1
   

Top White House posts go to Jews

 
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 03:56 pm
We could always try to educate, rather than criticize. Perhaps some insight into the following would help dispell F4F's current view:

Has the US been more lenient with Israel than Palestine? If so, why?

Would we stop Iran from creating bombs that may be used on Palestine rather than Israel?

In the first Gulf war, would we have had the same reaction had Saddam sent scud missles into Palestine rather than Israel?

Has the policy of Bush II towards Israel been different from that of Clinton?
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 04:20 pm
It's an unreasonable expectation that the US or Canada should treat all countries equally. Israel has treated North America and Western Europe well, treats it's people well, and has a working democracy. Given the stunning weight against both the Jews and Israel right from the get go, they have done astonishingly well.

If any one posting here was at the helm with so much against them, how well do you think you would have fared?

The same cannot always be said for other Middle Eastern countries in terms of a working democracy, treating its people well, and treating North America and Western Europe well.

I am Jewish by ethnic origin, and some of my relatives do/have lived in Israel, it's been no picnic let me tell you. I for one have great respect for Israel and the Jews.
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 04:27 pm
Quote:
The same cannot always be said for other Middle Eastern countries in terms of a working democracy, treating its people well


Quote:
Many Israeli Holocaust survivors live in poverty

By Jonathan Saul
Reuters
Monday, April 24, 2006

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Tens of thousands of Holocaust survivors in Israel are living in poverty because they are not getting enough help from the Jewish state, social welfare groups said on Monday.

The Finance Ministry said the government allocates 1.5 billion shekels ($330 million) a year to Holocaust survivors, giving them payments "far higher" than the social security allotments received by other elderly Israelis.

But, providing figures on the eve of Israel's annual Holocaust Remembrance Day, the Holocaust Survivors' Welfare Fund said around 80,000 of the 280,000 survivors in the country lived below the poverty line.

"Israel has always been busy remembering the dead but forgetting the living," said Zeev Feiner, a spokesman for the welfare fund.

Feiner said many survivors had to live on the equivalent of a few hundred dollars a month and lacked funds for basic items such as dentures and medicine, with around 46,000 considered dependents on the state.

Nathan Durst, co-founder of Amcha, an Israeli group which provides assistance and counseling to Holocaust survivors, added: "They do not have the strength to demonstrate. If they are crying, they are crying without tears."

Israel was founded partly as a haven for survivors of the Nazi slaughter of six million Jews during World War Two.

Survivor groups said many of the survivors who came to Israel after the 1948 Middle East War received compensation from Germany. Others received considerably smaller stipends from Israel.

NO COMPENSATION

But Durst said many of the survivors now living below the poverty line had migrated to Israel from the former Soviet Union in the 1990s.

Many, he said, were not eligible for any compensation from abroad or from Israel because of technicalities, increasing the hardships they faced.

Holocaust survivors make up around 40 percent of Israelis above the age of 60.

Feiner said the Finance Ministry had pledged to increase the amount it provided to the Holocaust Survivors' Welfare Fund's budget to a total of 14 million shekels, but the sum was still insufficient.

He said due to a lack of funds his organization, founded by Holocaust survivors, had to turn away 20,000 claims for aid by needy survivors since the group's founding in 2005.

"They have earned the right to get the minimum, to live a normal life and end their lives in an honorable way," he said.

($1=4.545 shekels)

washingtontimes


Quote:
Judith Ben-David's plan was straightforward enough, and if it worked there would be no need for another showdown with the police.
First, she and her friends would seek out the supermarket manager and make their plea. They were single mothers living off welfare, they said, and their children were hungry because Israel's finance minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, had slashed their benefits and told them to get jobs. But there was no work.

With the plea came a threat. If the supermarket manager was not prepared to give them food then the women would fill their trolleys, just as they had done at other shops all over the city of Beer Sheva, and charge out the door without paying.

"We're in trouble," Ms Ben David told the manager of a supermarket next to the central bus station. "We're Israelis with families and we don't have any money. We intend to fill our trolleys with food and we don't intend to pay. We don't care if we get arrested but we would be very grateful if you didn't stop us."

The women - all in their 40s with children in their teens or younger - call themselves the "Lionesses". They are among a growing number of Israelis driven deep into poverty by an economy ailing under more than three years of the Palestinian uprising and Mr Netanyahu's zeal for slashing social benefits to pay for lower taxes.

His many critics accuse him of robbing the poor to pay the rich, and of killing off the welfare state that was once a hallmark of Israel. Payments to single mothers, pensioners and the unemployed have been cut by a third in recent months.

Last week, the price of bread rose by a quarter while Mr Netanyahu reduced taxes on luxury goods. The leader of the Labour opposition, Shimon Peres, invoked Marie Antoinette. "Netanyahu and the Sharon government are proposing to hundreds of thousands of elderly who face starvation that if you don't have bread, let them eat television sets," he said.

With unemployment above 11%, one in five Israelis now lives below the poverty line, almost half of them children. Voluntary welfare organisations report a sharp increase in people looking for help. Hazon Yeshaya feeds about 5,000 people a week with hot meals; the majority are children. "We have seen a 65% increase in people coming to us over the past year," said the organisation's founder, Abraham Israel.

"It used to be we helped those people who were falling through the cracks; the old, the sick. In the past six months, we are getting those people who had jobs and were making it over the poverty line due to the assistance of social benefits. But the government has cut all these benefits."

Beer Sheva is one of the poorest of Israel's cities and flush with Russian immigrants who cannot find work.

The Lionesses met with a mixed response during earlier raids on a handful of supermarkets. At a couple they took the food and made a run for it. On one occasion they were arrested, but the shop did not press charges.

At the shop next to the bus station they decided to do it right. The security chief eyed them suspiciously but the manager, Yaish Biton, listened to their plea.
Ms Ben-David explained that she had three sons to feed and that Mr Netanyahu had cut her child support payments, her only source of income, from 3,800 shekels (£450) a month to 2,300 (£270). Her friends Michal Magen and Ahuva Mor-Yosef said they were in the same boat.

All three women are divorced and entitled to alimony payments, but such matters are handled by rabbinical courts that do little to make fathers responsible for their children.

What particularly riles the women is Mr Netanyahu's claim that welfare has created a culture of dependency and that many single mothers are too lazy to work. Ms Mor-Yosef used to work as a supermarket cashier. "Five years ago I had a heart attack and while I was recovering they fired me from the supermarket. Now they say I'm too old to hire," she said.

Mr Biton was sympathetic. "If it was up to me... " he said with a shrug. "But we are part of a chain. You have to ask headquarters." He invited them to send a fax to head office. Coca-Cola and chocolate croissants arrived while they awaited a reply. The security chief departed.

Mr Biton said he understood how hard life was for many Israelis today: "We used to have a special trolley next to the door. Customers were invited to put a tin of food in it for the poor. When the trolley was full, the food was delivered to the poor.

"Now there are so many hungry people they come to the supermarket and take tins out of the trolley. It never fills up anymore. A lot of people eat food straight off the shelf. They even bring can-openers. We don't stop them."

An hour later, a message came back from head office that there would be no free food. In the meantime, the security chief had called the police. The women felt duped. They grabbed a trolley and began to stuff it with rice, beans, chicken and oil. Mr Biton did not stop them but when they headed for the exit and barged past the security guard, the single mothers ran into a line of police.

There the women stayed, shouting to other shoppers for support and hanging signs on their trolley: "Any child has the right to food from its mother". An old man admonished them, saying he survived on 1,800 shekels a month. Several women told them to go and find work. Other shoppers said they understood, but stealing was wrong.

Opinion polls show considerable distress among Israelis at the erosion of the welfare state. Nearly 80% say they believe the government is being cruel to the weaker members of society. Three-quarters say Israel is in the midst of economic collapse even though Mr Netanyahu says the economy has turned around.

Yet polls on voting intentions also show that those views will have almost no impact on which parties and politicians Israelis support in the next election. If a ballot were held today, Mr Sharon would be returned to power, despite his government's economic programme and the fact that many voters suspect he is corrupt, because the bulk of Israelis still put more trust in him than his dovish Labour opponents in dealing with the Palestinians.

As the standoff at the supermarket doors continued - the single mothers clinging to their trolley and shouting for support, the police blocking their periodic attempts to make a run for it - Ms Ben-David complained of shortness of breath. Then she keeled over.

The police called an ambulance. Some of the other shoppers believed it was an act to gain sympathy. Out of the crowd came an elderly man who said he would pay for everything in the trolley. Ms Ben-David recovered.

"After I saw the woman fall, nobody even brought her a glass of water," the man said, declining to give his name. "My heart breaks when I see this. We're all Jewish."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1151109,00.html
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 04:39 pm
What's that?

Is your copy & paste intended to justify your anti-Semitism?

Is your copy & paste in some way meant to imply Israel does not do the best it can?

Is your copy & paste supposed to imply that the infinitely richer USA does not have a serious poverty issue itself?

Again I'll ask, given you appear as a self-styled Middle East expert of the copy and paste variety: if you were "at helm with so much against them, how well do you think you would have fared?"
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 10:24 am
squinney wrote:
We could always try to educate, rather than criticize. Perhaps some insight into the following would help dispell F4F's current view:

Has the US been more lenient with Israel than Palestine? If so, why?

Would we stop Iran from creating bombs that may be used on Palestine rather than Israel?

In the first Gulf war, would we have had the same reaction had Saddam sent scud missles into Palestine rather than Israel?

Has the policy of Bush II towards Israel been different from that of Clinton?


Squinny,

When it comes to anti-semetic conspiracy theories, the only appropriate response is a quick, strong and loud denunciation. They are based on the most primal of human evil, and then justified with sensationalistic theories and fabricated "facts".

The purpose of these theories is to justify hatred and fear. "Education" isn't relevant since education has to do with knowledge... and doesn't have anything to do with hatred. I believe that anyone who follows these ideas knows deep down what the real purpose of these theories are.

I am not trying to change the minds of the people who have swallowed these theories-- I suspect this is impossible.

By quick strong denunciations I hope to make these ideas even more repugnant in the general public society-- not for the people who hold them, but for the rest of us.

I also want to reiterate that there are real political issues surrounding the Israel-Palestinian conflict that should be discussed and must be dealt with.

But as soon as Anti-Semetic conspiracy theories enter the discussion, it becomes a discussion that no reasonable person will respond to any other way than with disgust.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 11:09 am
"Can we criticize Israel without being labeled anti-Semitic?" I thought that article was right on. Maybe I'm missing something here but I see no anti-semitism by freedom4free here. A posting of articles by the Jerusalem Post proves anti-semitism? Or an article pointing out poverty in Israel? Maybe there's a history between freedom4free and his accusers that I dont know of but I see no anti-semitism here on this thread.
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 11:59 am
Quote:
"Can we criticize Israel without being labeled anti-Semitic?" I thought that article was right on. Maybe I'm missing something here but I see no anti-semitism by freedom4free here. A posting of articles by the Jerusalem Post proves anti-semitism? Or an article pointing out poverty in Israel? Maybe there's a history between freedom4free and his accusers that I dont know of but I see no anti-semitism here on this thread.


Thanks for pointing that out blueflame1, unfortunately if/when one mentions the word 'jew' or 'Israel' it automatically equals 'Anti-Semitic' which sends shivers down their spine, because they [the poor jews] have suffered so much from the holocaust. They don't realize that its not about jews but Zionists.

If this doesn't prove that the US Government
is controlled by Zionist/Israel, nothing will.

Press Briefing by Scott McClellan, December 22, 2003.

Q Is the President in favor of international inspection of Israel's nuclear arsenal, which is pretty well known?

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know that I agree with that, the premise of your question. But the United States has a longstanding position of universal adherence to the treaty on the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons. That has been our longstanding position --

Q They never signed it.

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and that is universal adherence. Well, we have urged all states that have not yet adhered to the treaty to do so, and to accept the IAEA safeguards on nuclear activities that would come with it.

Q Are we trying to persuade Israel to sign it, and to be open to inspection?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think that, one, in terms of specifics about the Israeli government, you need to refer those questions to the Israeli government.

Q No, no, I'm asking our position.

MR. McCLELLAN: And I've told you that the long held position of the United States is the universal adherence to the nonproliferation treaty.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 12:15 pm
OK freedom4free,

I see you keep dodging my questions:

Is your copy & paste intended to justify your anti-Semitism?

Is your copy & paste in some way meant to imply Israel does not do the best it can?

Is your copy & paste supposed to imply that the infinitely richer USA does not have a serious poverty issue itself?

Again I'll ask, given you appear as a self-styled Middle East expert of the copy and paste variety: if you were "at helm with so much against them, how well do you think you would have fared?"
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 12:26 pm
Clumsy, can you rephrase your questions without using the word anti-Semitism, there's nothing anti-semitic in my posts. That doesn't mean i'll answer stupid questions, but i will think about them.

I think you should debate the points made in the articles, rather than make excuses.

You sure are Clumsy. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 12:55 pm
To streamline the process, let's exempt the first question until the remainder have been addressed. Then we can return to it and examine it fully. Understand, my first question is the only one that uses the term "anti-Semitism".

As to how I should engage in this process, I have provided my questions to you directly and I expect you to answer directly.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:10 pm
How convenient accusations of anti-semitism are for Jews who are up to obvious no good. There is the battle within Israel of who is a "true Jew" as I pointed out in an article earlier. Those Rabbis who called for Rabin's assassination are examples of how sick the "true Jews" are and how dangerous. To top it off the most militant of the settlers are armed and funded by an American neocon network including one of Abramoff's "charities". So to me there is proof of conspiracy there by the same people who lied us into war in Iraq. A conspiracy of fundamentalist Jewish and Christian fanatics led by the PNAC. These Israeli and American fanatics sure dont have the support of most Jews, not in the USA or Israel. And they are as much an obstacle to resolution as are the most fanatical of Palestinians. Most Israelis and Palestinians support a two state solution but fanatics on both sides are capable of spilling blood purely with the intention of creating obstacles to peace. Even should an agreement be reached these fanatics from both sides will be creating chaos to the detriment of everyone else.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:14 pm
Charity money funds illegal settlements

The following is a Special Report by The Institute for Research Middle East Policy "IRmep"

Israeli government officials recently disclosed that at least US $60 billion has been spent financing illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. According to Israeli prosecutor Talia Sasson, the Israeli government has systematically violated its own laws by financing settlements from foreign donations, the official state budget and secret military accounts. One global nonprofit, the World Zionist Organization, played a central role in coordinating illegal settlement activities.

Opaque and fungible assets freed up by massive yearly US foreign aid to Israel are pouring into settlement development and infrastructure building designed to partition key Palestinian territories and annex others to the state of Israel. US nonprofits are directly and indirectly financing the coordination of illegal settlement building, encroachment, and violence against Palestinians. Recently disclosed charitable contributions from US lobbyist Jack Abramoff laundered to finance violent armed Israeli activity in the Palestinian territories is only the tip of the iceberg. Considered against the findings of a groundbreaking new study revealing the causes of suicide terrorism, Americans must confront a disturbing question: "Are tax exempt donations from the US generating terrorist retaliation against America?"

Money laundering, occupation and terrorism
http://www.arabamericannews.com/newsarticle.php?articleid=3829
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:16 pm
No, It's Not Anti-Semitic

By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, April 25, 2006; A23



During the Jim Crow era, many American communists fiercely fought racism. This is a fact. It is also a fact that segregationists and others often smeared civil rights activists by calling them communists. This technique is sometimes called guilt by association and sometimes "McCarthyism." If you think it's dead, you have not been following the controversy over a long essay about the so-called "Israel Lobby."

On April 5, for instance, The Post ran an op-ed, "Yes, It's Anti-Semitic," by Eliot A. Cohen, a professor at the John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and a respected defense intellectual. Cohen does not much like a paper on the Israel lobby that was written by John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of Harvard University. He found it anti-Semitic. I did not.

But I did find Cohen's piece to be offensive. It starts by noting that the paper, titled "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," had been endorsed by David Duke, the former head of the Ku Klux Klan. It goes on to quote Duke, who, I am sure, has nodded his head in agreement over the years with an occasional piece of mine, as saying the paper is a "modern Declaration of American Independence." If you follow Cohen's reasoning, then you would have to conclude that David Duke and the Founding Fathers have something in common. I am not, as they say, willing to go there.

Unfortunately, Cohen's piece is not unique. The New York Sun reported on its front page of March 24 an allegation from Alan Dershowitz that some of the quotes from the Israel lobby paper "appear on hate sites." Maybe they do, but Mearsheimer and Walt took those quotes (about press coverage of Israel) from a book written by Max Frankel, a former editor of the New York Times. To associate Mearsheimer and Walt with hate groups is rank guilt by association and does not in any way rebut the argument made in their paper on the Israel lobby.

There is hardly a stronger, more odious, accusation than anti-Semitism. It comes freighted with more than a thousand years of tragic history, culminating in the Holocaust. The mere suggestion of it is enough for any sane person to hold his tongue. Yet this did not stop the respected German newspaper editor Josef Joffe from stating in the New Republic that the lobby paper "puts 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' to shame." He is referring to the most notorious anti-Semitic text of all time. My friend Joffe is in dire need of a cold compress.

My own reading of the Mearsheimer-Walt paper found it unremarkable, a bit sloppy and one-sided (nothing here about the Arab oil lobby), but nothing that even a casual newspaper reader does not know. Its basic point -- that Israel's American supporters have immense influence over U.S. foreign policy -- is inarguable. After all, President Bush has just recently given Israel NATO-like status without so much as a murmur from Congress. "I made it clear, I'll make it clear again, that we will use military might to protect our ally Israel," Bush said. This was the second or third time he's made this pledge, crossing a line that previous administrations would not -- in effect, promulgating a treaty seemingly on the spot. No other country gets this sort of treatment.

Israel's special place in U.S. foreign policy is deserved, in my view, and not entirely the product of lobbying. Israel has earned it, and isn't there something bracing about a special relationship that is not based on oil or markets or strategic location but on shared values? (A bit now like Britain.) But I can understand how foreign policy "realists" such as Mearsheimer and Walt might question its utility and not only think that a bit too much power is located in a specific lobby but that it is rarely even discussed. This may be wrong, but it is not (necessarily) anti-Semitic. In fact, after reading the Mearsheimer-Walt paper, the respected Israeli newspaper Haaretz not only failed to discern anti-Semitism but commended the paper to its readers. "The professors' article does not deserve condemnation," Haaretz stated in an editorial.

An abridged version of the Mearsheimer-Walt paper was published by the London Review of Books and is available online at http://www.lrb.co.uk/ . Read it and decide for yourself whether it is anti-Semitic. Whatever the case, their argument is hardly rebutted by purple denunciations and smear tactics. Rather than being persuasive, Mearsheimer and Walt's more hysterical critics suggest by their extreme reactions that the duo is on to something. These tactics by Israel's friends sully Israel's good name more than Mearsheimer and Walt ever could.

[email protected]
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:19 pm
Hi freedom4free,

Lets add one more given that you have started with the highly dubious and prejudicial claim that "Top White House posts go to Jews". By that assertion/logic top White House posts do not go to non-Jews. Which is of course complete garbage.

- You have yet to prove this is true by even a modicum of real evidence unless you are claiming George, Dick, Conalesa et al are Jewish.
- Why did you not also say Top White House posts go to whites?
- Why did you not also say Top White House posts go to Christians?
- Why did you not also say Top White House do not go to Blacks?
- Why did you not also say Top White House do not go to Hispanics?
- Why did you make such a crassly inflammatory and outright deceitful claim if you are not anti-Semitic?
- Explain your purpose in making the crassly inflammatory and outright deceitful claim that "Top White House posts go to Jews".

Tell the truth and don't hide behind copy & paste.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:20 pm
Let's ask the questions again as all you do is dodge them:

Is your copy & paste in some way meant to imply Israel does not do the best it can?

Is your copy & paste supposed to imply that the infinitely richer USA does not have a serious poverty issue itself?

Again I'll ask, given you appear as a self-styled Middle East expert of the copy and paste variety: if you were "at helm with so much against them, how well do you think you would have fared?"
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:23 pm
Chumly, "Top White House posts go to Jews". That headline was written not by freedom4free but by the Jerusalem Post. Are you calling the Jerusalem Post anti-semitic? This all reminds me of those Bushies who call Americans anti-American because they accuse Bushie of lying us into war. Easy to see through crap so unfair and contrived.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:24 pm
Come you chicken, quit hiding behind copy & paste and tell the truth.
You are frightened to answer my questions I see.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:26 pm
blueflame1 wrote:
Chumly, "Top White House posts go to Jews". That headline was written not by freedom4free but by the Jerusalem Post. Are you calling the Jerusalem Post anti-semitic? This all reminds me of those Bushies who call Americans anti-American because they accuse Bushie of lying us into war. Easy to see through crap so unfair and contrived.
He quoted it, he can back it up, I don't give a damn who he copy and pastes from! So far he is chicken to answer my questions and appears to think he making argument with copy and pasting. What a joke! Let's see his lists. Let's see him answer my questions.
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:31 pm
Clumsy

Quote:
making the crassly inflammatory and outright deceitful claim that 'Top White House posts go to Jews'.


Quote:
Tell the truth and don't hide behind copy & paste.


Sure. Very Happy Click Here

Please post a copy of your complaint letter to NATHAN GUTTMAN here, we'd love to read it.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:37 pm
Is your copy & paste in some way meant to imply Israel does not do the best it can?

Is your copy & paste supposed to imply that the infinitely richer USA does not have a serious poverty issue itself?

Again I'll ask, given you appear as a self-styled Middle East expert of the copy and paste variety: if you were "at helm with so much against them, how well do you think you would have fared?"

Lets add one more given that you have started with the highly dubious and prejudicial claim that "Top White House posts go to Jews". By that assertion/logic top White House posts do not go to non-Jews. Which is of course complete garbage.

- You have yet to prove this is true by even a modicum of real evidence unless you are claiming George, Dick, Conalesa et al are Jewish.
- Why did you not also say Top White House posts go to whites?
- Why did you not also say Top White House posts go to Christians?
- Why did you not also say Top White House do not go to Blacks?
- Why did you not also say Top White House do not go to Hispanics?
- Why did you make such a crassly inflammatory and outright deceitful claim if you are not anti-Semitic?
- Explain your purpose in making the crassly inflammatory and outright deceitful claim that "Top White House posts go to Jews".

So far you are chicken to answer my questions and appear to think you make argument with copy and pasting and links. What a joke! Let's see your own lists. Let's see you answer my questions. Right now, right here, in your own words. You're chicken!
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 0.03 seconds on 09/29/2024 at 01:29:31