GOP WANT'S RON PAUL OUT
Michigan GOP leader wants Paul barred from future debates
COLUMBIA, S.C.— The chairman of the Michigan Republican Party said Wednesday that he will try to bar Ron Paul from future GOP presidential debates because of remarks the Texas congressman made that suggested the Sept. 11 attacks were the fault of U.S. foreign policy.
Michigan party chairman Saul Anuzis said he will circulate a petition among Republican National Committee members to ban Paul from more debates. At a GOP candidates' debate Tuesday night, Paul drew attacks from all sides, most forcefully from former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, when he linked the terror attacks to U.S. bombings.
"Have you ever read about the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years," Paul said.
Anuzis called the comments "off the wall and out of whack."
"I think he would have felt much more comfortable on the stage with the Democrats in what he said last night. And I think that he is a distraction in the Republican primary and he does not represent the base and he does not represent the party," Anuzis said during an RNC state leadership meeting.
"Given what he said last night it was just so off the wall and out of whack that I think it was more detrimental than helpful."
Anuzis said his petition would go to debate sponsors and broadcasters to discourage inviting Paul.
Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign spokesman, said the candidate "is supporting the traditional GOP foreign policy. I think it's a shame when people try to silence the traditional conservative Republican standpoint."
After the debate Tuesday, Paul said he didn't' expect his remarks to end his campaign.
"The last time I got a message out about my position on the war it boosted us up by tens of thousands and I didn't change my position," Paul said. "I think the American people are sick and tired of this war and want it ended."
Story Here
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Finally!! Get this Nutroot, Blame America First, Conspiracy Theory Believing, non Republican LOSER OFF THE GOP TICKET! This weirdo is NOT a Republican!
COLUMBIA, S.C.— The chairman of the Michigan Republican Party said Wednesday that he will try to bar Ron Paul from future GOP presidential debates because of remarks the Texas congressman made that suggested the Sept. 11 attacks were the fault of U.S. foreign policy.
Michigan party chairman Saul Anuzis said he will circulate a petition among Republican National Committee members to ban Paul from more debates. At a GOP candidates' debate Tuesday night, Paul drew attacks from all sides, most forcefully from former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, when he linked the terror attacks to U.S. bombings.
"Have you ever read about the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years," Paul said.
Anuzis called the comments "off the wall and out of whack."
"I think he would have felt much more comfortable on the stage with the Democrats in what he said last night. And I think that he is a distraction in the Republican primary and he does not represent the base and he does not represent the party," Anuzis said during an RNC state leadership meeting.
"Given what he said last night it was just so off the wall and out of whack that I think it was more detrimental than helpful."
Anuzis said his petition would go to debate sponsors and broadcasters to discourage inviting Paul.
Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign spokesman, said the candidate "is supporting the traditional GOP foreign policy. I think it's a shame when people try to silence the traditional conservative Republican standpoint."
After the debate Tuesday, Paul said he didn't' expect his remarks to end his campaign.
"The last time I got a message out about my position on the war it boosted us up by tens of thousands and I didn't change my position," Paul said. "I think the American people are sick and tired of this war and want it ended."
Story Here
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Finally!! Get this Nutroot, Blame America First, Conspiracy Theory Believing, non Republican LOSER OFF THE GOP TICKET! This weirdo is NOT a Republican!
posted by Marie's Two Cents | 9:18 AM
65 Comments:
Give it up pal,
Ron Paul is NO Republican.
He is running in the wrong party!
And he needs to go!
Paul is so like a Democrat, despite calling himself a Republican. He demonstrates a complete lack of respect for the intelligence of the voting public, espousing liberal wingnut beliefs while assuming that Americans will believe he is a staunch conservative just because he says he is.
Seth, please compare Paul's voting record with the "Top Tier" candidates. There is no question who the real conservative is.
In case you've missed frequently posted facts about Rep. Paul's voting record, here they are:
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
Paul is conservative. Look at what the candidates do, not what they say. Guiliani, McCain, and Romney /are/ liberals in GOP clothing. Our troops are not being well served by nation building. We need them home.
Peace be with you.
Seth,
Well Ron Paul aligns himself with the MoveOn.org and those freaks, that explains alot.
Anon,
You see that kind of thing is what buggs us Republicans, the Patriot Act!
I will agree that Ron Paul doesnt want to raise taxes and blah blah
But to vote AGAINST the Patriot Act did it!
We need the Patriot act so we can have extra tools to fight the terrorists and foil plots before they materialize here at home.
Ron Paul would turn THIS Country into a terrorist playground and by GOD we arent going to let that happen!!
NOT getting attacked is first and foremost on Republicans Minds. And Ron Paul doesnt give a rats ass about our Country defending itself.
As for Nation Rebuilding, maybe Ron Paul should have told that to Roosevelt, and Clinton.
Our Troops sure wouldnt be served by having Ron Paul as commander-in-cheif.
Keeping the little terrorist assholes busy elsewhere besides here serves the American people AND the Troops, they dont have to worry about thier families being attacked back home.
There is a reason we havent been attacked in 6 years, and his name is President Bush!
You remember him, the man Ron Paul want's to Impeach!
Ron Paul is a friggen Moron.
Marie, I repectfully urge you to adopt my policy in engaging nut cases as such. I do not let a person post on my blog unless they are responsible enough to have a blog of their own where you can go to and make a mockery of their beliefs in front of their own nutcase supporters. It's your blog though and I respect your decisions.
Ron Paul is a nut case and not a conservative and will never be. He is a nut case libertarian extremist hiding behind someone else's party label. He is neither republican or conservative and can't even be honest about it.
Jenn,
Oh sure!! LOL, that's all I need is to invade a Ron Paul nutjob's blog and drag back all his supporters back over here LOL
I do have decent anonymous commentors that come on here that I dont mind talking to however, and I most of the time convince them or teach them how to make a name LOL
Other than that it get's a little boring around here and I enjoy slapping them around a bit :-)
Marie, I detect a lot of fear in your posts. This is not surprising, given the rhetoric which has emerged from the media since Neoconservatism rose to prominance. Please try to see beyond the paranoia we are all being subjected to.
The American people are being goaded into an ever broadening war in the Middle East. You will be less safe if and when that happens.
The best prevention for terror is to separate and trade. This means avoiding entangling alliances ---particularly in the region--- as Washington asked us to. As Americans, we have allegance to the USA alone. Other nations can go their own way, in peace.
This is the traditional Republican stance, and one Paul is championing.
As for the Patriot act; be careful that its circumvention of our laws are not one day used against you. This could happen if a Socialist Democrat gains the presidency and reinterprets what the definition of "terrorist" is. Possible categories range from "gun owner" to "home schooler".
The true terror is that we may lose our liberties through our fear. Chin up!
Peace be with you.
Anon,
Marie, I detect a lot of fear in your posts. This is not surprising, given the rhetoric which has emerged from the media since Neoconservatism rose to prominance. Please try to see beyond the paranoia we are all being subjected to.
The American people are being goaded into an ever broadening war in the Middle East. You will be less safe if and when that happens.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The paranoia we are all being subjected to? Are you friggen serious? See it's that kind of thinking why we cant stand Ron Paul or his supporters.
Were you absent on 9-11? In a Coma perhaps?
Maybe you believe we attacked ourselves on 9-11?
And guess where all the terrorists came from? THE MIDDLE EAST!
Taking the attitude you have will only get us attacked again and again just like before 9-11, and we arent taking it anymore!
The best prevention for terror is to separate and trade. This means avoiding entangling alliances ---particularly in the region--- as Washington asked us to. As Americans, we have allegance to the USA alone. Other nations can go their own way, in peace.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh Really! So you are saying we should just seal off the United States and become a floating Island?
But Ron Paul the other night said "We have to negotiate with other countries" Was he wrong?
Besides WE DONT NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS! PERIOD!
But we also dont shove our ally's to the side either. I cant believe that you believe the America I have grown up loving, that shining beacon on the hill, should say F*** You to our ally's we are closing up shop and you are on your own!
Boy do you have your priorities backwards, thank GOD our ally's dont treat us like that.
As for the Patriot act; be careful that its circumvention of our laws are not one day used against you. This could happen if a Socialist Democrat gains the presidency and reinterprets what the definition of "terrorist" is. Possible categories range from "gun owner" to "home schooler".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unless I am communicating with Al-Queada I dont have a damn thing to worry about. And a Democrat isnt going to win the Presidency anyway, not if I can help it.
For all I care they can listen in on me getting a chicken recipe from Grandma!
I have a freind in Kurdistan, Iraq that I talk to on occasion and we email, and Instant message and have been doing so for over 2 years! I have yet to see Homeland Security knocking at my door!
We HAVE to have the Patriot Act, there have been countless plots against the US and our Ally's you would like to convieniently toss aside thwarted, stopped, and people put in jail. And they werent looking for chicken recipie's from Grandma!
The true terror is that we may lose our liberties through our fear. Chin up!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The True Terror is electing someone like Ron Paul who want's to Impeach the President that has kept us safe for the last 6 years, aligns himself with the ilk of Soros and MoveOn.org, want's to seal off America and make us a flaoting Island, and want's to go back to a Terrorist Act being treated as a police action!
Hey Marie!
How are you? Did you hear me give you a shout out as I flew over OK on my way to my daughter's family in Calif.? My seat mates did. And they thought I was loopy!
I'm recovering from being with an exuberant, non-stop, high energy 3 1/2 year old for six weeks. At the end, I was his total slave. He bossed me around like he was the Emperor of Ice Cream!
Ron Paul? When I heard the name, I thought it was the cross dresser, RuPaul, who was running as a Republican candidate. Wow! The GOP is getting really kewl! I was mistaken, of couse, but think excitement if it had been true?
Here's where you can see the "fabulous" RuPaul:
http://www.google.com/musicl?lid=sU0IwvYlN8D&aid=PVFJ40IVWHL
I'll be back when my back recovers. My "little" grandson, Evan, weighs 43 lbs! My aching back.
Hope you're well.
Mrs Green
(Joanne)
Mrs Green,
WELCOME BACK!!!
How is my favorite Liberal? lol
Haha NO didnt hear a thing as you passed over OK but thank's for thinking of me :-)
I am so glad you are better, I did keep you in my prayers.
Sounds like you got wore out by your baby grandson though awwwww I bet you were a Happy Grandma :-)
Funny you should metion RuPaul lol, I did a post it's down there somewhere as to not confusing the two lol.
No this Ron Paul guy has been slipped in on us Republicans, he is either a Democrat plant lol, or he is just so out there it's unfriggenbelieveable.
Now you know the GOP is cool :-)
Most of us anyway :-)
Glad to have you back. Looking forward to our hot and heated debates lol
I will go look at your link in a few
I am SO glad you are better sweetie :-)
Marie,
I was very much present on 9/11 and will remember the event for the rest of my life.
I have to ask you though, what is wrong with questioning US policy's role in causing the event? Do you believe, as has been suggested elsewhere, that we were attacked solely because "they are jealous of our freedoms"?
Much of your concern seems to be preventing another attack. I share the same concern, but believe too much focus has been put on prevention via retaliation and not enough on prevention via policy. This includes questioning our blind support of Israel and investigating our invasion of Iraq, which as a state, has been proven to have no ties to Al Qaeda, and thus no reason to be invaded.
Some will make the case that Iraq's government was an evil regime had to be deposed in the name of democracy. As you know, this argument is reserved for the Clintons, Roosevelts, and other socialist nation builders. Sadly, it appears modern Neoconservatives are resorting to such logic to justify an expanded Middle East conflict.
As far as a "sealing off the nation", I acutally said "The best prevention for terror is to separate and trade". The key word here is trade. A non-interventionalist USA ---as we were before the 20th century--- will be safer, stronger, and richer. Less enemies mean more importers of our goods.
You are correct to suggest I am saying we should "shove our allies to the side". Our founding fathers asked us to not enter any Alliance, _ever_. This is what has and will drag our nation into war. It is also what lead to 9/11. Please think about it.
Congratulations on your friend in Kurdistan. That sounds interesting.
Peace be with you.
Anon,
I have to ask you though, what is wrong with questioning US policy's role in causing the event? Do you believe, as has been suggested elsewhere, that we were attacked solely because "they are jealous of our freedoms"?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NO I dont give a rats ass what the terrorists reasoning was for attacking us on 9-11, Bin Laden declared war on us in 1996. If you have forgotten I will refresh your memory, THEY WANT US ALL TO TURN MUSLIM OR DIE!!
That is thier sole decalred reason. Why they hate us? I dont give a flying F***..I am not ready to put on a Burka and I am not ready to turn Muslim.
I dont know if they are jealous of our freedoms, but they sure dont like it that we are free and NOT Muslim, I think that one is self explanitory. And I dont care.
Much of your concern seems to be preventing another attack. I share the same concern, but believe too much focus has been put on prevention via retaliation and not enough on prevention via policy. This includes questioning our blind support of Israel and investigating our invasion of Iraq, which as a state, has been proven to have no ties to Al Qaeda, and thus no reason to be invaded.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We have to have prevention as well as retaliation, we have been hit so many times, our hostages being taken for 444 days 1979, the 1993 WTC bombing, USS Cole, 9-11, etc..We cant afford to take a "Police Action" Mentality EVER again. And keeping the terrorists busy elsewhere sure seems to have worked since we havent been attacked in 6 years, nor our interests!
Blind support of Isreal? Are you insane? We will ALWAY'S have Israel as our ally. What the hell is it with you people havinga problem with Israel? Havent those people been through enough? I think so and they are our ally as well. We will ALWAY'S support Israel. See that's the way of thinking that seperates us Republicans from you dolt Ron Paul supporters.
Even my buddie (The Liberal) Mrs Green up there ^^ would agree that some of your statements are truly out there!
And I have news for you, Al-Zarqowi was in Iraq before we EVER got there after he had his leg almost blown off in Afghanistan. Why go to Iraq for a leg operation? Oh the Dept> of Defense nor the President will not draw any lines connecting the two, but us clear thinking people KNOW what was going on.
We didnt just go to Iraq for Al-Queada, you seem to forget there were 17 UN resolutions, The Iraq Liberation act signed by President Clinton, Saddam Hussien fired scud missiles into Israel (Our Ally), Saddam tried to assinate President Bush 43, Saddam shot at our planes in the No-Fly Zones that we were there to protect those idiots from Invading Kuwait AGAIN!, Saddam paid the families of suicide bombers 25,000 dollars to bombard Israel, Saddam scortched the earth when he lit all the Kuwaiti oil fields on fire as he was being evicted from Kuwait (That helped the ozone I'm sure), and to top it all off if we hadnt gone in, we would have NEVER discovered the "Oil for food program scandal" and how we were being bilked by Saddam for billions when we were trying to feed the Iraqi people. I'm sure I left out a few other things, oh yeah WMD, he had them, he used them on his own people, he committed Genocide, what he did with them is of concern, but he had them we know for sure and he said he was going to use them on us! SADDAM WAS A TERRORIST!!
If you have forgotten that is who we are after TERRORISTS!
No reason for the Iraqi's to be Liberated for the Butcher of Baghdad? My ASS!!
You people are crazy, shoving our ally's to the side is INSANE!
How are we suppose to trade with our ally's if they are cut off from us?
You truly dont make a damn bit of sense!!
Anon,
By the way my friend up there Jay, is in Israel.
Would you close us off from him?
Maybe if you had friends outside the USA you would understand where I am commimg from!
Ron Paul has some conservative stances, but when it comes to protecting this nation, only a strong hand against the enemy will work. In that case, Paul is no conservative.
Marie, whether Ron Paul is banned or not, he's definitely out. He screwed himself royally on national tv and the GOP wouldn't vote for him as a dog catcher!
Here's information you asked for although I can't publish the code in the comment thread of blogger comment threads. Blogger won't take the code and neither will Yahoo Mail. Here's what you need to do. I don't know whether you know how to download videos from You Tube or not so I included that information too:
Go to www.youtube.com and set up an account. It's easy to do and it's free. When you get the e-mail letter from them, which will be instantly, click on the verification code they send you in the e-mail, and then go back to You Tube. At the top right-hand of the screen you will find a place to do a "You Tube" search.
Type in "America, the Beautiful" and several videos will appear. Click on the one that says "Ray Charles" it will open a new page with that video on it.
At the right of the video you'll see some different codes. Copy and paste the "embed" code to the HTML page of your post in blogger. There, you've got it! And from now on you can get videos whenever you want. You Tube will not send you spam, and will not charge you a cent for downloading their videos to blogger.
PS: Don't let the idiot liberal trolls get to you, Marie. That's what they are trying to do. They love the attention. Whether it's negative or positive it doesn't make any difference to them. Arguing with them won't get you anywhere, I promise.
Doug,
Yes Ron Paul has some conservative stances but exactly what you said.
Ron Paul is a Moron
Thank's Gayle,
I should have mentioned I just needed the name lol
That's ok Gayle, they cant get to me, I enjoy slapping them around to much lol
I dont mind a good debate, but this is crazy lol
It's "America the Beautiful" (Sir Ray Version)"
Gayle,
Thank's Sweetie :-)
I do have some readers over on that blog that read, insist I link to them lol, and they I guess read but not alway's comment.
I even have one that emails me and insists I post something new on that blog lol
They are funny about that stuff I guess,
I have to leave moderation on that one because I wont have anyone bashing our Troops.
AND FOR YOU FREAKS THAT THINK YOU WILL BASH THE TROOPS HERE! YOU WILL GO STRAIGHT IN THE TRASH!
That's the only time I get rid of idiots!!
I really do need to keep up with that other blog more though, my bad.
They seem to like those videos so that's why I wanted it.
Thank's again Gayle :-)
Marie, Mrs Green left a comment over at my place too. Cool!
You pretty much summed up the big points about extremist libertarians. They are group bent on destroying this nation with notions that not even the founding fathers would have imagined.
WE cannot be an island as I said before and that thinking ended long before WWII as I have pointed out over at my blog. Isolationist ideas died before Jefferson did.
wow Marie...quite the discussion here girl!..For the record..I agree with u!..:)
Jenn,
I told you, there is a method behind my madness :-)
I guess I could just go along and throw every freak in the trash, but beating them mentally seems to sooth me.
I look at these people as my playtoys. They have enough of me and they will eventually leave my blog, or come back now and again which I dont mind, honest debate I can tolerate.
If they go hysterical they know they will wind up in the trash.
It's thier choice, debate nice or hit the trash it's pretty much up to them.
Yes it is nice to see Mrs Green doing well.
She and I dont agree on alot of issues but I can tolerate her. Even though we have some wayyyyy heated debates.
I dont wish ill on anyone contrary to how much I cuss and spew my own crap, I sure dont wish death on anyone, well except Muslim Extremeists that think I am going to be wearing a Burka anythime soon.
I can welcome Mrs Green back with open arms, know she is doing well, and expect some really good and quite heated discussions out of that woman lol.
Angel,
Thank's lol
I try lol
Marie,
At this point we have to agree to disagree. Neither of us are budging from our positions. I have no doubt you are a loyal Republican, but whether today's Republican is a conservative, I am not convinced. Personally, I'll remain conservative and let that take me where it may. Staying within GOP cannon is far less important to me than remaining a conservative at heart. I believe Rep. Paul feels the same way, which is why I support him. Party lines are largely dictated by the fasions of the era. They should never get in the way of what's right for America, and in my opinion, small government and respect for the constitution is exactly what we were promised in the '90s, what was abandoned in the '00s, and what is needed today.
As for your friend Jay being an Israeli, that's fine, so long as my tax dollars are not subsidising his nation's national defence. If you feel he is in danger without US support, ask for his government to attempt to live more peacefully with its neighbors. The incentive will increase when our troops are out of the region.
Among your responses, this comment stuck out for me...
"Blind support of Isreal? Are you insane? We will ALWAY'S have Israel as our ally. What the hell is it with you people havinga problem with Israel? Havent those people been through enough? I think so and they are our ally as well. We will ALWAY'S support Israel. See that's the way of thinking that seperates us Republicans from you dolt Ron Paul supporters."
...it seems you are confirming my point. The phrase "Always support Israel" is by definition blind-support. Again, consider that when we allied with this foreign nation ---against the wishes of our founding fathers--- we immediately accepted their enemies as ours.
No thank you. I'd rather the GOP return to non-intervention.
I sincerly hope the war drums cease beating you, Marie. The world is a better place when you're not in a state of war with it.
Peace be with you.
Anon,
Fuck You!
Traitor MY ASS!!
You fucking Moron as of this date every single Soldier (And I now plenty) have ENLISTED! Do you KNOW what that means? They VOLUNTEERED!!
There is NO Draft asshole.
That arguement is as tired and old as you are.
Back away from your computer and go take a rest!!
Just to clarify, I'm a different person than the Anonymous above. As someone who supports this war and has many friends and family members serving (which makes your response about volunteering, etc. all the more strange), I still find myself appalled by your comment.
"Keeping the little terrorist assholes busy elsewhere besides here serves the American people"
Your comment betrays a cavalier attitude towards our troops. You do not mention stopping the terrorists or winning the war. Your comment has the sickening implication that the troops should exist simply to draw fire from the terrorists so that we may sit comfortably at home. And you then respond saying that the troops all volunteered as though this somehow justifies your attitude that they can be used as cannon fodder... as decoys.
You are sick and should be ashamed of yourself.
Hi, just found this link on a thread over at digg.com and read your request so I figured I post your link.
Point out to me a link where our founding fathers said we should not align ourselves with Israel or any other Ally!
Just ONE link!
Here's a link to the First Inaugural Address of President Thomas Jefferson from March 4, 1801
In the 4th paragraph down, he says...
...the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations. Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies;
But I also remember George Washington had a famous quote, so I did a quick Google search and found the State Department has not only the text, but also a good summary.
Here's a link to George Washington's Farewell Address (1796) and summary.
The significant portion...
He called for men to put aside party and unite for the common good, an "American character" wholly free of foreign attachments. The United States must concentrate only on American interests, and while the country ought to be friendly and open its commerce to all nations, it should avoid becoming involved in foreign wars. Contrary to some opinion, Washington did not call for isolation, only the avoidance of entangling alliances. While he called for maintenance of the treaty with France signed during the American Revolution, the problems created by that treaty ought to be clear. The United States must "act for ourselves and not for others."
You also said...
Ron Paul is a candidate that doesnt give a shit about our National Security and that is PRIMARY if you wish to have an America left to defend!
That is what's known as a false dilema. Ron Paul does give a shit about national security, you just don't agree with him on how to do so. Ron Paul thinks the policies of Clinton, Bush, Rudy, McCain, etc. make us less safe but he doesn't accuse them of not giving a shit. He wants our military to track down the terrorists who attack this country and bring home our soldiers stationed in 140 countries across the world (you are aware the US has soldiers in 140 countries, right?), strengthen the borders and have our soldiers ready to defend this country.
Did you ever bother to find out why the Department of Homeland Security needs to be scrapped? Because it makes us less secure.
Here's an outline of the reasons why we need to get rid of the Department of Homeland Security.
Anyway, I hate to see someone get so emotional when talking about politics. This is America, we can talk about this stuff civily. No need for all the name calling. I also think you underestimate the number of Republicans that supprt Ron Paul. Have a good one.
I don't understand how a link to an NBC News interview changes anything. Would you like it better if I linked to a Fox News interview?
Anyway, I was just trying to respond to a question you asked and a statment you made. If you were being sarcastic and didn't really want the links, you should have signified that someway. I copied the significant quotes (not whole articles) so you wouldn't have to read through the long speeches to find the information you asked for. I don't see why you would want me to write it. I'm not one of the founding fathers.
I feel like I'm talking to a liberal.
Andrew,
I was expecting a blog when I clicked on your name, but as usual those of you who cant back up ANYTHING dont have a blog!
I never asked you for a link to a damn thing in the first palce so I dont see why you think I should have requested them not to be there.
I dont have to abide by YOUR rules Pal, you have to abide by mine.
I didnt want you to write a damn thing for me, and hell no you are not one of the founding fathers.
marie's two cents said...
Point out to me a link where our founding fathers said we should not align ourselves with Israel or any other Ally!
Just ONE link!
Andrew,
marie's two cents said...
Point out to me a link where our founding fathers said we should not align ourselves with Israel or any other Ally!
Just ONE link!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I believe I was addressing Anonymous with that statement
Andrew,
I dont even know why you are here, there is NOTHING for you here why dont you move along?
Marie you got intellectually owned, and the worst thing is you dont realise it and resort to infantile emotional outbursts.
Please grow up and open your eyes and ears.
*I am not any of the previous anonymous' btw*
Marie you got intellectually owned, and the worst thing is you dont realise it and resort to infantile emotional outbursts.
Please grow up and open your eyes and ears.
*I am not any of the previous anonymous' btw*
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Spare Me! There are what 4 of you here and not ONE of you can think up a name?
You cant even intellectually open up your own blog. How about "We are the last of the Ron Paul Supporters"!!
Now run along little Tin Foil Hat wearing people that have invaded my blog. I have other things to do today.
Marie, one of those analmouses posts this after he goes on about national security by ron paul. "Peace be with you".
As long as people are given to giving in and not standing strong against a determined enemy there will be no peace.
When we stop needing oil from the middle east that's when we pull out of there. Unless you stupid, I mean really stupid assholes want to be like my neighbors the Amish and ride around in horse and buggies and light their farmhouses with lamp oil (they do that by choice) you'd better just sit down, shut up and pass the ammunition because the Islamic facist assholes are going kill you because you are weak and have no idea about what you are talking about.
Your misnamed federalist movement is illogical and blind as the nutcase commies on the left. I were in the business of conquering the world for islamfacistism as it is attempting to do now. I would start where you exist. The third President Thomas Jefferson tried to be an isolationist and he found out that is not possible but he was smart enough to learn from his terible mistake. Whay haven't you dumb asses learn from that man's mistakes from 200 hundred years ago.
This is a question I already know the answer to but I'll ask it anyway. Are all of you misnamed federalists completely stupid? I believe the only group that is as stupid and neglectful of learning from past mistakes are your moonbat counterweights on the left.
Jenn,
This ought to keep them busy for the day:
Ron Paul Drops Out Of...
Back to that one "Anon" who tried to tell us what REAL conservatism is all about.
That's a red flag popping up right there.
When these folks try and tell everyone else they are the TRUE conservative I want to ask them:
-How many campaigns have you worked on?
-How much money have you given the party and conservative candidates?
Myself, I have worked with or participated in events with:
-President Reagan
-Barry Goldwater
-Phyllis Schlafly
-John Ashbrook
-William F. Buckley Jr.
-Phil Crane
-Ed Meese
And that's the short list.
And every one of those bona fide conservatives would denounce the "America First" rhetoric of a Ron Paul which history has shown only puts America in a weakened position inviting attack (Pearl Harbor!).
Ron Paulers are idiots and NOT conservatives and have done NOTHING to make this nation stronger and more secure.
Interesting divided comments on ALL issues.
Here's my two cents.
Benjamin Franklin said once " Those who would give up some freedoms for a little security deserve neither security nor freedom."
Regardless of Republican or Democrat, the whole of us should be looking at our future. On TV, donkeys and elephants are like lovers at odds with eachother. They smear mud on eachothers faces in public and smear cum in private.
Looking at the future and not trying to get too 'intellectual' for the emotional megaphones you all are; we have two choices:
One: We can sit and be happy with the way things are going. We can foolishly have blind faith in the strength of the dollar; can hold tight the fear of foreigners and terrorists so we can endlessly twitter about what the government isn't doing for us; can plead for the nanny state to secure our retirement, police our streets and borders, stop all the abortion, misdemeanor and post-radical strife plaguing our society. We can also gleefully continue to pay 50+ percent of our earned income to public agencies to help the poor and disenfranchised peolpe of othe nations as well as our own.
Or
Two: We can take responsiblity for ourselves, stand up like strong, logical men and women, get educated in matters of governance, teach others what we learn from our research, dispel all the lies and misdirection pouring from the media, repair our relations with the rest of the world, repair the fallen value of our currency, seek to re-invigorate our manufacturing base, and become competitive on the world scene without hand-holding from Uncle Sam.
All without hand-holding from Uncle Sam.
If anyone has read the philosophies of those who created our country, they would understand that present day America looks, acts and believes very differently from those who founded it.
Those of you who resist a return to those founding principles would take heed on this:
If we don't do something to correct our current trajectory in the grand scheme of things, soon enough, we won't have a trajectory to change. This country will fall just like every other which has taken this path throughout history.
IN EVERY SINGLE CASE OF HISTORY, THOSE THAT TAKE OUR CURRENT PATH, HAVE BEEN DESTROYED.
(If you need explanation of our current path, here it is. Seceding our sovereignty as individuals part of the greater social body, in any respect, for any purpose is permanent unless it's return is desperately fought for.
If we give control of ourselves, our policies and beliefs to others, they will never return them unless we destroy the mechanism by which they took our sovereignty and declare them no longer in control by replacing it with a new mechanism.
Simplified, if you can't do anything you need to fulfill and enjoy your lives without asking permission, then you are not free. For example, if you want to open a business, you need to get a business license. That's asking permission from Uncle Sam to sell stuff. If you have to carry a license to drive, and papers to exist, YOU ARE NOT FREE.
The above process is the one by which our country was founded.
If you don't know the meaning of sovereignty, please look it up. If you don't or can't do that, then you are of no use to this fight and should be quiet while those stronger than you, who will fight for it, go about the process of being honest, free and strong.)
Greece, Persia, Rome, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, The Maya, Tolteks, Aztecs, Egypt, Babylon.
ALL have failed.
Though some have picked up the pieces and found the right path, again, they veer off it. Talking about the EU specifically.
Do you want this country and its sovereignty destroyed?
I sincerely hope not.
If recorded history has any bearing on your minds, with regard to it's ceaseless razor accurate repetition, then the points and examples I am bringing up should be a matter of common sense.
Don't destroy my country Marie.
Consider Ron Paul, aside from the donkey or elephant debate, on his merits. On his philosophies which parallel the founding fathers and on his policies which on the surface seem insane by today's 'standards', but which at their core are aimed at preventing this country from self destruction.
I also forgot to mention.
Perhaps this will take some of the teeth out of a scathing retort.
Paul's stance on foreign affairs is by no means isolationist. He just frowns on military adventurism.
It is not isolationist if we keep our military here at home, while encouraging our merchants, their protection and dollars overseas in order to trade ourselves into prosperity.
It's the wanton pre-emptive striking of other nations, the covert overthrowing and influential international muscling around that Ron Paul's upset with.
That falls in line with that ever so spicy word..."conservative".
Tom
Tom, Ron Paul is a libertarian not a conservative and those ideas will never work here in America. You're plain wrong. Your examples are full of holes and I can point them out one by one but you know after twenty or so years of playing that stupid and useless game and worrying about black helecopters dropping ATF or UN soldiers and operators onto my roof in the middle night to enter my house with their dynamic entry tactics I have heard ewnough of your stupid bullshit to last me a lifetime. Go away and play isolationist games in Montana or something and leave serious adults alone to discuss real matters of importance. You guys never learn.
Tom,
I will at least give you credit for making up a name, fake webpage but at least a name.
The above process is the one by which our country was founded.
If you don't know the meaning of sovereignty, please look it up. If you don't or can't do that, then you are of no use to this fight and should be quiet while those stronger than you, who will fight for it, go about the process of being honest, free and strong.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let me get this right, you want me to be quiet on MY OWN BLOG?
I'm not interested in the fight for Ron Paul! What is it about you Ron Paul people that you do not get this?
You had better read the comments of your fellow Ron Paul supporters up there ^^ that seem to be a little more wacked out about this whole thing than you seem to be. They are UNHINGED! You dont seem to be quite as unhinged but are sadly misguided.
I saw the debate, I saw what Ron Paul said, He insinuated we asked to be attacked on 9-11 and when Rudy Guliani asked him to retract his statement he didnt do it, that told me right there HE MEANT WHAT HE SAID!
We live in different times, I will NEVER support ANYONE who is willing to Impeach our President who has kept us safe for the last 6 years, who want's to seal off the borders with everyone and make America into a floating Island that tosses our ally's overboard, and who seriously believes President Bush had a hand in attacking our own Country on 9-11.
That is Lunacy!
Don't destroy my country Marie.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You cant be serious, I wont let YOU destroy MY Country with Ron Paul.
Imagine what our Troops would think of him if he were commander-in-cheif? Do the Troops count for anything to you people?
Our Troops want to finish the job they VOLUNTEERED to do, and if you dont beliebve me go to Pat Dollard.Com
Consider Ron Paul, aside from the donkey or elephant debate, on his merits. On his philosophies which parallel the founding fathers and on his policies which on the surface seem insane by today's 'standards', but which at their core are aimed at preventing this country from self destruction.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I do like Ron Paul's conservative stance on the tax issues and that stuff, but he has NO plan to defend our Country. That is first and foremost on all of our Republican minds. Which Ron Paul is NO Republican. Ron Paul is a Libertarian, and I have link on my sidebar "Mainstream Libertarians" you should read what they say.
And one of your buddies up there ^^ say we have a blinding support for Israel! You damn straight we do, we will ALWAY'S be a friend to Israel. We have 60 Countries (Our Ally's that you people want to toss overboard) helping us in the "Global War On Terror" in Afganistan and Iraq, and Ron Paul and you people think we should tell them to Shove it?
Gee that sends a real strong message to our allies, Vote for Ron Paul he will toss you overboard and you will never hear from America again! That's just swell!
The only thing I will consider Ron Paul for is a trip to a mental institution!
I will NOT let him isolate this Country, tell our ally's to shove it, and turn America into a terrorist playground.
Ron Paul is NOT my guy. And the whole post here was that the GOP want's this guy out of future debates, did you even read the post? It explains why!
I also forgot to mention.
Perhaps this will take some of the teeth out of a scathing retort.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To late for that, anyone who comes on here and tries to tell me I should support Ron Paul instead of who I want to support get's SCATHED!
I ahve had enough of Ron Paul, he is a nut!
He needs to go back wherever he came from ad change his party back to Libertarian, Ron Paul is NO Republican!
And I dont give a rats ass about Ron Paul!!
Tom while I agree with some of your premise that from our founding we have given up to an all powerful central government some of our individual freedoms your thoughts about business license etc. are a little off base in blaming on, "Uncle Sam."
The Constitution allows for the State to establish certain laws etc. for not only the State but the cities or towns within that state. A business license for example is issued by the city in which that business is located and not by the federal government.
Though we have drifted from the Framers original intent in many ways to blatantly state the country will ,"fall just like every other which has taken this path throughout history." is not taking into account one of our most precious rights as citizens in this country and that is the freedom to hold our government responsible and answerable to its actions and non-actions.
The countries that fell, some of which you mentioned, did not have the ability of its citizenry to hold leaders and government accountable. Though we have drifted from the strict Constitutional Republic that we were founded upon we still have that glorious freedom and personal responsibility to hold elected officials to the fire and our governments accountability to its citizens.
This one aspect if nothing else will ultimatly prevent the, "grand experiment, " from ending up on the sludge heap of countries and empires who fell because of their government and leaders taking those historical nations down a path of no return.
There are many who do not realize the power and strength that, "We the People, " have but there are enough of us who do and that in itself is the strength and resoursefulness of our nation.
Uncle Sam has its problems but it is not beyond the intervention and responsibility of the people in turning any tide and keeping our government accountable. Even though politicians love their power they still, though at times it seems not, fear the power of the electorate who hold them accountable because we can and we do remove them from office with our voice and when we see trouble in our land rise to the occasion and prevent those in power from taking us down the path of destruction.
As far as Ron Paul is concerned, I looked the man in the eye in a one on one questioning Tuesday after the debate. I was bothered by his contention that our, "interventionist." policy and as he put it, "bombing of Iraq," brought 9/11 upon us. The responsibility of 9/11 is on Al Qaeda and those associated with islamic fanatics not the US. We did not ask for this war it was brought to us.
Yes we interveen and my friend if it were not for that intervention many nations would not exist today. Germany did not attack us but we interveened in Europs and our strength made victory possible.
If you stand as Paul does on the premise that our interventionism brought about 9/11 and hold no fault to Al Qaeda but place the blame on the US, then in the same context you must blame the US for Pearl Harbor because our intervention and policy against the Japanese Empire is what they claimed as the reason for attacking the US just as Islamic fanatics do now. Additionally one must remember that Islamic fanatics attack not because of political philospphy or nation interveening but a religious fanatasism that calls any non-Muslim or even Muslims who do not adhear to the fanatasism, Infidels worthy of death. that is their goal and the establishment of an Islamic fanatasism throuhout the world. The power and influence of the US is the main obstacle in their way and our freedoms make us as a nation and as a people the object of their hatred and their attacks.
Both 9/11 and Pearl Harbor were unprevoked attacks and in the aftermath we have the justifiable right to take war to those who attacked us wherever they may be. Whether Japan in the 40's, or Afghanistan and Iraq today.
I know your next thought is, "Iraq did not attack us, " while that is true, there is more than enough proof of Husseins thumbing his nose at the world after the Gulf War, associating with and harboring terrorists including Al Qaeda and yes WMD's which fled the country before our attack in March of 03.
Additionally concerning Paul while many claim he is conservative I can tell you from personal experience in my face to face talk with him that when pushed in questioning he moved from the, "blow back theory," to very liberal and Democrat talking points.
He involks the name of Reagan for conservatives but everyone seems to forget that in 1988 when he had an opportunity to back conservative Reagan as he claims in his calls about Reagan conservatism now, he chose rather to run AGAINST Reagan on the Liberatarian ticket because he disagreed with him then and only uses the conservative mantra now because it appeals to the GOP base.
He has conservative ideas but also liberal ones as well.
Thank You Mike and Ken,
If these nut's dont understand what Ron Paul is by now it will never sink in thier heads!!
One slight correction on my comment concerning Ron Paul. Paul ran in 1988 against George H W Bush BECAUSE he disagreed with Reagan policies and ran against the candidate Reagan was backing because of this disagreement.
1) Ron Paul is a nutjob, and thats a nice word for him.
2) I think its obvious anonymous is part of the Ron Paul kool-aid drinking group. He seems to have a small cult following that have way too much time to spend on the internet.
3) I second the motion for weeding Ron Paul out. He always used to proclaim himself to be a libertarian, now he's pretending to be a Republican to get some face time. As the moderator said at the debate, he's running for the nomination of the wrong party, plain and simple.
Little Miss Chatterbox,
Yes he is in the wrong party alright.
There are 4 or 5 people under the guise of anonymous here lol
Notice they never leave thier blog link behind for us to go check out.
My name is acutally Tom, and I decided to jump in the bee's nest to see what the honey tasted like. I can't really make a decision. I don't want to sit on the fence, so I'll stick to Libertarianism. However I do agree with much of what you all are saying. I would just approach it in a different way.
Congress should've declared war, and come up with a new definition of war that retains the limits we percieve when we define the word, but only allow the fact that the conflict wouldn't be with an established government. The target then should be defined very specifically and be reviewed frequently by Congress as to determine whether the target has metamorphosed.
The President should have no monopoly of our military might against a largely vague target. Congress was lazy and irresponsible to pass such authorizations. Congress should also, like any good business, have passed a definite budget based on the President's recommendations, not a blank check every time he whines. The President, no doubt had plans. But for them not to be reviewed by congress and debated behind closed doors was silly. (If they did let me know, but I'm led to believe Congress had no say in the matter) Congress should only not have say in the matter in the event of extremely imminent danger, as writ in the Constitution. (pardon my lack of article citing. I'm at work waiting for the computer to churn, but do not have much more time)
OBL should be dead and whoever harbors him, razed. But that won't happen unless we LOOK for him and if we know where he is, then what's the hold up? Pakistan? Oh yeah. They got nukes, so we won't attack them. (not that they could get any ICBMs on our soil, they'd probably melt Israel, but wouldn't that defeat the purpose of their whole fight? Besides Saudi Arabia?)
Iraq should not have been attacked. Iran should not be attacked. They threaten(ed) us with words, not physical matter. They threaten our interests in their natural resources. We should figure out something else. (That's not liberal, that's smart)
They SHOULD be attacked if they attempt to attack us at home. They should be slaughtered when they are fighting on our soil. Retaliation should be fierce if they rain on us missiles, but first-strike policy sounds unwise and arrogant of what we believe to be the truth.
If all else remains the same with respect to foreign affairs; trade, travel, civility, negotiations and respect, then how is that isolationist? Ron Paul doesn't want total isolation. One of you said you talked with him eye to eye. Who's the crazy one? Neither of you, extrapolated from your comments, seemed to care what the other thought.
All your points are very valid, and some I question, but I guess that's the beauty of freedom isn't it. Thanks wholeheartedly for the scathing and debate. It was lots of fun.
Cheers,
Tom
Tom,
Sounds a bit kinky but that's ok!
I enjoy a good debate.
I may get a bit hostile or emotional, but hey! That's show's I have feelings right?
I think everyone here had a strong opinion.
I tell you since you seem civil, you may come back and join in if you want, even though I think Ron Paul has some good points, I still think he is an idiot, but that's just me.
Tom we can all debate whenever you want to :-) Even if you're wrong, we can all still debate :-)
Without Ron Paul your party will die. Take the red pill. And your country should come before your party.
David,
You pick Memorial Day to try to pick a fight with me over Ron Paul?
Have you no sense of Country?
Have you no respect for our Fallen Soldiers?
Maybe you are having a nice little BBQ and have had to much to drink.
I hardly think Ron Paul is going to do any damage to the Republican party because he is not Republican. He's a Libertarian.
And soon he will be just a blip on the screen of time.
All but forgotten.
Maybe you should put the pipe down!
Red pill my ass.
How is Ron Paul connected with moveon.org? I've read and heard very misleading stories that he's "linked" to 9/11 conspiracy theorists, but I've seen nothing of substance to back that up. To see a ridiculous attempt to link Ron Paul to the "Scholars for 9/11 Truth," do a search on YouTube.com for "Ron Paul exposed exposed (Ron Paul 08)", and you'll hear the clip used to wrongly suggest he has some connection with them.
The link to that video:
http://tinyurl.com/2j9vbq
Basically the student group shows up at some house party where Ron Paul is—he doesn't really know much about the group as he states, himself—and they ask him a question about 9/11. Ron Paul—at a house party, mind you—simply states that he doesn't automatically trust a government investigation. I can't say that I do, either. That's the only "link" I've found with Ron Paul and conspiracy theorists.
If you don't like Ron Paul's beliefs, that's understandable, but please back up these assertions with legitimate non-misleading sources, since I haven't been able to find any myself.
Marie
I want to say this in the most unpatronizing way possible, think you need to bone up on your history and actually read the USA PATRIOT Act.
I just happy that the Gipper isn't alive to see the republican party of today.
Ron Paul DID vote to go after the terrorists who were involved in 9/11. He voted AGAINST granting the president authority to go into Iraq.
Wilson, Democrat, Advocated globalisim and interventionism, takes US into WWI to defend our allies. Opposed by Republicans.
Franklin Roosevelt, Democrat, takes the US into WWII because US is attacked. Founder of US interest in Middle East and US alliance with Suadi Arabia. Opposed by Republicans.
Truman, Democrat, takes US into Korea and the Cold War to defend our allies. Opposed by Republicans.
Eisenhower, Republican, former General, negotiates end of Korean War. Warns against having a powerful military. Promotes building weapons for deterrance as alternative to a strong military and military conflicts.
Johnson, Democrat, takes US into Viet Nam because we are attacked.
Nixon, Republican, takes US out of Viet Nam, opens dialog with Russia and China, promotes economic contest with communists instead of military contest.
Reagan, Republican, increases dialog with Russia. Ends Cold War through economic victory without ever sending troops to Russia.
To quote President Ronald Reagan:
“Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.”
But who knew? Now, through the clarity of the Neo-Con vision, we can see all along Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, and Johnson were the true conservatives. And Washington, Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan were just wacko nutjobs. WOW! RIGHT ON NEO-CONS!!!
George Washington defeated the British (the most powerful empire on Earth at that time) on American soil. To quote Washington (another nut like Ron Paul I guess):
"avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other.........The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible........Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice? It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it..."
One word: Blowback. That's a fact. Middle Easterners hate us for our support of Israel. I've known plenty in my lifetime who've said so and I can give you a list if you want.
Ron Paul = Paleoconservative.
Look it up, and work on the reading comprehension; apparently public schools don't teach it very well.
Ron Paul is causing a minor ruckus on the right.
The Texas congressman's opposition to the Iraq war (and most other wars, too) puts him in stark contrast with the other nine Republican presidential candidates onstage at recent debates.
While the "Rudy McRomneys" spend their debate time rallying support for Operation Iraqi Freedom and rattling sabers at Iran, Paul says that the most important moral issue facing our nation is its embrace of the Bush doctrine advocating preventative war.
His seemingly unorthodox positions have made him a sensation in online polls. He has also caused some to wonder if he is in the right party at all.
Paul points to old-school Ohio Republican Sen. Robert Taft, who advocated a humble foreign policy during the 1940s and early 1950s. Paul says that his party used to win elections by campaigning for peace.
Even more, a Democrat warrior like Roosevelt had to assuage fears in the heartland that he'd "plow every fourth boy under" by involving America in World War II. There may be signs that those same Midwestern Republicans are reverting to their old thinking.
Popular in opinion, unpopular in polls
A recent Strategic Visions Poll shows that 57 percent of Iowa Republicans want the U.S. to withdraw all of its military forces from Iraq within the next six months. Only 37 percent of likely GOP caucus-goers think the United States should stay past November.
If more than half of Iowa's Republicans want to get out of Dodge, why is Paul polling at only 2 percent there?
Simply put, he's not expressing his foreign policy in terms grass-roots conservatives understand or appreciate. In an oft-replayed moment from the South Carolina debate, Paul handled a question on the causes of Sept. 11 by giving a technical answer about "blowback."
He then encouraged the audience to "listen to the people who attacked us." Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani seized the emotion in the crowd and called the notion that we "invited that attack" absurd.
Pundits showered Giuliani with plaudits and piled on Paul. "Good for Rudy," Jonah Goldberg wrote on NationalReview.com's "The Corner," "sticking it to Ron Paul on his blame America first isolationism."
"Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country." --U.S. President Ronald Reagan
It would be more appropriate just to say that he is no politician because he tells the truth as he see's it, regardless of where the chips fall.
nice post, it's really interesting for me today, thx
Marie,
Just wondering if you curse as much in your prayers as you do on this blog?
Well it depends Steve.
Like right now I could cuss the daylights out of these Friggen Morons that keep leaving SPAM in my comments section.
SPAM WILL BE DELETED.
To all you people that insist on leaving spam behind instead of a comment, I will either turn the spam control on or just delete what you people post
Like "Actos" up there!!!
SPAM WILL BE DELETED!
Wonderful blog.
zxFCRl Please write anything else!
actually, that's brilliant. Thank you. I'm going to pass that on to a couple of people.
Post a Comment
<< Home