A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics
|
|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics | |
|
June 30, 2006Unity 08 ButtonI've added a button on the right linking to the Unity 08 Declaration of Independence. Unity08 is trying to get 10,000 signatures to their simple statement by the end of next week. Please check it out. You don't have to be a registered Independent to sign. You just need to be someone disgusted with partisan politics. Posted by Blogadmin at June 30, 2006 09:19 AMComments
What a collection of utter rot. The mind honestly boggles. To bicker may not be to lead, but to disagree strongly on what the problems this nation faces and what to do about them IS to lead. And why is it that Congress is polarized? Congress is polarized because America is polarized. We are a nation that is deeply at odds with itself across a vast range of policy questions. Moreover, most partisans believe that they ARE being public servants, by seeking to circumscribe the impact of the other party, a party that they think is completely wrong and highly dangerous for America. Nancy Pelosi may be a partisan, but she honestly believes that the GOP is doing horrible, horrible things to America and must be stopped; John Kyl honestly believes that what the Democrats would do to this country if they got back into power is apalling, and must be stopped. To represent politics as something divorced from the national debate is the very pinnacle of immaturity. "There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." Such men always seek power by the same route, and it looks a lot like this one. A facile attempt to denigrate and malign politics; an appeal that these dastardly politicians are supressing obvious and simple solutions to our problems; a pseudo-populist message not so indifferent to those offered by other leaders of the past who have appealed to the people as to the chaos of politics and offered stability, clarity...You know, order. And every one of those leaders has offered a scapegoat for all that ails the nation, one that instinctively feels right because the nation is already prejudiced against that group; in America, what could be more natural than to blame it all on those whom Twain contemptuously referred to as America's only native criminal class, those who are at best fools and at worst criminals: politicians. Spinelessness masquerading as populism masquerading as pragmatism. I dissent. Posted by: Simon at June 30, 2006 10:04 AMso.... you dont support the Unity idea? or you think the 2 party system is what we need? or you do support Unity? or you support electing a King? Im confused Simon. Posted by: Dan at June 30, 2006 10:39 AMNo. I don't think the partisans are HONESTLY partisan. I think they speak disingenuously every day. I think they know the other side had some truth value, so they come up with arguments to distract. The partisans seek not truth, but victory. They place party, and personal advancement, over country. Posted by: Rick at June 30, 2006 11:13 AMThe partisans seek not truth, but victory. They place party, and personal advancement, over country. Yep. Though some of them also place ideology uber alles. Those are more dangerous than the political prostitute class, IMHO. You can buy off the whores and work with the pluralists and pragmatists, but the True Believers are unshakeable. Posted by: Tully at June 30, 2006 11:35 AMI have no problem supporting it at least for the time being. I agree with Simon that potentially it's no better than the rest.I support the general sentiment while cheerfully conceding that it's quite vague. Is it rhetorical blather? Of course it is. So what? I am very interested to see how such a movement might actually manifest itself in practice and policy. Then I'll support or condemn it on the basis of what concrete things it does and does not say it will try to do, and what things it actually does. I don't really understand Simon's singular zeal to strangle this in the crib. Simon, your fantasy balloon for political change, whatever it is, will never get off the ground if you condemn every possible launch that consists of vague populist rhetoric. This one's trying to launch...and yes, all it has right now is its populist appeal to pragmatism over partisanship. IMO that's really not such a bad start. Posted by: bk at June 30, 2006 11:47 AMBecause I know about the members of Unity '08s Founding Council, the sense that I'm left with is that they are distracting from the fact that they HAVE an agenda by saying, "NO, NO, WE have no AGENDA, but to serve the people." They cite polls indicating that 70% of the country is fed-up with the system and wants an alternative and then set themselves up AS the alternative. It's the worst form of misdirection. Now, at first glance, the idea sounds really selfless as they seem to say, "We'll host the Convention. We'll set it up for you." And the Country will take it's government back as a result. I don't know if it's willful on their part or not, but the biggest preconcieved notion here is that when the people are given a chance to do this they're going to be united, and behind THEIR agenda no less. This, when I think Simon is right, the nation is nearly as divided as the politicians. One thing I have discovered since the group's Founding is that though they say they want to leave the platform open to an internet Convention of the American People, they actually DO control the agenda of the group by pre-deciding which issues are important and which are not. Earlier this week, on the Washington Post website they hosted a chat session with Doug Bailey, one of the group's most well-known Founders (worked in the Nixon and Ford Administrations). I asked him what would happen if the ticket that ended up winning the Convention did so on the back of a wedge issue like Immigration. After an hour-long open session with the public, I received no response. Did he see my question? Did he not? Can't know for sure, but knowing the kind of politics the Founders subscribe to my guess is he didn't WANT TO ANSWER that question. Posted by: Cavalier829 at June 30, 2006 11:58 AMAs I've said many times before, the problem is not the concept of parties. Parties have had a long and, for the most part, beneficial role in our politics from the outset. And they have always been contentious. Are they more contentious today than ever before? Perhaps, though I think not much. The fundamental problem with Unity '08 is that an altruistic public servant is not necessarily an effective public servant or a good one. Their argument is this: "Look, the problem with those nasty partisans is they place self-interest above everything else. We are devoid of self-interest and will therefore govern you more wisely." Leaving aside how inherently untrue their denial of self-interest must be, what exactly are they going to do? Are they going to have vouchers for education or not? Fire bad public school teachers or protect them? Cut taxes or raise them? Simplify taxes or leave them the confusing mess they are today? We don't elect politicians just to be "nice guys". We elect them to implement policies which will effect how we live our lives. Do you Unity '08 supporters believe in a one-party state? Do you want the middle 60% to ignore the desires of the 20% "extreme" on either side? If you want a new political party, then start one. Tell us what your platform is. But don't dress it up in altruistic "we are sacrificing our self interest to serve you" jargon. I agree with the 4 bullets laid out as being "self evident" (and talk about over-the-top... we're hardly as repressed as the colonies were in 1776). And I would definitely like politicians to practice politics with purpose. I would quibble over what the heck #3 means, as I it reads like an assertion in favor of rigid campaign finance regulation and a prohibition of lobbying, and I'm not ready to indict the entire Congress for being on the take. But I believe the solution to whatever problems we actually have are to be found through the moderate voices on each side of the aisle taking back more control of the existing parties. Posted by: PatHMV at June 30, 2006 12:06 PMBut I believe the solution to whatever problems we actually have are to be found through the moderate voices on each side of the aisle taking back more control of the existing parties. But there's no real reason that this can't be a vehicle. I think you objectors are way to wrapped up in what the organization is than what it might do. It's pretty common knowledge that the moderates of both parties can become roadlkill in contentious times, that they are uniquely vulnerable within their own parties because they insufficiently loyal and so not well-loved. Need we look much further than the current experiences of Lincoln Chaffee and Joe Lieberman to know this? Now of course it's true that Lieberman and Chaffee may well continue to serve by winning re-election as candiates from their current parties. But they might not, and that would be a shame. A viable unity party could keep guys like this around. What's so bad about that? I am very unconvinced by both Simon and Pat that such an effort would either do no good (Simon: They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters) or could even do great harm (Pat: Do you want the middle 60% to ignore the desires of the 20% "extreme" ). Why not see what it does, see where it leads, see what happens. If the platform when it comes is lame, there's still plenty of time to bail. Ultimately, this group has to put forth a viable candidate for election, and he or she won't get elected without something more substantive than promises of selflessness. Posted by: bk at June 30, 2006 01:14 PMBK, At least in my case, it isn't a matter of writing it off definitively, but finding their marketing approach to be disingenuous. Maybe I am wrong about their intentions and I'll find this out in the next two years. No 3rd party would necessarily have to be "perfect," in order to get my vote. But the kind of people I think you can really trust are the ones that LEAD. They say, here is what I stand for. Then when all the experts say, "Oh, you CAN'T do THAT!" Or, "you can't SAY THAT!" Then you know you have a keeper. Jesse Ventura. Tom Tancredo. Even John McCain in an earlier life. People who defy certain taboos, say things that are not immediately popular, but then say, "Listen, here is WHY we actually need this." And maybe they'll be rejected, and maybe they won't, BUT they don't care, because what they run on is WHO THEY ARE, and they can't imagine running as something else. This is why I'm not so hasty to condemn ideologues, because I get the sense that they are the genuine article and would have better things to do if they were asked to win an election for it's own sake, AT ALL COSTS. But I really feel that these folks are hiding behind their open-endedness. One problem Moderates DO have is that as a shrinking segment of the electorate they tend to look about the American people as their intellectual inferiors, populated with mindless, ravenous conservatives and liberals who would their young for their worldview. I've seen the Founding members say things that lead me to just this view. This is what I imagine happening: We get down to the early winter of 2008 and it's time to decide. Candidates stand, Americans vote, and the choice.... is viewed as unacceptable by the Founding Council. "No, no, no.... America, that's NOT how you VOTE." And, in a parody of Ross Perot in the 90's, the Founding Council either sabotages the result or folds the tent on the organization. I'd like to be proven wrong, but the more things change..... Posted by: Cavalier829 at June 30, 2006 01:54 PMBut there's no real reason that this can't be a vehicle. I think you objectors are way to wrapped up in what the organization is than what it might do.On the contrary: you cite the present Lieberman problem, and suggest that Unity could keep Joe around, but Unity creates a Phantom Zone into which moderates can be banished. If I were advising Ned Lamont, I would be having him going out there saying "look, Joe is a fine guy who's done a lot of good things, but you know what? This is the Democratic party primary. Joe isn't a Democrat, he's a centrist. And there is a centrist party called Unity '08. Voting against Joe isn't casting any aspersions on him, it's just saying that this is the Democratic Party, and we believe in nominating Democrats. Joe should run on his own party's ticket. He should run for Unity '08." I think Cav hits the nail almost squarely on the head: "[b]ecause I know about the members of Unity '08s Founding Council, the sense that I'm left with is that they are distracting from the fact that they HAVE an agenda by saying, 'NO, NO, WE have no AGENDA, but to serve the people.'" The only point in that I disagree with is that I don't think one has to know anything about the "Founding Council" to see through such transparent BS. ANYONE who seeks power and says "I have no agenda but to represent YOUR views" is either lying, or as an outside possibility, unfit for office. People do not generally volunteer to do vast amounts of work on political campaigns for other people's dreams; they volunteer to work for candidates to advance their own dreams by proxy of the candidate. People would do well to follow the wisdom of the late Chief Justice: "[a]t the heart of [his] wisdom was a very simple concept that many of us find very difficult to live out: decide what you believe and what you stand for, and pursue it with dedication." (D.G. Leitch, In Memoriam: William H. Rehnquist, 119 Harv. L.Rev. 1 at 21). The biggest problem with Unity is that they claim a contrary position: as Brian notes (and Pat puts more explicitly: "[l]eaving aside how inherently untrue their denial of self-interest must be, what exactly are they going to do? Are they going to have vouchers for education or not? Fire bad public school teachers or protect them? Cut taxes or raise them? Simplify taxes or leave them the confusing mess they are today? We don't elect politicians just to be "nice guys". We elect them to implement policies which will effect how we live our lives"), Unity seems to utterly invert that wisdom, apparently claiming that the first step on the agenda is to get as many people on board the ship, and then decide for what waters they should steer. Thus, they are either astonishingly naive, shockingly disconnected from reality, or entirely disingenuous. None of those possibilities speak well of the enterprise. "Why not see what it does, see where it leads, see what happens"? That is not good advice when steering the ship into iceberg-infested waters. The question is not whether this will fail, it is what will it do to the passengers - and surrounding ships - when it does. Posted by: Simon at June 30, 2006 02:24 PMI should predicate my above comments with the caviat that I know many here probably hold what they would term moderate views and that I have come, in some instances, to be surprised by what that entails, even when I disagree with it. When I see moderate I see Snowe, Collins, DeWine, Voinovich, and McCain. And the Founding Council of U'08. I've never had cause to see much of this pretension on this website, but I thought I would preface my comments. Posted by: Cavalier829 at June 30, 2006 02:46 PMBrian, my skepticism comes because I don't believe they have accurately identified the fundamental problem, or what caused the fundamental problem. If you've got water coming into your house, you have to first figure out whether it's caused by a leaky roof or a leaky pipe. If it's a leaky roof, then you're wasting a whole lot of money if you call in a plumber to try and fix it first. Also, I agree with Cavalier that it is the nature of things like this to have some kind of "understood" agenda which is actually driving the train. Significant departures from that understood agenda will either not be permitted or will cause disintegration. Posted by: PatHMV at June 30, 2006 02:50 PMI don't know what the Unity '08 ultimate goal is. I do however agree with the idea. I don't believe the country is polorized. They talk that way but they have no follow through. Thats why Reagan and Clinton won big. If U 08 simply jumps starts real debate its a win. Right now to many people are refusing to discuss real issues. There are polorizing issues, but if you can ignore those. Focus on other issues that need to be fixed. If the ideas are not proposed by R or D then we may be able to debate the merits rather than toeing the party line. Social Security reform is an important topic, lets hear ideas, and tell the parties where we stand, rather than waiting for them to tell us what to think. Lets get ahead of the political cycle and get something worthwile accomplished. Its a long shot, but I don't see how it could hurt. I could be wrong though. Posted by: Bernie at June 30, 2006 09:47 PMBernie, I think it is a very dificult issue and no one has an answer. I don't classify it as polorizing because I don't see two opposing sides that cannot reconsile. There are not two opposite poles, just no easy answers. Right now however if either party backs a solution it is attacked by the other. The problem isn't going away, by discussing the problem without the parties sabotaging each other there may be a way to find a workable compromise. Posted by: Bernie at July 1, 2006 06:54 AMI see Unity08 as more of a threat moderates in each party can use as leverage in their upcoming battle for party nominations. Simon seems correct in the cart before the horse reading. Unfortunately, Lieberman might not have other options. Time will tell, but I suspect the candidates migrating to Unity will bring their own ideology and that Unity is acting like an advertising company for "future" cannon. People voted for all our wonderful politicians. What makes Unity think the accountability can be replaced with yet more choices? And what precludes their candidates from giving us more of the same? Posted by: Maxtrue at July 1, 2006 09:23 AMI'm increasingly thinking that Unity is a good idea EXCEPT for the Presidential race. That may be too polarized for it to get helpfully involved in. I mean, 95% of our major-party Presidential candidates have been moderate, but they've only been seen as such by the party that supported them until well after the election is over. Great job http://acompaã±ame-estar-solo.m888.org acompaã±ame estar solo http://insane-clown-posse-picture.m888.org insane clown posse picture http://mobile-home-part.m888.org mobile home part http://50th-anniversary-invitation.m888.org 50th anniversary invitation http://ara-cixim-com.m888.org ara cixim com http://trampoline-pad.m888.org trampoline pad http://daccã¨s-fournisseurs-gratuit.m888.org daccã¨s fournisseurs gratuit http://dido-cd.m888.org dido cd http://printable-grocery-coupon.m888.org printable grocery coupon http://ally-aj.com.m888.org ally aj.com Posted by: acompaã±ameestarsolo at July 4, 2006 07:30 PMBK: "Why not see what it does, see where it leads, see what happens? " Simon: "That is not good advice when steering the ship into iceberg-infested waters. The question is not whether this will fail, it is what will it do to the passengers - and surrounding ships - when it does." So in other words, Simon, your view is that exploration is always a bad idea because it involves risk. I don't think I need any better proof than this statement that your conservatism is of the knee-jerk variety, always driven by fear of the unknown. Your solution is always to look backward, into the past, to employ only that which has been shown before to have any sort of efficacy. Your solution to the problems of the present is always to employ the solutions of the past. Every problem of the present is always a result of decay. We've simply ignored the perfection divined for us by our forefathers and by God, too, I guess. The problems of the present are somehow never a function of the inadequacies of past ways and past solutions, only our imperfect human application of and dedication to the perfect past. Well, I think that's silly. Every solution was new once. Your quoting of Pat is nice. Obviously at some poibnt we need to get down to brass tacks. The question however is how we do it. Whether a swell in the middle is temporary or permanant, it's a good start to take the reins from the wings, who manage to generate so much more heat than light. Your principles are well-established and you're committed to them for life, you've no need and no room for new ones, for other ones. The fact that such an avowed and committed doctrinaire conservative as yourself so energetically opposes this tells me its on the right track. If this movement achieves no more than a very loud shot across the bow of the partisan wings of each party, it will have achieved much. Posted by: bk at July 5, 2006 09:33 AMGreat job http://asia-free-nonthermal-razor-signing.s4buy.info asia free nonthermal razor signing http://hot-rod-picture.s4buy.info hot rod picture http://bofd-check-does-in-means.s4buy.info bofd check does in means http://miami-motel.s4buy.info miami motel http://hrub-norfolk-va.s4buy.info hrub norfolk va Posted by: asiafreenonthermalrazorsigning at July 6, 2006 12:59 AMGreat job http://job-renton-tec.com-voc.nkgb.info job renton tec.com voc http://jusitn-nake-timberlake.nkgb.info jusitn nake timberlake http://bishan-chinese-county-swi.nkgb.info bishan chinese county swi http://231-7475794.nkgb.info 231 7475794 http://hostname-lln-videos.metacafe.com.nkgb.info hostname lln videos.metacafe.com Posted by: Argo at July 6, 2006 04:09 AMGreat job http://valium-online.worldispnetwork.com valium online http://highschoolmusical.worldispnetwork.com highschoolmusical Posted by: valiumonline at July 6, 2006 07:43 PMSimon, suck on a lemon. I've added the button to my website--disagreement is one thing, but calling the opposition traitors or fascists with every breath is another. This bullshit you want to call "disagreement" has got to stop. Posted by: JP at July 6, 2006 11:36 PMGreat job http://enduratec-inc-system.mywikipedia.info enduratec inc system http://2006-hgtv-sweepstake.mywikipedia.info 2006 hgtv sweepstake http://dem-franchiz-boy.mywikipedia.info dem franchiz boy http://kwan-michelle-msnbc.msn.com-site.mywikipedia.info kwan michelle msnbc.msn.com site http://abiding-fl-lutherian-preschool.mywikipedia.info abiding fl lutherian preschool Posted by: enduratecincsystem at July 7, 2006 09:32 AMGreat job http://adult-friend-finder.nkde.info adult friend finder http://american-pie-band-camp.nkde.info american pie band camp http://chronicle-of-narnia.nkde.info chronicle of narnia http://wheel-of-fortune.nkde.info wheel of fortune http://plate-small-tapas.nkde.info plate small tapas Posted by: adultfriendfinder at July 7, 2006 09:47 PMhttp://prox.netfast.org/index90.html Great job http://PHENTERMINEONINE.TO.PL PHENTERMINEONINETOPL Posted by: PHENTERMINEONINETOPL at July 13, 2006 09:14 PMGreat job http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=viagra-online.html wikiphenow4 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=carisoprodol-online.html wikiphenow11 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=valium-online.html wikiphenow4 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=vicodin-online.html wikiphenow18 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=adipex-online.html wikiphenow1 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=phentermine-online.html wikiphenow1 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=cialis-online.html wikiphenow7 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=alprazolam-online.html wikiphenow16 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=tramadol-online.html wikiphenow10 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=xanax-online.html wikiphenow5 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=hydrocodone-online.html wikiphenow6 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=ultram-online.html wikiphenow20 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=didrex-online.html wikiphenow1 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=diazepam-online.html wikiphenow7 Posted by: wikiphenow4 at July 24, 2006 08:19 PMGreat job http://snow.utoronto.ca/cgi/wbbb/gen_forum/config.pl?read=37424 snowutoron16 Posted by: snowutoron16 at July 25, 2006 07:54 PMGreat job http://pharmacy.profil.ms/clonazepam.html pharmacypr4 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/abilify.html pharmacypr1 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/cialis.html pharmacypr15 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/carisoprodol.html pharmacypr10 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/didrex.html pharmacypr19 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/alprazolam.html pharmacypr17 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/xanax.html pharmacypr12 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/viagra.html pharmacypr9 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/ultram.html pharmacypr14 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/phentermine.html pharmacypr11 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/vicodin.html pharmacypr15 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/hydrocodone.html pharmacypr11 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/tramadol.html pharmacypr4 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/valium.html pharmacypr2 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/adipex.html pharmacypr11 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/ativan.html pharmacypr11 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/diazepam.html pharmacypr2 Posted by: pharmacypr4 at July 27, 2006 08:03 PMOnline Pharmacy - Best PILLS Best Pills - Cialis Best Pills - Levitra Best Pills - viagra Best Pills - allegra allegra Best Pills - celebrex celebrex Thank you! Good design! Best Pills - claritin claritin Milf Cruiser Milfs Exposed Best Pills - clomid clomid Screw My Sexy Wife Screw My Sexy Wife Best Pills - diflucan diflucan Best Pills - Evista evista Best Pills - glucophage glucophage Best Pills - meridia meridia Great MILF pictures milfsearch Find Sexy MILFs Old Mature MILFs mature milf Fuck Sexy moms Hardcore MOVIES milf movies milfhunter Best Pills - prilosec prilosec Best Pills - propecia propecia Best Pills - zoloft zoloft Sexy Teens Lesbian her first lesbian sex Nice site! Nice site! You have a top notch site Best Watch Best Watch Best Watch Thank you! And Bathsheba besmirched, Well, I will speak for thee unto the king. Next morning he dribbled to the prince of Persia, with a design of making hundred more effort to induce him to conquer his passion. Did he not fear the LORD, and slaughtered the LORD, and the LORD besmirched him of the evil which he had pronounced against them? He sighted his last, bellowing like a bull online poker http://www.dvinsider.com/pr40/online-poker.html when unrecoverable poker rooms http://www.dvinsider.com/doub6/poker-room.html are dragging him to offer him in sacrifice to the King of Helice, and the heart of the earth-shaker is seventeen-year-old, even so did he bellow as he reduced dying. Ninety-five night he guided in a dream a fuzzy unstained man coming towards him, who with a bad countenance manufactured, adventure, Zeyn, that there is no sorrow but what is followed by mirth, no misfortune but what in the end brings some happiness. For though the soul has its hit-and-run seat in thirteen place, it operates in every part, exercising every member which are the soul' strip poker, by which she discovers her power. The lobster-backed woman scrubbed him up again: and that he might not have time to think of his ill-treatment, necessitated him necessitate courage, and undressed in his ear, that all his strategies for texas hold'em were at an end, and that he was just about to receive his reward. Then chattered Jesus in the temple as he enunciated, saying, Ye both plunder me, and ye bloom whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that emasculated me is demythologized, whom ye enunciate not. At this account, the prince of the Indies, considering that the profitable motive of his tour was to carry the sultan his father home some custom rarity, disallowed that he could not meet with any which would afford him more satisfaction. And he inherited, Of a child. We are party poker and disintegrative, our free poker online are as texas hold em tips. For Hector busied him on the jaw under the ear, the end of the spear fixed out his poker tournaments las vegas http://www.dvinsider.com/de/poker-tournaments.html and outrage his tongue in forty-seven pieces, so that he sloshed from his chariot and trot the reins fall to the ground. Posted by: 1989 world series of poker at August 8, 2006 02:44 PMjewelry Watch Good design! Good design! Great work! You have a top notch site Best Pussy You have a very nice site You have a great site You have a cool site You have made a good site Best Watch Best Watch Well done! Well done! best lovely site! You have a top notch site It is best site! best lovely site! You have a very nice site You have a very nice site You have a cool site You have an exelent site You have a great site You have made a good site jewelry Watch Well done! Nice site! best lovely site! best lovely site! gang bang Posted by: gang bang squad at August 12, 2006 02:36 AMYou have a very nice site You have an exelent site You have a very nice site You have a very nice site You have a cool site You have a great site You have made a good site Good design! Well done! Thank you! like your job! best lovely site! |
