Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 381 - Pledge Of Darkness Edition [Archive]

View Full Version : Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 381 - Pledge Of Darkness Edition

FORD

09-27-2010, 01:21 AM

<img src="http://upload.democraticunderground.com/top10/10/381.jpg" border="0"> The Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 381 September 27, 2010 Pledge Of Darkness Edition This week the Republican Party (1,3) makes the foolish mistake of actually saying what they're going to do if they get elected -- and it's all John Boehner's (2,7) fault! Elsewhere, Susan Collins (5) and Rand Paul (6) teach us all about fairness, and Christine O'Donnell (10) has a plan to... well, you'll see. Don't forget the <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/key.html" target="_blank">key</a>! <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/01.gif" border="0" alt="" title=""> The Republican Party <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/lame.gif" border="0" alt="lame" title="lame"> Last week the GOP released its much-awaited "Pledge To America," a rehashed "Contract With America" which aims to dispell the popular notion that Republicans have got absolutely nothing new to offer whatsoever. Want to know what's in it? I'll <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hBuErW4Kv_v_HYB_21r54a5KJuOgD9IDQTL81" target="_blank">give you a clue</a>: <div class="excerpt">The "Pledge to America" was filled with familiar proposals to slash taxes and spending and cut down on government regulation, as well as repeal President Barack Obama's health care law and end his stimulus program.</div> See, they have ideas! All we have to do is cut taxes, reduce spending, and do away with everything the Democrats have done the past two years, and lo and behold it's morning in America all over again. Just one problem... <div class="excerpt">The plan steers clear of specifics on important issues, such as how it will "put government on a path to a balanced budget." It omits altogether the question of how to address looming shortfalls in Social Security and Medicare, which account for a huge portion of the nation's soaring deficit, instead including a vague promise: "We will make the decisions that are necessary to protect our entitlement programs."</div> So how is the GOP going to do all the <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39314078/ns/politics-capitol_hill/" target="_blank">great stuff</a> that's featured in their very special document, for example vowing to "cut taxes and federal spending" while simultaneously providing "full funding for missile defense programs?" I'm glad you asked. <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/23/goppledge-ask-americans" target="_blank">According to</a> Think Progress: <div class="excerpt">During the roll-out of the House GOP's "Pledge to America" gimmick, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) was asked for specifics on how his colleagues would balance the budget and cut the deficit, but he wasn't able to hide the fact that document falls short on details. "I don't have all of the solutions," Boehner said, adding that the American people "will help us get the answers." </div> Nice work John -- that should look good on a bumper sticker. <center><img src="http://upload.democraticunderground.com/top10/10/381_sticker.gif" border="0" alt="" title=""></center> <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/02.gif" border="0" alt="" title=""> John Boehner <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/dumb.gif" border="0" alt="dumb" title="dumb"> Of course President Obama was quick to push back against the Republicans' "Plague On America" (thanks for <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/house/120537-clyburn-new-gop-pledge-like-a-plague-on-taxpayers" target="_blank">that</a>, James Clyburn). <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/09/obama-says-gops-pledge-to-america-will-be-the-exact-same-agenda.html" target="_blank">According to</a> ABC News: <div class="excerpt"> The president tonight mocked their proposal in advance, casting it as more of the same. "Make no mistake: The Republicans running for Congress, they want the next two years to look like the eight years before I took office," he said. "They might be announcing some new details tomorrow -- but the chair of one of their campaign committees already told us their intentions. He said that if the other party takes control of Congress, they plan to pursue -- and I'm quoting here -- the 'exact same agenda' as they did during the last administration. The exact same agenda."</div> Wow, a bit of a blunder there by that campaign committee chairman. Still, surely Republicans aren't so stupid as to make the same mistake <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/from-boehners-lips-fodder-for-democrats/?src=twt&twt=thecaucus" target="_blank">twice</a>... <div class="Excerpt">The idea behind Thursday morning's news conference by House Republican leaders was not to provide ammunition for Democrats. But that may be what happened. Even as Representative John Boehner, the Republican leader, was trumpeting the "Pledge for America," he may have inadvertently played right into the hands of the White House and Democratic candidates. In answer to a question from a reporter about the party's position on social issues, and with the cameras running, Mr. Boehner said: "We are not going to be any different than what we've been."</div> I stand corrected. <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/03.gif" border="0" alt="" title=""> The Republican Party <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/flip-flop.gif" border="0" alt="flip-flopping" title="flip-flopping"> <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/cronyism.gif" border="0" alt="cronyism" title="cronyism"> <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/hypocrisy.gif" border="0" alt="hypocrisy" title="hypocrisy"> A few more notes on the GOP's "Plague On America..." 1. As Democrats were more than happy to <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2010/09/dems-gop-already-broke-tax-cut.html" target="_blank">point out</a>, just four hours after unveiling their pledge -- which included a promise to "give small business tax deductions" -- Republicans marched back to the House and voted in lockstep against $12 billion in tax cuts for small businesses. Only one Republican voted for the bill. 2. It was <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/22/pledge-for-america-brian-wild-lobbyist_n_735911.html" target="_blank">revealed</a> that the author of the Pledge To America -- determined by looking at the original PDF file's properties -- was a man named Brian Wild, who, until he started working for John Boehner this past April, was a bigshot lobbyist for AIG, Exxon Mobil, Comcast, and Pfizer. 3. <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9187316" target="_blank">Courtesy of</a> the Rude Pundit: <div class="excerpt">The "Pledge" says, "End TARP Once and For All: Americans are rightly outraged at the bailouts of businesses and entities that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior. We will cancel the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), a move that would save taxpayers roughly $16 billion." Of the current House GOP leadership, John Boehner, Eric Cantor, and Pete Sessions all <a href="http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml" target="_blank" target="_blank">voted</a> for it. Shouldn't they be held accountable by the caucus for bringing about the current crisis?</div> Well at least we now know why the GOP has called their plan the "Pledge" -- there is some serious turd-polishing going on around here. <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/04.gif" border="0" alt="" title=""> The Republican Base, aka Bush's Backwash, aka The Tea Party <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/circular_firing_squad.gif" border="0" alt="circular firing squad" title="circular firing squad"> The media has spent much of the past two years fixating on the plight of America's most downtrodden group -- old white Republicans -- and trumpeting the rise of the Tea Party as their answer to the problems facing America today. Apparently what old white Republicans need most is no health care and no Social Security. Who knew? Not even them, I'll wager. Anyway, it seems that despite two years of media fellatio the Tea Party is finally going floppy, and not a moment too soon. Don't get me wrong, the mid-term elections will still be an uphill battle for Democrats -- but let's face it, win or lose, sooner or later the Republican powers-that-be are going to dump the Tea Party over the side of the ship. The cracks in the facade were on display last week in <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/24/tea-party-convention-is-canceled/" target="_blank">this</a> New York Times article announcing that the grand National Tea Party Unity Convention in Las Vegas has been cancelled. Oh, woe. <div class="excerpt">Sponsored by Tea Party Nation, a social networking site, the convention was supposed to emphasize Tea Party groups working together -- a contrast to the convention in February, which was plagued by infighting among groups, with sponsors and speakers dropping out right up until its opening hours. (snip) Barbee Kinnison, a Tea Party activist in Las Vegas who had been helping organize the convention, sent an e-mail to supporters saying that it was with "deep sorrow" that she had to announce "the convention is just not going to happen."</div> So what happened? Well, it turns out that there are actually tons of different Tea Party groups, and the Tea Party Nation just can't teabag like the rest of 'em. <div class="excerpt">Tea Party Nation still draws scorn from some other Tea Party groups, which have raised eyebrows at asking people to spend more than $200 to attend a convention, so it was not clear what this said about the strength of the movement. Tea Party Patriots, a large umbrella for about 2,700 local Tea Party groups nationwide, had criticized the media attention on the convention in February, saying it was not a real representation of Tea Party activism. But Ms. Kinnison said in her e-mail that "the various large 'other' Tea Party organizations have slid in their participations and donations across the country, and their events are free." A group called Unite in Action had hoped to have a three-day Tea Party extravaganza of seminars and rallies in Washington starting Sept. 10, but Ms. Kinnison said that classrooms that the group had set up for 500 people ended up with only 5 in them. </div> You mean this whole Tea Party thing has been blown out of proportion by a factor of 100? Color me shocked. <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/05.gif" border="0" alt="" title=""> Susan Collins <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/cowardice.gif" border="0" alt="cowardice" title="cowardice"> <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/homophobia.gif" border="0" alt="homophobia" title="homophobia"> Every year, the Senate has a brief debate on the annual Defense Authorization Bill, and then votes to pass it. The National Defense Authorization Act funds the Pentagon and literally provides soldiers with their paychecks, so voting against it is not usually seen as a politically savvy move. That is, until this year! Yes, this year every single Republican in the Senate <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/21/defense-cloture-dadt/" target="_blank">voted against cloture</a> on the bill, meaning it could not even come to the floor for a vote. In case you've been living in a cave for the last couple of years, that is called a filibuster. As in, "Can you believe those assholes actually filibustered the Defense Authorization Bill?!?!?" Mind you, Republicans had a really good reason to filibuster the bill this year -- the Democrats had attached an amendment to it which would repeal the military's Don't Ask Don't Tell (DADT) policy, and of course Republicans can't have gay people running around fighting and dying for their country. Why, letting openly gay people into the military might make people think that they're, you know, normal. And obviously we can't have that. So it was up to such principled folks as Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) to explain why she actually supports repealing DADT, but somehow couldn't bring herself to let the bill come to the floor of the Senate for an up-or-down vote: <div class="excerpt">"I support the provisions in this bill. I debated for them; I was the sole Republican on the Committee that voted for the Lieberman-Levin language on don't ask, don't tell. I think it's the right thing to do, I think it's only fair. I think we should welcome the service of these individuals who are willing and capable of serving their country. But I cannot vote to proceed to this bill under a situation that is going to shut down debate and preclude Republican amendments. That too is not fair."</div> So there you have it. While DADT may not be fair to gay people -- in that it forces them to live a life of shame and deceit in exchange for the privilege of serving their country -- it is equally unfair that the Senate Republicans weren't allowed to offer unlimited amendments to the Defense Authorization Bill. Nice to know that Susan Collins has got her priorities in the right order.

FORD

09-27-2010, 01:22 AM

<img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/06.gif" border="0" alt="" title=""> Rand Paul <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/screw.gif" border="0" alt="screwing the poor" title="screwing the poor"> Dear seniors: yes, we know you have paid Medicare taxes all your lives. Yes, we know that you pay premiums for Medicare Parts B and D. And yes, we know you also have to pay co-pays for prescriptions. But I'm sorry -- <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9IDSOL81.htm" target="_blank">according to</a> senate candidate Rand Paul (R-Obviously) you're going to have to open those wallets a little wider if Republicans take over Washington this fall. <div class="excerpt">Kentucky Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul said Thursday that Medicare recipients may have to "bear more of the burden" to shore up the health program's finances as rising numbers of seniors rely on its benefits. While accepting a business group's endorsement, the tea party-backed Paul told reporters that dealing with looming Medicare shortfalls will require a bipartisan solution, but said options could include higher premiums. "Nobody wants that," Paul said during a question-and-answer session in a steamy business warehouse. "I don't want higher premiums. But I also don't want the system to be bankrupt where we can't pay for Medicare at all. "So I think we need to be adults and talk about the fact that we're short of money."</div> Okay then, let's talk about it like adults. Say Mr. Paul, what do you think of the idea of extending tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans, which will give them all an additional <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-08/obama-says-progress-on-repairing-economy-painfully-slow-in-visit-to-ohio.html" target="_blank">$100,000 each</a> (on average), despite the fact that doing so will add <a href="http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/07/let_cuts_expire.html" target="_blank">$830 billion</a> to the deficit? <a href="http://www.kentucky.com/2010/09/16/1436998/rand-paul-supports-tax-cut-extension.html" target="_blank">Do tell...</a> <div class="excerpt">Republican U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul said he would vote to extend federal tax cuts even without proposed spending cuts, a move that would dramatically deepen a federal debt he has railed against. Paul, who has built his campaign around opposing big government and a $13.4 trillion national debt, said it would be better to pair the tax cuts with a plan to reduce spending. However, asked if he would vote to extend the tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts, Paul said, "Absolutely. The money is not the government's. It is ours."</div> So to clarify: Rand Paul is okay with borrowing an additional $830 billion so that millionaires can pad their bank accounts. He's okay with borrowing that money even if there aren't any spending cuts. But if there have to be spending cuts, then he's fine with forcing struggling seniors who rely on Medicare and Social Security for their very health and well-being to "bear more of the burden." You know, I'm sure Republicans used to be a bit more careful about flat-out saying things like, "I want to take money away from America's seniors and give it to millionaires." I guess they really are feeling confident about the upcoming elections. <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/07.gif" border="0" alt="" title=""> John Boehner <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/sex.gif" border="0" alt="sex" title="sex"> <a href="http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/s_700079.html" target="_blank">Word on the street</a> is that the Republican rank-and-file is <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/16/john-boehner-mitch-mcconn_n_719631.html" target="_blank">not particularly happy</a> with Minority Leader Boehner. As the Orange One's <a href="http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/77753/the-coming-boehner-purge" target="_blank">gaffes</a> pile up, top Republicans may be starting to smell blood in the water. All of which makes you wonder where <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-sheet/item/times-sitting-on-story-of-boehner-affair/scandal/" target="_blank">this</a> little story came from: <div class="excerpt">Maybe we shouldn't be so quick to inaugurate John Boehner the next Speaker of the House: The New York Post says, "Insiders on Capitol Hill are buzzing about an upcoming New York Times exposé that will detail an alleged Boehner affair," and that the paper is planning to drop the story sometime in October. On Thursday, a reporter at Daily Kos <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/9/23/143551/011" target="_blank" target="_blank">asked</a> Boehner and the alleged mistress-lobbyist Lisbeth Lyons -- about the rumors. At the time, both just offered stony "no comments." </div> That "no comment" was later upgraded to: <div class="excerpt">Boehner's office says: "This is bullshit."</div> At this point I should note that "Boehner" is an anagram of "Bone her." Coincidence?!?!?!? <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/08.gif" border="0" alt="" title=""> Kenneth Kratz <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/evil.gif" border="0" alt="just plain evil" title="just plain evil"> While we're on the subject of Republican family values, meet Kenneth Kratz, district attorney of Calumet County, Wisconsin. Or rather, former district attorney of Calumet County, Wisconsin. Why? Because it was revealed last week that he "sent sexually suggestive texts to a domestic abuse victim last year, during the time he was prosecuting her case against her ex-boyfriend." And if that doesn't spell "scumbag," I don't know what does. <a href="http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/district_attorney_in_wi_sent_sexually_suggestive_t exts_to_domestic_abuse_victim.php" target="_blank">According to</a> Talking Points Memo: <div class="excerpt">Kratz was handling the case of Stephanie Van Groll, 26, in October 2009, after she accused her ex-boyfriend of nearly choking her to death. Van Groll complained that in a two-day span, Kratz sent her "20-plus" texts attempting to start an affair with her. One of the texts said: "Are u the kind of girl that likes secret contact with an older married elected DA...the riskier the better? Or do you want to stop right now before any issues?" Kratz handed over the case once Van Groll made the complaint, and has since resigned his position on the Wisconsin Crime Victims' Rights Board. Reportedly, he resisted at first, and tried to avoid "public disclosure" of the case, according to Channel 3000 News.</div> TPM also has a selection of text messages taken from the police report which I won't republish here. Oh all right then, just one: <div class="excerpt">Im serious! Im the atty. I have the $350,000 house. I have the 6-figure career. You may be the tall, young, hot nymph, but I am the prize! Start convincing</div> Yes, Kenneth Kratz is a real prize all right. <center><img src="http://upload.democraticunderground.com/top10/10/381_kratz.jpg" border="0"></center> And in case you were wondering, yup, <a href="http://www.postcrescent.com/article/20100918/APC0101/9180517/Calumet-County-District-Attorney-Ken-Kratz-says-he-will-not-resign" target="_blank">he's a Republican</a>. UPDATE: It seems that <a href="http://www.piercecountyherald.com/event/article/id/29182/" target="_blank">five women</a> have now come forward to accuse Mr. Kratz of sexually harrassing them. What a charmer. <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/09.gif" border="0" alt="" title=""> The Media <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/dumb.gif" border="0" alt="dumb" title="dumb"> <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/lazy.gif" border="0" alt="lazy" title="lazy"> <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/partisanship.gif" border="0" alt="partisanship" title="partisanship"> According to a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/09/21/us/politics/AP-US-Health-Care-Poll.html?_r=1&ref=news" target="_blank">report</a> in the New York Times last week: <div class="excerpt">Six months after President Barack Obama signed the landmark health care law, the nation still doesn't really know what's in it. More than half of Americans mistakenly believe the overhaul will raise taxes for most people this year, an Associated Press poll finds. But that would be true only if most people were devoted to indoor tanning, which got hit with a sales tax. Many who wanted the health care system to be overhauled don't realize that some provisions they cared about actually did make it in. And about a quarter of supporters don't understand that something hardly anyone wanted didn't make it: They mistakenly say the law will set up panels of bureaucrats to make decisions about people's care -- what critics labeled "death panels." The uncertainty and confusion amount to a dismal verdict for the Obama administration's campaign to win over public opinion. </div> Wait a second. Yes, the administration can and should do a better job informing the public about the health care law, but I have a question: What about the media's role in all this? The whole point of the media is to keep the public informed. It's easy to say that "The uncertainty and confusion amount to a dismal verdict for the Obama administration's campaign to win over public opinion," but when the Times lays the blame at the feet of the Obama administration it ignores the massive elephant in the room -- that the public shouldn't be this poorly informed, and that they are this poorly informed because the media has done such a shitty job of informing them. And it's easy to see why. Rather than reporting on what was actually in the health care law, most media air time was given over to political operatives with partisan interests who were more than happy to just plain invent stuff on live television and elsewhere -- and could do so with little consequence. Hence this finding now that so many people think that death panels are real and their taxes will go up. Remember when <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm" target="_blank">70% of Americans</a> thought that Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks? Well hey, that's because the Bush administration did such a great job "winning over public opinion." It's also because THE MEDIA FUCKING SUCKS. <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/number/10.gif" border="0" alt="" title=""> Christine O'Donnell <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/batshit_crazy.gif" border="0" alt="batshit crazy" title="batshit crazy"> <img src="http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/icons/religious_nut.gif" border="0" alt="religious nut" title="religious nut"> And finally, there is no doubt that we'll be seeing a lot more of Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell (R-Teabag) between now and the elections on November 2, especially if Bill Maher keeps his word to release one video clip a week from her appearances on his former ABC show "Politically Incorrect" if she doesn't appear on his current HBO show "Real Time." (See <a href="http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/25/odonnell-in-1998-evolution-is-a-myth/" target="_blank">here</a> for the latest clip: If evolution is real, how come we can't see monkeys evolving into humans?) But even without Bill Maher's assistance it seems there's still plenty of video floating around out there that doesn't exactly put Ms. O'Donnell in a flattering light. And when I say "doesn't exactly put Ms. O'Donnell in a flattering light," I mean it makes her look like a crazed megalomaniac desperate to impose her fucked-up religious fanaticism on the rest of the country. Here's The Plum Line's <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/video_of_christine_odonnell_im.html" target="_blank">description</a> of a new video unearthed last week: <div class="excerpt">At the time, O'Donnell was with the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, a conservative group she later sued for gender discrimination. The exchange, on Scarborough Country on November 13, 2003, is an argument between O'Donnell and Eric Nies, then with the Moment of Hope foundation, about whether to counsel kids to have safe sex: NIES: I tell them to be careful. You have to wear a condom. You have to protect yourself when you're going to have sex, because they're having it anyway. NIES: There's nothing that you or me can do about it. O'DONNELL: The sad reality is -- yes, there is something you can do about it. And the sad reality, to tell them slap on a condom is not -- NIES: You're going to stop the whole country from having sex? O'DONNELL: Yeah. Yeah! NIES: You're living on a prayer if you think that's going to happen.</div> But let's be fair to Christine here -- she's probably got a better chance of stopping everyone in America from having sex than she does of becoming the next senator from Delaware. See you next week! -- EarlG

Nitro Express

09-27-2010, 03:08 PM

FORD

09-27-2010, 03:34 PM

Ok. Democrats are pretty good at slagging Republicans but what I'm actually interested in is what exactly is the Democrat strategy for solving the problems? They have had total control for two years and have showed us all they are just as corrupt and stupid.

Yes, SOME "Democrats" are as corrupt and stupid as Republicans. They are known as the "Democratic Leadership Council" though in reality they are neither Democrats nor leaders. Obama himself has never been a member of this group, but the majority of his cabinet unfortunately is. So he's getting a lot of shitty advice and needs to clean house.

Same applies to Congress. While it's true that Boner and McChinless have been obstructing everything, they have had a lot of help from so-called "Democrats" like Ben Nelson, Max Baucus, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, Joe Lieberdouche, and more recently Chris Dodd, who took anything Ted Kennedy actually wrote out of the health care bill, and most recently attached the anchor of the "Federal" Reserve to the consumer protection agency that Elizabeth Warren called for. So even though she is now technically in charge of it, the "Federal" Reserve and Timmy the exiled elf-dentist still have the "veto" power over her decisions.

Bottom line is corporate money in politics. Remove that and you will have REAL Democrats and Rockefeller Republicans again, instead of this pathetic joke of the last 30 years.

ELVIS

09-27-2010, 03:48 PM

Top 10 Liberal Scare Tactics is what these threads should really be called...

:elvis:

bueno bob

09-27-2010, 04:40 PM

Top 10 Liberal Scare Tactics is what these threads should really be called...

:elvis:

Well, smart ass, how about you post some more bullshit Republican scare tactic crap then? Will that make your little hurt feelings all better?

Prick.

Now thank me for this post.

ELVIS

09-28-2010, 10:24 AM

I'm not a republican, therefore I cannot...