mentioned before, advocates staying in Iraq until we can hand off the country to the new Iraqi government and its military.  I'm sorry you feel that this is wrong, but let me tell you something.  The country of Iraq was drawn nearly 90 years ago arbitrariliy, with no respect to ethnic and religious lines.  For almost all of its history, it has been ruled by strong, authoritarian leaders, similar to Marshal Tito in Yugoslavia.  Now, when Tito died in 1980, Yugoslavia fell into disarray, eventually tearing itself apart by ethnic faction until it disintegrated into several different republics.  That's exactly what will happen to Iraq if we pull out immediately.  The resulting ethnic conflict in Iraq would spill into the Middle East region, and an authoritarian country with possible nuclear capabilities like Iran may try to gain control of it.  So to avert a crisis like this, we must stay in Iraq, at least until the Iraqi government can take control of its own country. 

I myself would like to bring the troops home as soon as possible, but we have to see this government through.  Otherwise our total effort would have been a waste.  This support to stay still does not make Lieberman a warmonger.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2006, 04:27:12 pm by Tredrick »Logged
GOP = Terrorists
Progress
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1673


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: July 25, 2006, 04:31:36 pm »
Ignore

First of all, how the hell do you equate "warmonger" by being against an immediate pullout?

You support the continued bombing of children for no reason other than Bush felt like lieing to the American people about it.

Quote
Lieberman, as I mentioned before, advocates staying in Iraq until we can hand off the country to the new Iraqi government and its military.  I'm sorry you feel that this is wrong, but let me tell you something.  The country of Iraq was drawn nearly 90 years ago arbitrariliy, with no respect to ethnic and religious lines.  For almost all of its history, it has been ruled by strong, authoritarian leaders, similar to Marshal Tito in Yugoslavia.  Now, when Tito died in 1980, Yugoslavia fell into disarray, eventually tearing itself apart by ethnic faction until it disintegrated into several different republics.  That's exactly what will happen to Iraq if we pull out immediately.

That is exactly what will happen if we pull out now or in 15 years.

Quote
The resulting ethnic conflict in Iraq would spill into the Middle East region, and an authoritarian country with possible nuclear capabilities like Iran may try to gain control of it.

It is going to happen.  IT IS HAPPENING.  The difference is that you want our guys to be over there killing children and enflaming tensions.

It already has effective control over any democratic Iraq.

« Last Edit: July 25, 2006, 04:38:17 pm by Tredrick »Logged

Virginian87
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3618
Political Matrix
E: -3.55, S: 2.70

View Profile
« Reply #35 on: July 25, 2006, 04:38:12 pm »
Ignore

I'm going to stop responding to your constant attacks, Progress.  You haven't been able to back up anything you say, but just persist in calling me a warmonger and telling me that I'm not a "true Democrat".  Come back and debate me when you have some facts, because your arguments thus far are somewhat pathetic.
Logged
GOP = Terrorists
Progress
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1673


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: July 25, 2006, 04:49:20 pm »
Ignore

I'm going to stop responding to your constant attacks, Progress.  You haven't been able to back up anything you say, but just persist in calling me a warmonger and telling me that I'm not a "true Democrat".  Come back and debate me when you have some facts, because your arguments thus far are somewhat pathetic.

Fact:  You want our troops to stay in Iraq resulting in them both dieing and killing more innocent Iraqi civilians.
Logged

Christmas Bushie 2014
BushOklahoma
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21982
Kenya


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: July 25, 2006, 05:41:12 pm »
Ignore

Bill Clinton has endorsed Joe Lieberman.  The report was on Fox News "Special Report with Brit Hume" at 5:30 pm CDT.

The Lamont supporters still aren't scared.

It still remains to be seen whether Connecticut Democrats love Bill Clinton more or hate Joe Lieberman more.
Logged

My earlier comment notwithstanding, I do think that the site would be better off if Inks left his position. (The fact that the village idiot has dropped in to express his support for him only confirms this.)
Virginian87
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3618
Political Matrix
E: -3.55, S: 2.70

View Profile
« Reply #38 on: July 25, 2006, 05:49:19 pm »
Ignore

It still remains to be seen whether Connecticut Democrats love Bill Clinton more or hate Joe Lieberman more.

Oh they're gonna hate Bill Clinton now for supporting the "warmonger" Joe Lieberman.
Logged
Christmas Bushie 2014
BushOklahoma
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21982
Kenya


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: July 25, 2006, 06:00:24 pm »
Ignore

On the same show "Special Report with Brit Hume" on Fox News, they were saying in a 3-party race with Lieberman as Independent that Lieberman would manhandle Lamont and Shlies, 51-27-9.
Logged

My earlier comment notwithstanding, I do think that the site would be better off if Inks left his position. (The fact that the village idiot has dropped in to express his support for him only confirms this.)
Virginian87
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3618
Political Matrix
E: -3.55, S: 2.70

View Profile
« Reply #40 on: July 25, 2006, 06:08:24 pm »
Ignore

On the same show "Special Report with Brit Hume" on Fox News, they were saying in a 3-party race with Lieberman as Independent that Lieberman would manhandle Lamont and Shlies, 51-27-9.

Of course he would.  He'd have a sizeable chunk of the Democratic and Republican vote and pretty much all of the moderates.  It's pretty much a given that he will win either way.  It just makes this whole primary a waste of time and money.
Logged
○∙◄☻•tπ[╪AV┼cVÍ└
jfern
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31885


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: July 25, 2006, 06:13:23 pm »
Ignore

On the same show "Special Report with Brit Hume" on Fox News, they were saying in a 3-party race with Lieberman as Independent that Lieberman would manhandle Lamont and Shlies, 51-27-9.

Rasmussen says 40-40-13.
Anyways, Joe's threats of running as an Indy shouldn't make people vote for him in the primary.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/July%202006/connecticutSenateJuly.htm
Logged
○∙◄☻•tπ[╪AV┼cVÍ└
jfern
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31885


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: July 25, 2006, 06:17:08 pm »
Ignore

It still remains to be seen whether Connecticut Democrats love Bill Clinton more or hate Joe Lieberman more.

Oh they're gonna hate Bill Clinton now for supporting the "warmonger" Joe Lieberman.

Clinton said he'd support the primary winner, which seems pretty reasonable.
Logged
jerusalemcar5
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2743
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -8.35

View Profile
« Reply #43 on: July 25, 2006, 08:13:26 pm »
Ignore

I'm going to stop responding to your constant attacks, Progress.  You haven't been able to back up anything you say, but just persist in calling me a warmonger and telling me that I'm not a "true Democrat".  Come back and debate me when you have some facts, because your arguments thus far are somewhat pathetic.

Without using attacks I will try to explain something.  The democratic government will never be able to take control and neither will military or police forces.  All evidence supports that theory.  Iraq's arbitrary lines will cause the nation to collapse.  It just has to happen.  Our troops are too few to ever quell the resistance and so are theirs.  There is just no support to say that "sticking the course" will yield anythin, but more death.
Logged
black and white band photos
BRTD
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 72511
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: July 25, 2006, 09:19:09 pm »
Ignore

I'm going to stop responding to your constant attacks, Progress.  You haven't been able to back up anything you say, but just persist in calling me a warmonger and telling me that I'm not a "true Democrat".  Come back and debate me when you have some facts, because your arguments thus far are somewhat pathetic.

Without using attacks I will try to explain something.  The democratic government will never be able to take control and neither will military or police forces.  All evidence supports that theory.  Iraq's arbitrary lines will cause the nation to collapse.  It just has to happen.  Our troops are too few to ever quell the resistance and so are theirs.  There is just no support to say that "sticking the course" will yield anythin, but more death.

Correct. Iraq is just like the former Yugoslavia, it's not a sustainable nation.

And I'm not one to tell people to change their avatar colors, but I'll definitely have to say so to BushOklahoma after that post awhile back. As if his name wasn't enough.
Logged




01/05/2004-01/10/2014
Christmas Bushie 2014
BushOklahoma
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21982
Kenya


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: July 25, 2006, 10:06:14 pm »
Ignore

And I'm not one to tell people to change their avatar colors, but I'll definitely have to say so to BushOklahoma after that post awhile back. As if his name wasn't enough.

The reason I don't change my avatar color is while I am a registered Republican, I'm not so hard-core that I hate Democrats.  I have voted for Democrats in the past (i.e. John Kerry) and am planning to vote for a Democrat in November 2006 (Brad Henry).  As my political matrix says I am a social conservative and an fiscally left-of-center.  I consider myself to fall in between John McCain and Bill Frist on the conservative scale.

My posts in the past may have shown otherwise, but I just don't like vast left-wing conspiratists.  The moderate and even slightly liberal Democrats are okay.

I voted for John Kerry in 2004, because at the time I thought like many of the people in this forum, I thought we needed a fresh face to handle the war in Iraq.

Even though he's a staunch liberal, I still kinda like John Kerry, though I won't vote for him again if he runs, and I also like his former running mate, John Edwards.  He's a liberal, but I don't think he's as hard-core as, say, Ted Kennedy or Hillary Clinton, or Barbara Boxer, etc.
Logged

My earlier comment notwithstanding, I do think that the site would be better off if Inks left his position. (The fact that the village idiot has dropped in to express his support for him only confirms this.)
jerusalemcar5
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2743
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -8.35

View Profile
« Reply #46 on: July 25, 2006, 10:33:34 pm »
Ignore



My posts in the past may have shown otherwise, but I just don't like vast left-wing conspiratists. 

Excuse me?  What are those?

Even though he's a staunch liberal, I still kinda like John Kerry

He is no staunch liberal, though Bush did play that card well.  He's intermediate Democrat (in between moderate and liberal), but he isn't that great.  He's basically a staunch panderer.  If you look at his Senate record before the 2004 election, you can see he was definitely not a liberal.
Logged
Virginian87
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3618
Political Matrix
E: -3.55, S: 2.70

View Profile
« Reply #47 on: July 26, 2006, 04:51:41 pm »
Ignore

The reason I don't change my avatar color is while I am a registered Republican, I'm not so hard-core that I hate Democrats.  I have voted for Democrats in the past (i.e. John Kerry) and am planning to vote for a Democrat in November 2006 (Brad Henry).  As my political matrix says I am a social conservative and an fiscally left-of-center.  I consider myself to fall in between John McCain and Bill Frist on the conservative scale.

It's good to see you sporting that red avatar.  There is a healthy moderate Democratic contingent here, including Preston Caldwell, Frodo, myself, Dave Hawk, and josh22 (who switched parties recently).  You're probably more conservative than I am on some issues, but it's refreshing to see some moderates from the Sooner State.  Perhaps you'll re-register as a Democrat someday. 

I too hope Henry wins a second term this November.  He and Dave Freudenthal are the best things we have going for us in the Plains states.
Logged
Christmas Bushie 2014
BushOklahoma
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21982
Kenya


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: July 26, 2006, 10:31:08 pm »
Ignore

The reason I don't change my avatar color is while I am a registered Republican, I'm not so hard-core that I hate Democrats.  I have voted for Democrats in the past (i.e. John Kerry) and am planning to vote for a Democrat in November 2006 (Brad Henry).  As my political matrix says I am a social conservative and an fiscally left-of-center.  I consider myself to fall in between John McCain and Bill Frist on the conservative scale.

It's good to see you sporting that red avatar.  There is a healthy moderate Democratic contingent here, including Preston Caldwell, Frodo, myself, Dave Hawk, and josh22 (who switched parties recently).  You're probably more conservative than I am on some issues, but it's refreshing to see some moderates from the Sooner State.  Perhaps you'll re-register as a Democrat someday. 

I too hope Henry wins a second term this November.  He and Dave Freudenthal are the best things we have going for us in the Plains states.

Thanks, Senator,

I will actually have a chance to re-register in late August or early September as I will be moving to Northwestern Oklahoma in middle August.  I can't re-register until August 23 at the earliest due to our runoff on August 22, but I will do it in late August or early September.  Definitely before registration closes in early October in advance of the November election.  I have been pondering a switch, formally, to the Democratic party, but I still haven't made up my mind, yet.  I'll let you know, though, as soon as I do.  I like both parties so its a hard decision.  The majority of my family are staunch Republicans, but I'm quietly the rebel of the group as I'm a little to their left on some things.  They think I am a staunch conservative Republican, and I don't want to come out and tell them, because I like talking politics with them.  The good thing is, they don't have to know, as I have the freedom of political affiliation in our Constitution.
Logged

My earlier comment notwithstanding, I do think that the site would be better off if Inks left his position. (The fact that the village idiot has dropped in to express his support for him only confirms this.)
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines