0
   

Okay, Dems, What Went Wrong? And How Can We Fix It?

 
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 08:00 am
Hey Gunga,
Thanks so much for starting in the 1830's because it gives me a chance to show how much the Democratic Party has grown over the years. Yes, and thank God for Abraham Lincoln and the Republican of his day. Certainly an example of a leader not catering to his Southerner opposition's moral values. Do you think Abe would recognize the present GOP? I know he wouldn't believe who the Democrats are now either based on the 1830-1929.

I think what finally clicked for the Democrats was the phrase "Liberty and Justice for all". They finally saw the balance between liberty and justice and thus,
when the rise of unionism began it was the Democrats leading the way, when mine safety and work regulations had to passed to protect the lives of workers, it was the Democrats who lead the way,
when protections against old age poverty had to be found, Democrats lead the way,
Democrats lead the way against both Hitler's and the war's terrible aftermath -it was the Truman doctrine, remember?

And during the fifties and the sixties is was the Democrats fighting against members of their own party who fought for and won Civil Rights for all Americans.
Liberty and Justice for all.
Unemployment Compensation? A Democrat idea.
Medicare, Medicaid, Workmen's Compensation -- all Democratic ideas. The environmental Protection Agency a Democratic idea signed into law by Richard Nixon.
OSHA ditto.
Securities and Exchange Commission - Democratic idea.

And recently, Bill Clinton's Economic Recovery Act, passed without a single Republican vote, leading to the first budget surpluses in forty-five years. (The last being under LBJ) and the biggest REDUCTION in welfare benefits passed by any President which began as a Democratic pledge in Clinton's second run for the White House.

Not that the Republicans haven't helped America. They build some pretty good highways under Ike and, with Democratic help, build the largest, most powerful military in the world.

If you want to criticize JFK and LBJ for Viet Nam, fine, I'm on your side there. I was opposed to that war from the time I was twelve, even though later I enlisted in the USAF and after my enlistment spoke out against the war (sound familiar?) Why? Because I am a Democrat.
I believe in Liberty and Justice for all. Not just the powerful, but for all. Not just for the people who agree with our goals, but for all.

Yeah, we've come a long way from being the race-baiting, anti-Civil War draft rioting, KKK marching thugs of the past and redeemed ourselves in many ways, some not listed above in a misguided effort to be humble, but we have much work to do after the recent election.

We must find ways of fighting the assault that will soon come onto Civil Liberties, we must oppose doctrinaire hacks being put on the US Supreme Court (again), we must look for ways to make our ideas on tax reform be known without passing through gasbag Republican filters on Fox and we must get ready now for the mid-term elections.

All while hoping that the Administration will not lead us to disaster in Iraq, that they really are cognisant of the dangers of not securing our ports as they have not done in three years since 9-11 and that somehow it comes to them that we do not have to fight the war on terror as if we were the only target.



Joe
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 08:24 am
georgeob1 wrote:
blatham wrote:
How about, as a change of pace, digging up some actual examples or citations of what you claim rather than just setting your gums to the wind and letting fly.


Sniping, always sniping. C'mon the election margins in '92 and '96 are fairly well known and easy to find.

I lean, but only lightly. By theway the verse in question is preceeded by another that sets the scene. They are;

I sometimes think that never blows so red
The Rose as where some buried Caesar bled;
That every Hyacinth the Garden wears
Dropt in its Lap from some once lovely Head.

And this delightful Herb whose tender Green
Fledges the River's Lip on which we lean--
Ah, lean upon it lightly! for who knows
From what once lovely Lip it springs unseen!


george

You might want to look at her post again. Margins weren't the point.

I figured the poem for Hardy, but find you are quoting a blood-soaked Muslim. That's verging on the traitorous these days. Good advices therein, however:
1) if the tulips are looking a little ragged, toss Aunt Netty's head in with the compost
2) avoid leaning on parsley when it's between you and the river

I was, by the way, a bit disappointed that the theological discussion you began with a couple of fellows here didn't go any further. I'd love to watch that. If the opportunity arises again, I'd suggest a starting point of the Pope or, equally interesting, the tribulation. American evangelical theology is danged exciting. I think this could be very easily done. We'll just put some bleachers out in the sun, have it down on highway 61.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 11:50 am
OK, I was wrong about the margins.

The Muslim mathematician was the inspiration, but it was really the work of a good Irishman, old Ed Fitzgerald. For me the two verses express a lyric, beautiful thought. However I really did enjoy your version, especially the bit about slipping on the parsley. You have a talent ---

I found the post to which you referred. I rather liked it myself. Too bad it elicited no response - perhaps I'll try it again. You can sit on the asphalt in the sun while we wait.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 12:00 pm
Joe Nation wrote:
Hey Gunga,
Thanks so much for starting in the 1830's because it gives me a chance to show how much the Democratic Party has grown over the years...


Right....


The Democrat Party, then:

http://www.wildwestweb.net/cwp/cwp65.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0553212184/102-2468103-0389710?v=glance


and now:

http://www.thbookservice.com/bookimages/99/c6399_full.jpg

http://www.yaf.org/speakers/star_parker.html
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0785262199/102-2468103-0389710?v=glance&s=books



That's for the benefit of anybody who thinks black people are doing anything in the world other than getting screwed by this present arrangement with the democrat party. Everybody else pretty much knows what the democrat party is about and recognizes it as a threat as we just saw.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 12:06 pm
I find it very interesting that Lincoln ran on a platform that the Dems were too conservative. I guess it's about time we moved somewhat to the left.
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 12:16 pm
dyslexia wrote:
I find it very interesting that Lincoln ran on a platform that the Dems were too conservative. I guess it's about time we moved somewhat to the left.


That was Zell Miller's complaint. The Dem party he knew and loved left him when it veered sharply to the left.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 12:33 pm
<Just thinking that Elijah P. Lovejoy was killed by a mob on the night of November 7, 1837.>
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 12:34 pm
The Republican Party of now is much closer to the Democrat party of my young adult years and the two parties differed then not so much in process or expectations of outcome but in the approach to get from Point A to Point B.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 12:56 pm
georgeob1 wrote:
OK, I was wrong about the margins.

The Muslim mathematician was the inspiration, but it was really the work of a good Irishman, old Ed Fitzgerald. For me the two verses express a lyric, beautiful thought. However I really did enjoy your version, especially the bit about slipping on the parsley. You have a talent ---

I found the post to which you referred. I rather liked it myself. Too bad it elicited no response - perhaps I'll try it again. You can sit on the asphalt in the sun while we wait.


It is a beautiful bit of poetry, and reminded me of the Aenid.

Met thomas yesterday for breakfast and a walk in Central Park. Too bad my ex-wife couldn't come along, she would have enjoyed his company. Lovely fellow, of course.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 03:09 pm
I'll post this Simon Schama piece in its entirety for its excellence and pertinence...and because I think he has it exactly right.

Quote:
Onward Christian soldiers

The hopefuls in the Democrat camp really believed victory in the US election was within their grasp. How did they get it so wrong? They failed to appreciate, says Simon Schama, that their country is now in fact two nations that loathe and fear each other - Godly and Worldly America

Friday November 5, 2004
The Guardian

In the wee small hours of November 3 2004, a new country appeared on the map of the modern world: the DSA, the Divided States of America. Oh yes, I know, the obligatory pieties about "healing" have begun; not least from the lips of the noble Loser. This is music to the ears of the Victor of course, who wants nothing better than for us all to Come Together, a position otherwise known as unconditional surrender. Please, fellow curmudgeons and last ditchers, can someone on the losing side just for once not roll over and fall into a warm bath of patriotic platitudes at such moments, but toot the flute of battle instead; yell and holler and snarl just a wee bit? I don't want to heal the wound, I want to scratch the damned thing until it hurts and bleeds - and then maybe we'll have what it takes to get up from the mat. Do we think the far-right Republican candidate Barry Goldwater, in the ashy dawn of his annihilation in 1964, wanted to share? Don't think so. He wanted to win; sometime. And now, by God, he has.
"We are one nation," the newborn star of Democrats, Senator-elect Barack Obama, exclaimed, even as every salient fact of political life belied him. Well might he invoke Lincoln, for not since the Civil war has the fault line between its two halves been so glaringly clear, nor the chasm between its two cultures so starkly unbridgeable. Even territorially (with the exception of Florida, its peninsular finger pointing expectantly at tottering Cuba), the two Americas are topographically coherent and almost contiguous. One of those Americas is a perimeter, lying on the oceans or athwart the fuzzy boundary with the Canadian lakes, and is necessarily porous and outward-looking. The other America, whether montagnard or prairie, is solidly continental and landlocked, its tap roots of obstinate self-belief buried deep beneath the bluegrass and the high corn. It is time we called those two Americas something other than Republican and Democrat, for their mutual alienation and unforgiving contempt is closer to Sunni and Shia, or (in Indian terms) Muslim and Hindu. How about, then, Godly America and Worldly America?

Worldly America, which of course John Kerry won by a massive landslide, faces, well, the world on its Pacific and Atlantic coasts and freely engages, commercially and culturally, with Asia and Europe in the easy understanding that those continents are a dynamic synthesis of ancient cultures and modern social and economic practices. This truism is unthreatening to Worldly America, not least because so many of its people, in the crowded cities, are themselves products of the old-new ways of Korea, Japan, Ireland or Italy. In Worldly America - in San Francisco, Chicago, San Diego, New York - the foreigner is not an anxiety, but rather a necessity. Its America is polycultural, not Pollyanna.

Godly America, on the other hand, rock-ribbed in Dick Cheney's Wyoming, stretched out just as far as it pleases in Dubya's deeply drilled Texas, turns its back on that dangerous, promiscuous, impure world and proclaims to high heaven the indestructible endurance of the American Difference. If Worldly America is, beyond anything else, a city, a street, and a port, Godly America is, at its heart (the organ whose bidding invariably determines its votes over the cooler instructions of the head), a church, a farm and a barracks; places that are walled, fenced and consecrated. Worldly America is about finding civil ways to share crowded space, from a metro-bus to the planet; Godly America is about making over space in its image. One America makes room, the other America muscles in.

Worldly America is pragmatic, practical, rational and sceptical. In California it passed Proposition 71, funding embryonic stem cell research beyond the restrictions imposed by Bush's federal policy. Godly America is mythic, messianic, conversionary, given to acts of public witness, hence the need - in Utah and Montana and a handful of other states - to poll the voters on amendments to their state constitution defining marriage as a union between the opposite sexes. But then Worldly America is said to feed the carnal vanities; Godly America banishes and punishes them. From time to time Godly America will descend on the fleshpots of Worldly America, from Gotham (it had its citadel-like Convention there after all) to Californication, will shop for T-shirts, take a sniff at the local pagans and then return to base-camp more convinced than ever that a time of Redemption and Repentance must be at hand. But if the stiff-necked transgressors cannot be persuaded, they can be cowed and conquered.

No wonder so many of us got the election so fabulously wrong even into the early hours of Tuesday evening, when the exit polls were apparently giving John Kerry a two- or three-point lead in both Florida and Ohio. For most of us purblind writers spend our days in Worldly America and think that Godly America is some sort of quaint anachronism, doomed to atrophy and disappear as the hypermodernity of the cyber age overtakes it, in whatever fastness of Kentucky or Montana it might still circle its wagons. The shock for the Worldlies is to discover that Godly America is its modernity; that so far from it withering before the advance of the blog and the zipdrive, it is actually empowered by them. The tenacity with which Godly America insists the theory of evolution is just that - a theory - with no more validity than Creationism, or that Iraqis did, in fact, bring down the twin towers, is not in any way challenged by the digital pathways of the information age. In fact, such articles of faith are expedited and reinforced by them. Holy bloggers bloviate, Pentecostalists ornament their website with a nimbus of trembling electronic radiance and, for all I know, you can download Pastor John Ashcroft singing the Praises of the Lord right to your Godpod.

Nor, it transpires, is the exercise of the franchise a sure-fire way for the Democrats to prevail. The received wisdom in these Worldly parts (subscribed to by yours truly; mea culpa) was that a massively higher turn out would necessarily favour Kerry. P Diddy's "Vote or Die" campaign was credited with getting out young voters en masse who ignored the polls in 2000. We saw a lot of Springsteen and Bon Jovi and ecstatic upturned faces. Who could possibly match their mobilisation, we thought? Answer: Jehovah and his Faithful Servant St Karl the Rove. The biggest story of all in 2004 is the astounding success of the Republicans in shipping millions of white evangelicals to the polls who had also stayed at home four years earlier. We thought we were fired up with righteous indignation - against the deceits of the propaganda campaign for the Iraq war, against the gross inequities of the tax cuts - but our fire was just hot air compared to the jihad launched by the Godlies against the infamy of a tax rollback, of merely presuming to diss the Dear Leader in a time of war. And the battalions of Christian soldiers made the telling difference in the few critical places where Godly and Worldly America do actually rub shoulders (or at least share a state), Ohio above all.

By the lights of the psephology manuals, Ohio ought to have been a natural for the Democrats: ageing industrial cities such as Akron and Dayton, with big concentrations of minorities, suffering prolonged economic pain from out sourced industries. Cleveland and Cincinnati are classic cities of the Worldly plain: half-decayed, incompletely revived; great art museums, a rock'n'roll hall of fame, a terrific symphony orchestra. But drive a bit and you're in deep Zion, where the Holsteins graze by billboards urging the sinful to return to the bosom of the Almighty, the church of Friday night high school football shouts its hosannas at the touchdowns, and Support Our Troops signs grow as thick as the rutabaga. At first sight there's not much distance between this world and western Pennsylvania, but were the state line to be marked in 20ft-high electrified fences the frontier between the two Americas couldn't be sharper. The voters of the "Buckeye State" cities did care about their jobs; they did listen when Kerry told them the rich had done disproportionately nicely from Bush's tax cut. But they were also listening when their preachers (both black and white) fulminated against the uncleanliness of Sodom and the murder of the unborn. In the end, those whose most serious anxieties were the state of the economy and the Mess-o-potamia were outvoted by those who told exit pollers their greatest concern in 2004 was "moral values".

Faith-driven politics may even have had a hand in delivering Florida to Bush by a surprising margin, since it seems possible that Jewish voters there who voted for "my son the vice-president" Joe Lieberman (not to mention Hadassah, oy what nachas) in 2000, actually switched sides as a result of the president's support for Ariel Sharon. It wasn't that the Kerry campaign didn't notice the confessional effect. It was just that they didn't know what to do about it. Making the candidate over as some sort of altar boy (notwithstanding directives from Rome instructing the faithful on the abhorrence of his position on abortion) would have been about as persuasive as kitting him out with gun, camouflage and dead Canada geese; a laboriously transparent exercise in damning insincerity.

In Godly America the politics of impassioned conviction inevitably trumped the politics of logical argument. On CNN a fuming James Carville wondered out loud how a candidate declared by the voting public to have decisively won at least two of the three televised debates could have still been defeated. But the "victory" in those debates was one of body language rather than reasoned discourse. It registered more deeply with the public that the president looked hunched and peevish than that he had been called by Kerry on the irrelevance of the war in Iraq to the threat of terror. And since the insight was one of appearance not essence, it could just as easily be replaced by countless photo-ops of the president restored to soundbite affability. The charge that Bush and his second war had actually made America less, not more safe, and had created, not flushed out, nests of terror, simply failed to register with the majority of those who put that issue at the top of their concerns.

Why? Because, the president had "acted", meaning he had killed at least some Middle Eastern bad dudes in response to 9/11. That they might be the wrong ones, in the wrong place - as Kerry said over and over - was simply too complicated a truth to master. Forget the quiz in political geography, the electorate was saying (for the popular commitment to altruistic democratic reconstruction on the Tigris is, whatever the White House orthodoxy, less than Wolfowitzian), it's all sand and towelheads anyway, right? Just smash "them" (as one ardent Bush supporter put it on talk radio the other morning) "like a ripe cantaloupe". Who them? Who gives a ****? Just make the testosterone tingle all the way to the polls. Thus it was that the war veteran found himself demonised as vacillating compromiser, the Osama Candidate, while a pair of draft-dodgers who had sacrificed more than eleven hundred young men and women to a quixotic levantine makeover, and one which I prophesy will be ignominiously wound up by next summer (the isolationists in the administration having routed the neocons), got off scot free, lionised as the Fathers of Our Troops.

Well, the autumn leaves have, just this week, fallen from the trees up here in the Hudson Valley and the scales from the eyes of us deluded worldlies. If there is to be any sort of serious political future for the Democrats, they have to do far more than merely trade on the shortcomings of the incumbents - and there will be opportunities galore in the witching years ahead (a military mire, a fiscal China syndrome and, hullo, right before inauguration, a visit from al-Qaida). The real challenge is to voice an alternative social gospel to the political liturgy of the Godlies; one that redefines patriotism as an American community, not just a collection of wealth-seeking individuals; one that refuses to play a zero-sum game between freedom and justice; one in which, as the last populist president put it just a week ago, thought and hope are not mutually exclusive. You want moral values? So do we, but let them come from the street, not the pulpit. And if a fresh beginning must be made - and it must - let it not begin with a healing, but with a fight.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 03:18 pm
Screw the Republican Party and agenda. There'll be no compromises from me.
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 03:22 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
Screw the Republican Party and agenda. There'll be no compromises from me.


Thataboy, edgar. You tell 'em.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 03:28 pm
Right on, Edgar!

And as the subject is, in fact, grace, let us rejoice in the two following inevitabilities:

1) the Rapture-Train is going to carry them out of our midst anyway, which handily solves the demographic problem.

And for those of who find comfort in a vengeful god,
2) they are going to be stuck in each others' company, forced to listen to elevator-harp tunes, and without hot sex (thankyou Mr. Clemens) for eternity.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 04:42 pm
Quote:
AUSTIN, Texas -- Do you know how to cure a chicken-killin' dog? Now, you know you cannot keep a dog that kills chickens, no matter how fine a dog it is otherwise.

Some people think you cannot break a dog that has got in the habit of killin' chickens, but my friend John Henry always claimed you could. He said the way to do it is to take one of the chickens the dog has killed and wire the thing around the dog's neck, good and strong. And leave it there until that dead chicken stinks so bad that no other dog or person will even go near that poor beast. Thing'll smell so bad the dog won't be able to stand himself. You leave it on there until the last little bit of flesh rots and falls off, and that dog won't kill chickens again.

The Bush administration is going to be wired around the neck of the American people for four more years, long enough for the stench to sicken everybody. It should cure the country of electing Republicans.

http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?columnsName=miv
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 06:07 pm
McTag wrote:
I think however there are dark forces at work in America, and all those Stepford-wives christians make me afraid for its future. Kerry had a tough job asking for a change in leadership during a "war", even though the war, it seems to me, was a device started in part to ensure the conservatives increased their hold on the country..

I suppose there is some truth in that. Certainly some Democrat zealots are considering such ideas and vowing to do a better job next time educating the ignorant masses so that they will learn what is really good for them. I hope they do - it will keep them out of office.

You should also consider the possibility that the images to which you referred are merely convenient stereotypes, bearing little relation to reality. Neither do I credit the notion that the war was started to ensure a conservative political victory. Consider how truly odd is your juxtaposition of ideas here : the enemy is both credulous and stupid ("Stepford wives christians"), and at the same time scheming and Machiavellian ("devise started.. to ensure..."). Reflect on it: does this really ring true?

It also appears to me that you have not sufficiently reflected on the defects in Kerry's record and, by implication, character. There truly is a factual basis for all this, and it did indeed affect the outcome. Not an invalid point either. History offers numerous lessons of the greater importance of the character of leaders, than of their initial concepts of right policy in an ever-changing world.

Finally, modern variants of secularism have evolved from the absence of religion to opposition to it, and also to ever more intrusive, but secular, doctrines about how people should live their lives. (The contemporary religion of political correctitude is just as intolerant as any of the old ones. Consider the ease with which you let out the phrase "…all those Stepford-wives christians make me afraid for its future…". Would you have felt as comfortable if instead of "christians" you were to say, "homosexuals", or "women", or "Hispanics"?) This too was a factor, and the prospect of judges overturning the ability of legislators to regulate marriage did arouse some opposition.

The Democrat view is, "The people have spoken, and the people are wrong". Not very democratic when you think of it. The people are actually pretty smart.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 06:07 pm
blatham wrote:


...The Bush administration is going to be wired around the neck of the American people for four more years, long enough for the stench to sicken everybody. It should cure the country of electing Republicans.


I'll say it again, the thing I like best about W. is his list of enemies, including all terrorists, the eurotrash leadership echelon, Hollywood, the beloved leader of NK, the mad mullahs of Iran, all of the double-chromosome types who voted for Peroutka, George Soros and his band of billionaires, all the sundry losers on the demmy side of the US senate, the trial lawyers' guild, the NEA, and everybody in other countries who think they know more about running our nation than we do.

I love hearing all of those people crying. It's kind of like what Chengis Khan said about the best thing in life being to have all the girlie-men scattered before you and listen to all their crybaby acts. Just makes me feel good all over....

http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/lyrics/ohwhata.htm

Oh, what a beautiful mornin',
Oh, what a beautiful day.
I got a beautiful feelin'
Ev'rything's goin' my way.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 06:30 pm
Dunno where The Democrats get the idea they're threatend by The Republicans ... its The Democrats themselves who've engineered and brought about their own march toward marginalization.


And frankly, I'm not all that sure that's something even Republicans should be all that happy about. A balance within the Legislative branch ... neither party enjoying a supermajority ... is a pretty effective check on the abuse of power by the dominant party. The way things are goin', a Republican supermajority is a very real possibility in 2006, and thats prolly not a real good thing.

Its up to the rank-and-file Democrats to change things for their own betterment. Their leadership sure as hell ain't about to do it if it continues to trend the way it has over the past dozen years or so.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 06:33 pm
timberlandko wrote:
Dunno where The Democrats get the idea they're threatend by The Republicans ... its The Democrats themselves who've engineered and brought about their own march toward marginalization.


And frankly, I'm not all that sure that's something even Republicans should be all that happy about. A balance within the Legisalative branch ... neither party enjoying a supermajority ... is a pretty effective check on the abuse of power by the dominant party. The way things are goin', a Republican supermajority is a very real possibility in 2006, and thats prolly not a real good thing.



I agree, but it's a BETTER thing than having any power at all in the hands of a clearly rogue party such as the dems. The only happy ending in this picture to be had as I see it, is for the democrat party to be destroyed, and the choice on ballots become Republicans vs libertarians or some such, i.e. for the dems to be replaced by some new blood.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 06:37 pm
Dadgummit ... I wish folks wouldn't quote me 'till I'm done findin' and correctin' my typos Rolling Eyes Embarrassed Laughing
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Nov, 2004 06:37 pm
psst..hey gungasnake I hear there's some brown colored families close by your neighborhood that haven't taken down their Kerry Edwards signs yet.....better form a vigilante comittee boy, and get to work...no time to hang around here..... :wink:
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 09/19/2024 at 09:41:06