CNN Calls Republicans’ Bluff, Reschedules YouTube Debate
CNN Calls Republicans’ Bluff, Reschedules YouTube Debate
On July 23, all eight Democratic presidential candidates participated in the CNN/YouTube debate. By uploading a 30-second video to YouTube, “voters could directly question a presidential candidate during the debate.” Steve Grove, YouTube’s news and politics editor, called this new debate format “more democratic than ever.”
Yet so far, just three Republican presidential candidates — Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), and as of yesterday, Tommy Thompson — have confirmed that they will participate in the Sept. 17 debate.
Both former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney have said that they have scheduling conflicts. CNN has called their bluff. The website for Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) reports today that CNN has postponed the September debate:
We received word yesterday that the CNN/YouTube/Florida GOP presidential candidates debate scheduled for September 17 has been postponed. A new date has yet to be determined.
ThinkProgress spoke with the Paul campaign today, who confirmed that CNN contacted them and said that it is rescheduling the debate. The campaign said that it believes it was done to accommodate the schedules of the other candidates. Earlier today, the New York Times reported that CNN “said it would work with the campaigns to find a new date.”
It’s unclear whether the other candidates will actually participate in the rescheduled debate. Romney recently mocked the debate, stating, “I think the presidency ought to be held at a higher level than having to answer questions from a snowman,” referring to a citizen dressed as a snowman who submitted a question about global warming.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
They won’t participate. The sniveling cowards will come up with one ridiculous excuse or other to dodge the debate. Given how stupid their drooling base is, the excuse doesn’t even have to make sense.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:29 pmWhy are most of the g.o.p. candidates afraid of Youtube? Senator Allen, are you there?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:29 pmFear strikes the hearts of all g.o.p ers who can’t control their “media” images.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:33 pmRead Joe McGinnis: “The Selling of the President”: it outlines Nixon’s run in 1968. . . nothing has changed (although many argue it’s much worse).
No SCRIPTS???
HOW could they POSSIBLY “debate” without them??
July 28th, 2007 at 9:36 pmYou know what? F*UCK ‘EM! Hold the debate, have empty podiums for the chicken-sh*t debate dodgers, televise the YouTube questions directed to the missing, and have 30 seconds of silence.
That would be just as good as the “out of my a$$” answers JulieAnnie and Mutt would give anyway.
PEACE
July 28th, 2007 at 9:40 pmAs their empty podiums at the recent NAACP convention attest, like the current Oval Office occupant these Republicans apparently have no stomach for authentic, unscripted questions from the American people.
For the details, see:
July 28th, 2007 at 9:42 pm“GOP Candidates to Add YouTube Event to NAACP Boycott?”
From the Romney/YouTube thread:
If they can’t stand up to Youtube, how can the voters think any GOP wannabes can stand up Al Queda?
Comment by notanumber
July 28th, 2007 at 9:55 pmMitt Macaca is just afraid that even with all his make up, the fake snowman would look more manly.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:00 pmEven with the TouTube angle, the debates are still pretty dull. Baseball understood this kind of problem when it instituted inter-league play. Republican vs. republican or Democrat vs. Democrat = Who cares; but Hillary vs. Rudy or Obama vs. Mitt = Vavoom — Pow!
At a minimum, if the republican debate is Ron P and Saint John, I hope some of the Democratic hopefuls send in videos. What kind of audience share could you get for Gravel vs. Paul? It takes my breath away.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:06 pmhttp://www.cnn.com/
July 28th, 2007 at 10:06 pm# Story Highlights
# Country’s largest Sunni political bloc threatening to leave the Cabinet
# Political fighting among Sunni Arabs, Shiites and Kurds
# Five people were killed on Saturday in a Baghdad car bombing
# Top commander in Iraq says positive security trends in Iraq continue
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/
Sounds Like OUR News.
T.P. must be having a slow story day.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:08 pmwhenever this happens, news starts flying fast.
“Why are most of the g.o.p. candidates afraid of Youtube? Senator Allen, are you there?”
Well, it isn’t Youtube, per se, it is actual people. They are very afraid of the electorate because if they told the truth 71% of the people would never vote for them. They live on slick commercials and cheap sound bites. Don’t expect them to actually go do a fireside chat…it would just show what pigs they are.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:10 pmUgh, interleague play is a nightmare. Not only do our esteemed NL teams have to play with DH’s when away (something they don’t and shouldn’t prepare for as it is an abomination to the game) but there is very little decent debate over which league is better because of the head to head results.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:12 pm“What kind of audience share could you get for Gravel vs. Paul? It takes my breath away.”
That was funny. A 0.01 share is breathtaking :)
July 28th, 2007 at 10:14 pm#2 -You are right, the memory of Youtube and Senator Allen defeat scared these GOP candidates to death.
After Allen defeat, they don’t want to be face to face with YouTube…It is a nightmare for them, it is the killer.
Ron Pual has nothing to fear; McCain & T. Thompson have nothing to lose.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:16 pmGuess we won’t be subjected to all those middle-age white guys scrambling to answer questions that they weren’t prepared for. And I wonder how many times they would STILL get the words “ronnie ragunz” inserted.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:17 pmRudy is afraid all his questions will come from men in drag. Deal with it Rudy,many think your wife is a queen.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:18 pmNo varnst, he is afraid of the abortion and gay rights questions that will drive the righties away no matter how he spins his record. You cannot be a fascist papa figure that the righties feel all warm and comforted by when you hold progressive domestic views.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:21 pmI suspect the Republican candidates fear YouTube and the concept of extemporaneous answers to surprise questions is the mere fact that the combined Intelligence Quotient of the entire group still falls short of any of the front-runner Democrats. The Republican group of incompetents need to be scared, really scared when it comes to presenting something not rehearsed and practiced a hundred times on the campaign trail. It was laughable when they railroaded Matthews and overruled his line of questioning - suffusing it with such obvious talking points and campaign rhetoric. It was actually quite painful to even watch such a charade.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:25 pmYouTube questions will not enable them to sell their ‘family values’ schemes.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:27 pmCertainly if the electorate would be posing serious questions about any of the issues critical to this campaign (which they definitely would) the paltry group of Gophers would be at a total loss for a palatable answer. The fact is that most of them have already said too much about their platform and philosophies which run counter to now about 70+% of americans.
It’s really becoming irrelevant to even see what these guys have to say at this point because, other than Ron Paul, they’re all in lockstep Reichwing formation and the people will have no more of it.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:29 pm#18……You may be correct.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:29 pmtarazan: I’m wondering what “family values” any Republican would have to sell today. I think their reputations speak louder than words and with the daily scandals engulfing the GOP, the people already know that their level of personal morality and family values are mere words - meaningless words. Actions speak louder than words and by their actions, they’ve pretty much shown the people that they’re bona fide hypocrites.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:30 pmI suspect the Republican candidates fear YouTube and the concept of extemporaneous answers to surprise questions is the mere fact that the combined Intelligence Quotient of the entire group still falls short of any of the front-runner Democrats. The Republican group of incompetents need to be scared, really scared when it comes to presenting something not rehearsed and practiced a hundred times on the campaign trail. It was laughable when they railroaded Matthews and overruled his line of questioning - suffusing it with such obvious talking points and campaign rhetoric. It was actually quite painful to even watch such a charade.
Comment by veritas
Spot on. There ARE intelligent people in the Rapeublican party;
the problem is that they feed on the FEARS and EMOTIONS of the morons who vote for them.
You DON’T go to WAR on logic.
You whip the country up into a frenzy of FEAR and EMOTION.
Right out of the Nazi playbook, “improved” by Karl Rove…
July 28th, 2007 at 10:31 pmGuiliani will whimp out regardless of the change in date. So will Romney. Guiliani doesn’t want to answer the abortion question and Romney doesn’t wish to discuss Mormonism.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:32 pmNor does Guiliani want to see a fireman ask him anything whatsoever about his so called planning abilities.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:34 pmAnn: And “whipped like prostrate subjects we were”! The fear mongering coupled with he wave of patriotism following 911 was the perfect synchronization of emotions for us to permit ourselves to be enslaved. Benjamin Franklin (I think) said: If a man trades his freedoms for the illusion of safety, then he deserves neither. This is precisely what we’ve done in allowing the enemy within to swiftly and deliberately use our constitution for their personal toilet paper.
The one thing I run on is faith though and I have no doubt that the people, awakening from the dark, deep miasma of corrupiton which has overwhelmed their internal logic, will prevail. The ball is rolling and will ultimately rest in the hands of the people who will bring these criminals to the justice they deserve.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:36 pmNor does Guiliani want to answer the question of what the FEMA people were doing setting things up in his City on September 10 either!
July 28th, 2007 at 10:36 pmRomney doesn’t take the voting public seriously. Duly noted.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:37 pmuh, mitt, you’ve got to do better than that if you want to become president.
oops! silly me, i forgot that the majority of this country is….stupid and god-fearing….
yup, he’ll win. go mitt!
July 28th, 2007 at 10:38 pm911truth.org has all the details of the FEMA arrival ostensibly to prepare for some “war games” which were occurring simultaneous to the attack (wink wink). Of course, Giuliani’s command center was brought in lock, stock and barrel a day or two beforehand (wink wink). You know Giuliani, our “hero” - the next “annointed one” - (wink wink).
July 28th, 2007 at 10:39 pmFear mongering is no longer working. The people would rather risk the “cry wolf syndrome” when/if something legitimate is going on than to ever be pimped by these liars again.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:41 pmComment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 10:12 pm
Absolutely correct! Save it for The World Series, with the team with the best record getting home field advantage. But let’s get back OT. :)
July 28th, 2007 at 10:43 pmRomney recently mocked the debate, stating, “I think the presidency ought to be held at a higher level than having to answer questions from a snowman.â€
I think the presidency ought to be held at a higher level than not using your real name, (Romney’s is Willard) and not having campaign aides impersonating law enforcement agents…What an ass this guy is.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:45 pmI am rarely on topic, Wayne :) I think I can summarize my feelings in 3 words for this thread though…Republicans are pu$$ies.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:47 pm“I think the presidency ought to be held at a higher level than having to answer questions from a snowman.â€
Why attack the questioner unless you don’t have an answer for the question? If you do have a coherent answer, then ignore the silly costume and answer the nice snowman.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:47 pmI think we should start calling them out for their elitism. They’re too important to take questions from the unwashed masses that they try and pander to for votes?
Empty podiums is the answer! And lots of intimidation from all directions. Repeat after me: Romney and Guliani are Authoritarian Elitists.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:47 pmI think I can summarize my feelings in 3 words for this thread though…Republicans are pu$$ies.
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 10:47 pm
I was thinking of a different word with a double $$ :)
July 28th, 2007 at 10:48 pmRomney is a wealthy ass Mormon who must be rejected by the entire nation. He is a hypocrite in that he loves war, but his 6 grown sons are NOT serving in the military. He claims they are busy working for his church.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:49 pmThe republicans will no longer scare me. If a bomb goes off in my city so be it.I will not cower in fear and live a sheltered life the way they want.I am an American and I will spit in the faces of the Thompsons and Guilianis.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:50 pmIf need be I will rise up and destroy any strawman they present. I am sick of being a sheep and now will become the wolf. F*ck You republicans,this is MY country.
Wayne!! I am a big fan of holes. I think you give them too much credit. Your word means they are aggressive and mean. While I do think they have a mean streak, I think they are too wimpy to actually vocalize their true feelings (the black vote would drop from 2% to 0%).
By the way, I find the snowman reference very offensive being a Wisconsinite. Pig.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:53 pmSomebody should make up a costume that is like a cross between a Chicken and a Tele-Tubby with the YouTube logo on its screen and chase these guys around to all of their events.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:55 pmAs for Giuliani: he has a lot of gall to ridicule YouTube as a bunch of freaks, when he himself wears women’s undies and bras. Being a cross-dresser drag queen makes him creepy.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:55 pmI also think we should employ some hackers and find out who the pro-war trolls are. Seeing as how they have no problem with the invasion of privacy of Americans,they shouldnt mind us discovering who they are. This is indeed war and merits the actions for success. See you soon Mr. President.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:59 pmMake that a Tele-Tubby-Chicken Wearing a Diaper following them around to all of their events.
:)
July 28th, 2007 at 10:59 pm#19 Comment by veritas — July 28, 2007 @ 10:25 pm
The Republican group of incompetents need to be scared, really scared when it comes to presenting something not rehearsed and practiced a hundred times on the campaign trail.
You betcha! Who is it that chooses the questions, BTW. The MSM that enables neocons?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:04 pmdont cut and run like the democrat cowards did on FNC
July 28th, 2007 at 11:05 pm#23 Comment by veritas — July 28, 2007 @ 10:30 pm
Actions speak louder than words…
Not when you are talking about the neocon or the religious right base. They believe in words, and words only.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:09 pmcrimedog, the GOP already did with the NAACP. Hypocrite.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:12 pmI think I can summarize my feelings in 3 words for this thread though…Republicans are pu$$ies.
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 10:47 pm
Bad choice of description here. You are insulting that which I love the most. Frankly, I like the word coward. Its not scat, but I think its worse. IMO, it doesn’t get much lower. Even an A**hole has some form of value or dignaty.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:16 pmIt is all good, though. If I were a Republican I wouldn’t want to answer questions on racial equality either.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:17 pmMerlin, I agree that pu$$y should be a positive but it isn’t in coloquial American English. It is accepted that the word means wimp, coward, Republican, chickenhawk, gutless wiener. Just the way it is.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:19 pm#41- Jay Randal
[….He is a hypocrite in that he loves war,but his six grown sons are NOT serving in the military. He claims they are busy working for his church]
———————————————
During Viet Nam Romney enrolled in a Mormon missionary in France, for several years,after getting a 4-D MISSIONARY EXEMPTION
It was allowed then because he was a state of Michigan residence,with a small percentage of Mormons,he had little competition to get his deferment.
His father was the governor of Michigan.
So working for church is not a new reason given, with regard to his sons and war in Iraq
July 28th, 2007 at 11:23 pmIt has been used before.
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
I agree with you. Never the less, coward is 10 times stronger and fits the description of these chickenhawks much better. After all, you can be brushed off when you call someone a scat name. There is no writing it off, when you are called a coward. Like calling a spade a spade. There is no where for the coward to run. He has to face the charge.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:31 pmtarazan, just because it has been used before doesn’t make him less of a hypocrite. He supports the war (and I am guessing the rest of his family) while his kids are busy impregnating poor, African women. I apologize, the rich mormons get Italy or France to do their “missionary” style…er, work.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:31 pmIf the moonbats can flee from Fox News then why can’t the GOP avoid the Clinton News Network?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:33 pmI disagree, Merlin, coward has never phased a right winger. It rolls off of them like water on a ducks back. I don’t know if my word is more effective as it has never convinced one of them to join up so maybe all words are useless. Except maybe Pat Tillman’s words. Snivelling (not sure what he said) got him killed by his own.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:34 pmFrank, NAACP!!! Dimwit.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:35 pmLiberals should really avoid throwing around words like coward given their lack of interest in defending the United States.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:36 pmFrank, when are you joining up, you yellow coward?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:37 pmNAALCP
July 28th, 2007 at 11:37 pmWait, that is unfair, everybody knows Iraq has nothing to do with defending the US. But you are way to stupid to get that.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:37 pmPut on your white hood, Frankie.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:38 pm#34 Comment by veritas — July 28, 2007 @ 10:41 pm
Fear mongering is no longer working. The people would rather risk the “cry wolf syndrome†when/if something legitimate is going on than to ever be pimped by these liars again.
So their answer is to become bold face liars and give the American public the finger while daring us to do something about it. They keep pushing the limits and doing what they want.
And why not, they figure. The gig is up, so lets just go for it.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:38 pmI wasn’t talking about Iraq.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:41 pm#61 Comment by Frank J — July 28, 2007 @ 11:36 pm
Liberals should really avoid throwing around words like coward given their lack of interest in defending the United States.
I spent 5 and one half years in the Army from 1958 to 1963. I have a small right to condemn those who refuse, or refused, to serve.
And your experience is, troll? Or are you a coward?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:43 pmWhat night was that debate? I have to wash my wig.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:45 pmWhat WERE you talking about then Frankie? You said liberals were not interested in defending the US. From what?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:45 pmThe liberal ideology post 1972 finds the United States not worth defending.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:45 pmBy the way, Frankie, there are liberals AND atheists in foxholes, no matter what your masters tell you.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:46 pmIslamo Fascism.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:46 pm#57… Jpark,
July 28th, 2007 at 11:46 pmthat was my point..
He is a hypocrite..
Expound on that statement Frankie. I want to hear this.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:46 pmWhat the hell is Islamo Fascism?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:46 pmAre Muslims going to take over the world? Are you that chickensh!t?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:47 pmtarazan, I know. I was just expanding on it. Sorry if I sounded like I was attacking you.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:48 pmYou are as bad as the losers that think the Mexicans are going to steal the southwest, Frankie. Just clueless about reality.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:50 pmWhat number of dead American civilians do you want to see before your ideology would act, seems 3,000 was not high enough or was it because you lost no friends or loved ones in that attack that you are indifferent to Islamo Fascism, explain your idiocy.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:53 pmHow many dead Iraqis would sate your blood-lust? Especially since Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:58 pm#78–Jpark,
July 28th, 2007 at 11:58 pmNo, I didn’t think you were attacking me…not at all.
I appreciate your point of view,thanks for your kind words. I totally share your point of view, on this and others your wrote tonight.
Bushie boy doesn’t care about Osama, why should you, Frankie?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:59 pmCan you explain your idiocy?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:01 amPerhaps you can give us a little bit of the plan that the corrupt Clinton, Osama Obama or the Breck Girl have to deal with this problem?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:02 amIslamoFascism——–5,000…. or so victims
ChristoFascism—1,000,000 + …. victims
now who should I worry about?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:02 amCan you explain your idiocy?
Comment by Frank J
Eh. I can explain yours. You are an idiot.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:02 amGood question Frankie. I am guessing you are being ironic.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:02 amOr perhaps you don’t realize you are an incredible moron, Frankie?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:03 amOh boy, Francine is back.
Ok Francine, do you want to get your manhood back. How about answering this question. And you won’t get any points by avoiding the answer by throwing out a strawman or by saying “Clinton did it”. I’ll make this one an easy question. See if you are man enough to answer it.
Here’s the question: If the government is telling the truth about Pat Tillman’s death, why is George Bush trying to stop investigators from obtaining documents by invoking Executive Privilege?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:04 amMaybe you can run down the plan the first failed Clinton presidency had in dealing with Bin Laden following any one of the first four attacks? And blowing up a tent or aspirin factory don’t count,.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:05 amCan you post the link showing that Bush is doing that please?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:06 amMy prediction: all of the candidates will appear at the rescheduled debate but they will not be under oath and there will be no transcript.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:06 amComment by Frank J — July 29, 2007 @ 12:05 am
Two words: Tora Bora!!!!
Just another a*shat troll. I see some things have not changed in my absence.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:07 amLiberals should really avoid throwing around words like coward given their lack of interest in defending the United States.
Comment by Frank J
Actually, it’s COWARDS and TRAITORS like Bush, Cheney, Rove, Gonzo, etc. who have SABOTAGED NATIONAL SECURITY.
The exposure of CIA spy Valerie Wilson and Brewster Jennings.
20 years of espianoge keeping an eye on WMD’s in Iran.
Thus SCREWING out NATIONAL SECURITY, which they OBVIOUSLY couldn’t care LESS about.
TREASONOUS unamerican scum who needs to be in JAIL until DEAD…
July 29th, 2007 at 12:08 amOh, Christ, Frankie, do you want me to list the times Clinton attacked bin Laden’s camps? I can. I don’t even like Clinton. By the way, following any one of the first four attacks? What, are you including the OKC fed building bombing and the anthrax mailings? Otherwise I can’t figure out what you are babbling about. I am guessing that isn’t new to you though.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:09 amSo the left would have done what exactly at Tora Bora? Given the fact that Al Qaeda operated out of Afghanistan from 1995-2001.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:09 amExactly the f^cking opposite of what Bush was (which was let the 6′8″ guy with a dialysis machine escape). You suck.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:11 amWhat about liberalism has changed that you will now deal with a problem you have ignored for fourteen years?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:11 amUm, jackass, it was the righties that funded the “Afghan freedom fighters”. Nice job!!!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:12 amComment by Frank J — July 29, 2007 @ 12:09 am
We wouldn’t have “cut and run” in Afghanistan to invade a sovereign nation that did not attack us on 911!!!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:12 amIt isn’t the first time the Republicans have given terrorists a ton of cash or weapons. Iran-Contra ring a bell?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:13 amClinton blew up a tent and an aspirin factory. Perhaps you are including his mighty cruise missle attack against Saddam during impeachment.
Four attacks: WTC 1993, Kobar Towers, American Embassies in Africa and the USS Cole. Response to Bin Laden? None.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:13 amI feel it is perfectly OK for the veterans on this site to call out the cowardly decider in chief, his veepchickenasshawk, and all the leading rep candidates (except McCain) for their cowardly behavior in not only dodging their military duty but not wanting to handle anything but pablum questions in upcoming debates.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:15 amThe left would never gone into Afghanistan even after 9/11. There is nothing in your behavior before or after the attack of September 11 that shows you would have. If you would have done the opposite that would have meant more bombs and going into Pakistan to cut off escape routes with more troops. Given again the history of liberalism and how it has acted since the attack of 9/11 this is either wishful thinking or simply the left acting tough as long as someone else is making the decisions.
The United States armed the Northern Alliance not the Taliban they were funded by Saudi Arabia. No charge for that historical fact.
And where is that Tillman link?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:17 amPlease post the military records of Hillary Clinton, Osama Obama and the Breck Girl.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:20 amBush had Osama…he let him get out of the US…then he let him go at Tora Bora. Clinton actually took action against him…Bush is his b!tch…just like you. Terrorist lover.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:22 amFrankie, you just told us to give you the military records of the presidential candidates but you a$$holes attacked the one guy in the race that actually served in 2004. You are precious.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:23 amComment by Frank J — July 29, 2007 @ 12:20 am
They are not chickenhawks like republicans so I do not care. What is your military record?
Mine? My fanily has a long history of serving:
mother - army air corp
me - 6 years air force
sister - 8 years air force
brother - 4 years air force
Husband - 4 years navy
July 29th, 2007 at 12:24 ambrother-in-law - 4 years navy
other brother-in-law - 8 years navy
Please post the link showing when Osama Bin Laden was in the United States, you must have him confused with the Osama from Illinois.
Clinton was offered Bin Laden by Saudi Arabia and Sudan but turned them down, lack of guts. That is a fact.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:24 amIt would seem that most of the YouTube questions come from the younger population and tend to lean Democratic. I’m not sure why the other candidates aside from R. Paul, McCain, and Thompson are reluctant to jump in.
Even with the Democratic YouTube debate, I was disappointed that no one bother to address the collapsing dollar or major trade deficits. In fact, the only question I recall touching upon economic issues was regarding minimum wage. You can count that by mid 2008, the big issues will involve the economy including the collapsing housing bubble and deflating dollar.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:24 amCleland is a traitor, too, right, Frankie?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:24 amClinton was offered Bin Laden by Saudi Arabia and Sudan but turned them down, lack of guts. That is a fact.
Comment by Frank J — July 29, 2007 @ 12:24 am
Link please - and not red state or some other lying neocon site
July 29th, 2007 at 12:25 amFrankie, Osama made arrangements for his family to leave the US after 9/11. But you like that, don’t you? The Saudis are our GOOD friends.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:25 amIt is still in dispute which side John Kerry was on.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:26 am“Clinton was offered Bin Laden by Saudi Arabia and Sudan but turned them down, lack of guts. That is a fact.”
Actually, that is a lie. The 9/11 commission found absolutely no eveidence of that. Nice to know that you are susceptible to right wing propoganda. Surprise, surprise.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:27 amIt is still in dispute which side John Kerry was on.
Comment by Frank J — July 29, 2007 @ 12:26 am
Link please - and not red state or some other lying neocon site
July 29th, 2007 at 12:27 amCleland is a traitor, too, right, Frankie?
Comment by JPark
You do realize you’re arguing with a very stupid and very irrational troll, right? If you’re having fun, fine, but I hope you don’t think you’ll ever be able to penetrate the Skull of Stone.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:27 am“It is still in dispute which side John Kerry was on.”
Oh, jeez, are you really that much of a right wing blow up doll? Yeah, I guess you are.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:28 amgummitch. Yeah, I realize it. Sometimes it is fun. It is a pointless exercise but…
July 29th, 2007 at 12:29 amI would think Frank J is another incarnation of michael, but his punctuation is better.
That’s all. Just the punctuation.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:31 amClinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize - By Mansoor Ijaz
L.A. Times ^ | December 2001 | Mansoor Ijaz
Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize
Sudan offered up the terrorist and data on his network. The then-president and his advisors didn’t respond.
By MANSOOR IJAZ
President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as last year.
I know because I negotiated more than one of the opportunities.
From 1996 to 1998, I opened unofficial channels between Sudan and the Clinton administration. I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. “Sandy” Berger and Sudan’s president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who wanted terrorism sanctions against Sudan lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt’s Islamic Jihad, Iran’s Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.
Among those in the networks were the two hijackers who piloted commercial airliners into the World Trade Center.
The silence of the Clinton administration in responding to these offers was deafening.
As an American Muslim and a political supporter of Clinton, I feel now, as I argued with Clinton and Berger then, that their counter-terrorism policies fueled the rise of Bin Laden from an ordinary man to a Hydra-like monster.
Realizing the growing problem with Bin Laden, Bashir sent key intelligence officials to the U.S. in February 1996.
The Sudanese offered to arrest Bin Laden and extradite him to Saudi Arabia or, barring that, to “baby-sit” him–monitoring all his activities and associates.
But Saudi officials didn’t want their home-grown terrorist back where he might plot to overthrow them.
Full Article Here
July 29th, 2007 at 12:35 amComment by gummitch — July 29, 2007 @ 12:27 am
You do realize you’re arguing with a very stupid and very irrational troll, right?
Are you talking about Frank J? The coward?? The guy who spent 20 years in the military???
July 29th, 2007 at 12:36 amComment by Frank J — July 29, 2007 @ 12:35 am
This was disputed in the BIPARTISAN 911 commission report. Game over - you lose - again!!
Now, about your military record……
July 29th, 2007 at 12:38 amSudan offered up the terrorist and data on his network. The then-president and his advisors didn’t respond.
And what did Bubba tell the 9/11 Commission about this? From their report…
President Clinton, in a February 2002 speech to the Long Island Association, said that the United States did not accept a Sudanese offer and take Bin Ladin because there was no indictment. President Clinton speech to the Long Island Association, Feb. 15, 2002 (videotape of speech). But the President told us that he had “misspoken†and was, wrongly, recounting a number of press stories he had read.After reviewing this matter in preparation for his Commission meeting, President Clinton told us that Sudan never offered to turn Bin Ladin over to the United States.President Clinton meeting (Apr.8, 2004). Berger told us that he saw no chance that Sudan would have handed Bin Ladin over and also noted that in 1996, the U.S. government still did not know of any al Qaeda attacks on U.S. citizens. Samuel Berger interview (Jan. 14, 2004).
This of course explains Sandy Burglars theft and destruction of documents at the National Archives.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:44 amZoo, yeah, he is a slightly more obsessive michael.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:45 am“Are you talking about Frank J? The coward?? The guy who spent 20 years in the military??”
He claimed to be in the military? Or had been in the military? That is funny. He sounds like a piss-soaked coward. I am pretty sure he would have been fragged if he served during wartime.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:47 amAnd of course don’t forget Bin Laden’s endorsement of Kerry in October 2004.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:49 amAnd of course don’t forget Bin Laden’s endorsement of Kerry in October 2004.
Comment by Frank J — July 29, 2007 @ 12:49 am
July 29th, 2007 at 12:50 am————————————————————-
Yep. Terrorists support the Dems.
Comment by Frank J — July 29, 2007 @ 12:44 am
Again - never happend. Berger never had the original documents - he had copies. frank if you keep getting all of your “news” from Faux Noise you will never be informed.
You lose - again!!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:51 amHe claimed to be in the military? Or had been in the military? That is funny. He sounds like a piss-soaked coward. I am pretty sure he would have been fragged if he served during wartime.
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 12:47 am
That was snark. Sorry… My bad
July 29th, 2007 at 12:52 amSandy Berger fined $50,000 for taking documents
CNN ^ | Sept. 8, 2005 | CNN Producer Paul Courso
WASHINGTON (CNN) — Former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger was sentenced Thursday to community service and probation and fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives and intentionally destroying some of them.
Berger must perform 100 hours of community service and pay the fine as well as $6,905 for the administrative costs of his two-year probation, a district court judge ruled.>p> “I deeply regret the actions that I took at the National Archives two years ago, and I accept the judgment of the court,” Berger said outside the courthouse after his sentencing.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com …
July 29th, 2007 at 12:54 amLiberals should really avoid throwing around words like coward given their lack of interest in defending the United States.
Comment by Frank J — July 28, 2007 @ 11:36 pm
There is only one answer to that:
See who has served, and who hasn’t, buddy. Look at the numbers of our fighting men and women who are in the Republican party or members of the right noise machine, versus the numbers in the Democratic Party or members of the left noise machine.
The pro-war side of elected officials and prominent voices just so happens to be severely lacking in actual members of the armed services.
The anti-war side of elected officials and prominent voices is chock full of veteran men and women.
This is not a coincidence.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:55 amThey won’t participate. The sniveling cowards will come up with one ridiculous excuse or other to dodge the debate. Given how stupid their drooling base is, the excuse doesn’t even have to make sense.
Comment by VerbalKint — July 28, 2007 @ 9:29 pm
They might be forced to admit that they don’t enjoy interacting with the dregs of humanity that frequent YouTube. They prefer serious debate with serious adults, not wasting time with every developmentally arrested clown with a computer. ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 12:58 amWho received a larger share of the military vote in 2004, Bush or Kerry?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:59 amComment by Frank J — July 29, 2007 @ 12:54 am
Just like a good little neocon to cherry pick - read the whole article a*shat. What he took had nothing to do with some lying neocon making false claims re Clinton and Bin Laden in 1996.
From the atricle: The documents taken by Berger dealt with the terror threats during the 2000 millennium celebration, according to parties in the case
You really need to practice your debating skills. You suck!
July 29th, 2007 at 1:01 amWho really wants to hear upteen questions about Algore’s cult?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:01 amThe pro-war side of elected officials and prominent voices just so happens to be severely lacking in actual members of the armed services.
The anti-war side of elected officials and prominent voices is chock full of veteran men and women.
This is not a coincidence.
Comment by Moderation — July 29, 2007 @ 12:55 am
Probably because fewer heroes than cowards make it back. ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:02 am“Who really wants to hear upteen questions about Algore’s cult?”
What is upteen?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:03 amComment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 1:02 am
Don’t have a chance of being a hero if you are too chickensh*t to go!!
July 29th, 2007 at 1:04 amuntil the democrats agree to debate on fox news, no republican should debate on cnn or msnbc. its a total joke that republicans have to debate with democrat chris matthews and liberal hack olbermann, but the dems cant handle wallace and hume. the demosocialts are pathetic cowards. if you can’t go on fox and handle hannity, you sure cant handle hugo chavez and iran. liberals are utterly gutless.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:07 amhow can obama meet with all the dictators of the world and hold tough when he is too afraid of answering questions from chris wallace??? does barrack hussein need jimmy carter employee matthews, liberal blog hack olbermann, and ted turner(mr. jane fonda)’s cnn to mask is overwhelming lack of experience?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:10 amComment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:04 am
Now jules, even many of your fellow lefties admit that the military has historically been heavily conservative. At least they did a few months back. It may not serve their purpose now, so maybe the military has magically become a lefty liberal group of folks. You know, just because someone believes we should get out of Iraq doesn’t make them a liberal. ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:10 amc’mon hillary fans, she can take murdoch and ailes’ money but can’t debate on the network that reaches more americans then msnbc and cnn combined? what kind of uniting force is that? are all democrats this gutless? how can they stop bin laden if they are so afraid of brit hume?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:12 amare all democrats racist for boycotting the black caucus/fox debate? do they just hate people of color? diversity? is barrack obama a self-hater? why would they perform such a racist boycott of the black caucus debate?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:14 amComment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 1:10 am
What a bunch of crap. What “lefties” have said this? I served and I know plenty of individuals who have and I would not describe one of them as a neocon.
Conservative and neocon are not interchangable. I know and like many conservatives. I have never met a neocon I could tolerate.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:14 amNice propoganda LDA.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:15 amis Wendell Goler just too much for Barrack Hussein to handle? how on earth will he stand up to Kim Jong Il if he is shaking in his boots around ol’ Wendell?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:15 amComment by liberals destroyed america — July 29, 2007 @ 1:14 am
Are all the repugnut candidates racist for boycotting the NAACP convention?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:15 amYeah, upright, because so many Iraq vets ran as Republicans and no Dems did last election. Right?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:16 amComment by liberals destroyed america — July 29, 2007 @ 1:15 am
How on earth can Mitt go up against Bin Laden if he is afraid of a snowman?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:16 amBarrack Hussein? You are a pig, aren’t you, LDA?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:16 amWait, you don’t have to answer that. The answer was obvious long ago. Oink.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:17 amComment by JPark
please explain how republicans passing on cnn (network founded by ultra left wing ted turner) is somehow worse then democrats passing on foxnews(network founded by hillary clinton campaign contributor rupert murdoch).
the repubs had to answer questions from jimmy carter employee chris matthews, how is that better then renowned journalist brit hume?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:18 amBarrack Hussein? You are a pig, aren’t you, LDA?
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 1:16 am
I teach high school. Sounds like something one of my kids would say and they are 15.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:18 amOnce again –
Are all the repugnut candidates racist for boycotting the NAACP convention?
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:15 am
July 29th, 2007 at 1:19 amTrolls are winning in here too!
Yippee!!!!!!!!!!
I love to watch the Lefties in pain!
July 29th, 2007 at 1:21 amWhy Dr Ron Paul?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:22 am• 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.
• He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
• He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
What “lefties†have said this?
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:14 am
I’m quite sure a few of them will admit to having said this, being honest, forthright folks. ;)
——
Yeah, upright, because so many Iraq vets ran as Republicans and no Dems did last election. Right?
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 1:16 am
Perhaps ya missed this statement: “You know, just because someone believes we should get out of Iraq doesn’t make them a liberal.” If ya want to achieve a goal, you choose the most expediant course. It would be interesting to see how the views of these folks compare with yours beyond Iraq and gays in the military. ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:24 am“please explain how republicans passing on cnn (network founded by ultra left wing ted turner) is somehow worse then democrats passing on foxnews(network founded by hillary clinton campaign contributor rupert murdoch).”
You clearly think CNN is some ultra-left wing network. So…you are not bright and not worth talking to. I have found that Limbaugh, Savage and Hannity lovers are really impervious to logic and reality.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:25 am“If ya want to achieve a goal, you choose the most expediant course.”
Actually, being an anti-war Republican would be more expedient since being anti-war Dem just makes you unpatriotic.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:27 amComment by JPark
it is his name, Barrack Hussein Obama. you may be ashamed to acknowledge it, but i am not.
the republicans stood up to Carter employee Matthews and blue blog hack Olbermann, yet the lefties cower in fear of Chris Wallace, I guess because he exposed Clinton with one of the fairest questions ever asked “did you do enough?” Clinton went on to fall apart over himself, admitting “that i tried and i failed”. i guess exposing the horrid liberal field is something the DNC fears.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:27 amOh, Christ, it is a Ron Paul lover. The guy who wants to gut SS and Medicare. Go away.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:28 amComment by JPark
obviously someone who thinks keith olbermann is an incredible, unbiased journalist, as opposed to the distinguished careers of brit hume and chris wallace isn’t smart enough to vote in the first place.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:29 amComment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 1:24 am
You will please forgive me if I do not take your word for this….or anything for that matter.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:30 amI have found that Limbaugh, Savage and Hannity lovers are really impervious to logic and reality.
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 1:25 am
Well, to your idea of logic and reality, anyway. ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:30 amWell, to your idea of logic and reality, anyway. ;)
Comment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 1:30 am
Anyone with a brain :)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:31 amAnyone with a brain :)
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:31 am
This is Jules kicking some serious ass. :)
Hi, Jules.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:34 amActually, being an anti-war Republican would be more expedient since being anti-war Dem just makes you unpatriotic.
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 1:27 am
Since most Republicans had tentatively backed the war, until recently, it made more sense for someone opposing the war to run as a Dem to gain support. Like the ultra liberal hijacking of the Dems drove moderates to the Republican party, the war and scandals are driving em back to the Dems. ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:35 amAnyone with a brain :)
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:31 am
Hey jules, paris and lindsay each have a brain. So you must share their ideas of logic and reality. ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:37 amHi, Jules.
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 1:34 am
Well Mistress Z - long time. When are you going back to school? I move my daughter into the dorm 8/16 - yikes!
July 29th, 2007 at 1:37 amHey jules, paris and lindsay each have a brain. So you must share their ideas of logic and reality. ;)
Comment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 1:37 am
Again - I will not believe you without proof.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:38 amI teach high school. Sounds like something one of my kids would say and they are 15.
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:18 am
Could there possibly be two such similar pinko liberal high school teachers here or might jules be the unbelievable “unbelievable?” ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:40 amAgain - I will not believe you without proof.
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:38 am
jules, jules, jules, now you are sounding like your students. I’m sure you would demand more than that from them. ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:42 amComment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 1:40 am
There are many more than two of us upright :)
I am not unbelievable. I only wish I were half the person she is. I also wish you were half the person she is. You may then have redeeming qualities :)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:44 amjules, jules, jules, now you are sounding like your students. I’m sure you would demand more than that from them. ;)
Comment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 1:42 am
No - I teach my students to NOT believe everything that a person says without some form of proof. What type of informed citizen would they be? I do not care if they turn out to be conservative - I just do not want them to be brainless trolls.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:45 amWell Mistress Z - long time. When are you going back to school? I move my daughter into the dorm 8/16 - yikes!
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:37 am
School begins 8/20 — can’t wait! It’s amazing how fast you adjust to the empty nest — trust me on this. I’m so glad you found your niche teaching. We need more teachers like you.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:46 amNo - I teach my students to NOT believe everything that a person says without some form of proof.
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:45 am
So jules, are you requesting proof that paris and lindsay each have a brain, then? ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:48 amSo jules, are you requesting proof that paris and lindsay each have a brain, then? ;)
Comment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 1:48 am
You are such a moron.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:52 amSo jules, are you requesting proof that paris and lindsay each have a brain, then? ;)
Comment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 1:48 am
Yes as recent actions belie this claim!
July 29th, 2007 at 1:53 amYou are such a moron.
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 1:52 am
LOL zehava, I mean, zooette it really ticks you off when liberals get themselves into a corner with the old “prove it” line, eh? ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:56 amComment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 1:46 am
I am very excited for my daughter beginning her new life, but when you have had one major focus for 18 years it is very difficult to know what you will do with all of that free time :)
I am thinking of taking spanish classes. I would love to ba able to converse with some of my students parents who cannot speak english very well.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:56 amYes as recent actions belie this claim!
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:53 am
Oh yeah, we need more folks like this teaching our kids. You’re gonna post “I know you are but what am I” any minute now aren’t ya? ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:57 amOh yeah, we need more folks like this teaching our kids. You’re gonna post “I know you are but what am I†any minute now aren’t ya? ;)
Comment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 1:57 am
I am confused by this response? Do their recent actions suggest intellect and logic to you? These are two of the most important functions of the brain.
There are many adjectives that could be used to describe me that I may not be thrilled about, but lack of intellect and logic will never be two of them!
July 29th, 2007 at 2:02 amLOL zehava, I mean, zooette it really ticks you off when liberals get themselves into a corner with the old “prove it†line, eh? ;)
Comment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 1:56 am
You just keep on thinking, ok dimwit? The world will move forward without you.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:03 amWell this has been fun. I am going to make an attempt to be back tomorrow. Miss Z - have a good rest of your evening. Upright - good to meet you and I hope we are able to have such civil conversations in the future.
Good night and good luck!
July 29th, 2007 at 2:07 amI am very excited for my daughter beginning her new life, but when you have had one major focus for 18 years it is very difficult to know what you will do with all of that free time :)
I am thinking of taking spanish classes. I would love to ba able to converse with some of my students parents who cannot speak english very well.
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:56 am
Believe me, you’ll work it out. :) It’s actually quite nice knowing you did what you could as a parent, and then watch them mature into their own adulthood — bumps and all.
I agree. Spanish is the second language of choice these days. Such a beautiful language. I would like to learn it myself, hopefully in real time in the Spanish language country of my choice. That is a few years off, of course. :)
July 29th, 2007 at 2:08 amGoodnight, Jules. Always great to see you. :)
July 29th, 2007 at 2:09 amComment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 2:02 am
Ok jules, I’ll go ahead and spell it out. People can’t drive without a brain. See? People who actually lack a brain don’t get drunk and do drugs. People tend to die without a brain. So your statement about agreement with the logic and reality of people who have a brain doesn’t necessarily put you in the best company. You know, any of your students could probably have helped you out on this one. ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 2:10 amYou just keep on thinking, ok dimwit? The world will move forward without you.
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 2:03 am
Thinking is considered a good thing by most folks, zooette. Try it sometime. ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 2:11 amHeh.
I thought I’d check back and see what kind of passive/aggressive bullshit you’d put up, upright left.
Just your typical crap. Nothing out of the ordinary.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:16 amThese are two of the most important functions of the brain.
Um… I’m gonna have to disagree with that one. I would say that basic vital functions such as breathing, keeping a pulse, and the like, are a bit more important.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:17 amI thought I’d check back and see what kind of passive/aggressive bullshit you’d put up, upright left.
Just your typical crap. Nothing out of the ordinary.
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 2:16 am
The passive/aggressive label seems to surface when you’ve run out of ammo, zooette. ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 2:20 amComment by upright left — July 29, 2007 @ 2:10 am
OK - I really am going - I just had to ask this one thing. I will check back in the morning to see your response.
Why is it that you neocons always whine about how liberals shouldn’t take the likes of Ann, Rush, and Billo so literally when they spew such rubbish as calling for the poisoning of a supreme court justice or likening liberals to Nazis. However when I, a liberal, call two braindead individuals, well braindead, that must be taken literally?
It is sad that neocons seem to have a do as I say attitude.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:28 am