October 30, 2003

The Left Self-Destructs

Democratic Senator Zell Miller has endorsed George W. Bush for president.

Life-long left-liberal Roger L. Simon has endorsed George W. Bush for president.

Life-long left-liberal Cara Remal has endorsed George W. Bush for president.

All in the last three days.

Fred Barnes responds:

[Zell Miller's] endorsement is important for several reasons. With Miller on board, Bush will have a head start on forming a Democrats for Bush group in 2004. Such a group would woo crossover votes from conservative or otherwise disgruntled Democrats next year. In 2000, an effort by the Bush campaign to form a Democrats for Bush organization fizzled.
It probably won't fizzle this time.

Democrats: You had better snap out of denial and get your act together fast. You are in so much trouble and you have no idea.

I'm sure conservatives feel like the cat that ate the canary. But if you're like me, even if you know where Zell and Roger and Cara are coming from, this is a major drag. So click on over to Andrew Northrup's place and at least get a good laugh out of it.

Posted by Michael J. Totten at October 30, 2003 10:36 PM
Comments

Still, if the election were held today, like Georgia Democratic Senator Zell Miller, I would vote for George W. Bush without a second’s hesitation. . . . And here’s why I think they’re [Democrats are] dangerous—they’re acting like we’re still in Vietnam when we’re in a real war of civilizations.

This is identity politics at its worst -- it's the psychotic endorsing a psychotic, just because he's psychotic.

Posted by: Kimmitt at October 30, 2003 11:10 PM

It's not a left v. right thing, it's not a conservative v. liberal thing. It's an eagle v. ostrich thing. I don't care what consonant identifies my president, as long as he or she apprehends the nature of the peril.

Posted by: Lileks at October 30, 2003 11:19 PM

James Lileks: It's an eagle v. ostrich thing.

Yep.

Kimmitt: it's the psychotic endorsing a psychotic, just because he's psychotic.

That, my friend, is partisan politics at its worst.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at October 30, 2003 11:36 PM

I'd hate Bush just as much if he ran as head of the Reform Party, and if he ran as a Dem, I'd switch Parties. It's not about partisanship; it's about policy.

Posted by: Kimmitt at October 31, 2003 12:21 AM

Sorry Kimmit; Bush has the best national security policy, by far, of any candidate for pres. It is more arguable if his other mistakes, er, policy are better; and it's arguable how important security is. Lots think it's most important (I do).

The positive side, Michael, might well be that self-proclaimed Dems for Bush can try to help Bush have better domestic policies; for instance policies which help more black kids learn to read before they're out of High School, etc.

Less corp. pigfare might be better, too. They might even start with helping Arnie out in CA with better policies.

Posted by: Tom Grey at October 31, 2003 02:37 AM

Michael,

I'm sure conservatives feel like the cat that ate the canary.

I for one take no pleasure form the Democrats self-immolation. A healthy democracy requires at least two strong parties.

Of course I'm a Hayek, Friedman, Teddy Roosevelt, John Stuart Mill, Adam Smith type liberal rather than a conservative.

Posted by: HA at October 31, 2003 03:09 AM

A "Hayek/Friedman/TR/JS Mill/Adam Smith type liberal"? These days, that is a conservative. In the sense of conserving principles of classical liberalism from the bankruptcy and sheer lunancy of the left.

I agree with you about the two party system. I keep waiting for the Democratic party to show up.

Posted by: Zacek at October 31, 2003 04:28 AM

Though I can't provide a URL, I believe that
former NYC Mayor Ed Koch is backing Bush also.

---Tom Nally, New Orleans

Posted by: Tom Nally at October 31, 2003 04:29 AM

"A healthy democracy requires at least two strong parties."

Extra points if one of them isn't named after a color of the spectrum. Christ, that'd be the last thing we'd need right now.

Posted by: Moe Lane at October 31, 2003 05:28 AM

You guys are going to get your wish -- next year, we are fixing for a few Republican pickups in the House; large ones in the Senate in 2004, and basically complete Republican rule in Congress until the next census.

When you're done gloating, please give me some solid evidence that Joe Lieberman, Dick Gephardt, Bob Graham, Joe Biden, Wesley Clark, John Kerry and John Edwards are "ostriches" in the war on terror. Is there any form of dissent to Bush's foreign policy that you will tolerate?

You seem to ascribe to the Democrats as a whole that same views as supporters of Dennis Kucinich. Get something straight: Dennis Kucinich is not going to be the Democratic nominee, and not just because he can't win the general election. People who share his views are a very small minority of Democrats. 50% of Democrats in Congress voted for the war resolution, and if Bush had come in with a UN resolution or a Nato resolution and asked for war authority, he would have gotten at least 95% of the Dems to vote for use of force.

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 06:31 AM

I think we're overreacting a bit here; Miller has always been a fairly conservative Democrat, so his endorsement isn't a real surprise. What I'm looking for are moderate to liberal Democrats remaining neutral. It's too much to expect of them to endorse Bush, but if, say, Biden or Lieberman (let's be honest here) were to not officially endorse the Dem nominee (or even do it half-assed), I think that'd be a pretty big deal.

Of course, Senatorial endorsements really don't count for much in the first place. It's the House and Governors endorsements which really matter, which makes the upcoming Gubernatorial elections all the more interesting.

Posted by: George at October 31, 2003 06:33 AM

"I'm sure conservatives feel like the cat that ate the canary."

As a conservative, it gives me no pleasure to see anyone endorse GeorgeW., simply because there is no alternative.

"That, my friend, is partisan politics at its worst." - Amen, Michael. It's this type of stupid politics that prevents real discussions of real issues. There should be honest disussions about national security and the role of State sponsors of terror and the U.N.'s role vs. our role. We need real discussions about Medicare and S.Sec, but politics and an upcoming election year prevent real conversation, ideas and action from occurring.

Too often we vote for the lesser of two evils rather than a good solid candidate. I'm sick and tired of it.

Posted by: Jim M at October 31, 2003 06:35 AM

Kimmitt:

Calling Zell Miller "psychotic" is patent nonsense. I haven't lived in Georgia for a long time (my mother lives there) But Miller is a popular, relatively moderate former governor who is respected on both sides of the aisle. He successfully fought off arch-conservatives for the Georgia governorship more than once. If he's psychotic, so are Richard Lugar, Joe Lieberman, and Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Daniel Calto at October 31, 2003 06:35 AM

Markus:

I'd agree that most Dems don't hold views similar to Kucinich's (if they did, they'd poll less than the Green Party). But Dean, one of the leading Dems in a cast of thousands, has called George Bush "the enemy." A number of the Dem candidates are tripping all over themselves not only to say Bush is wrong about Iraq (fair enough), but that he's the head conspirator in some sort of nefarious plot (how many times does the "BushCo" meme come up?) Is this really the level of rhetoric that mainstream candidates should adhere to? Frankly, I see weakness on security issues as the kiss of deqath for the Democrats, one which is only heightened by their internecine warfare.

I'd like to see a stronger Democratic candidate emerge who could challenge Bush on the many substantive issues where he ought to be challenged. But it may take an election debacle, similar to the Goldwater debacle of 1964, before the Democrats can clean house and reorganize their party.

Posted by: Daniel Calto at October 31, 2003 06:44 AM

Michael, I hope this isn't considered untoward, but I'd like to repost here a comment I made on Roger Simon's site, because as you'll see it's addressed to you as well:

[begin quote]

Roger, I feel sorry for you. Really, I do.

When I see folks like you, or Michael Totten, or Gabriel Gonzalez here, I think of how depressing it must have to be to divorce yourself from the party you've loved and belonged to for decades. And, even worse, I can only imagine the barbs and cream-pies-in-the-face you're catching from other leftists - I can only imagine the ad hominem "you're not a real liberal, you're a traitorous turncoat!" crap that's being slung at articulate and angry folks like you three.

I used to get that all the time when I was a Democrat (because I was too 'conservative' on issues like gun control), and prior to 9/11 I sometimes got the same in reverse from Republicans - "you're a RINO!" - for my stance on gay rights and abortion, etc (less so, for what it's worth).

It's no fun having to strike out as a nominal 'heretic' from your party because THEY and not YOU have moved away from the liberal and humanitarian values which you both used to cherish.

Finally, I just wanted to quote the fellow Foo above:

"i'm a conservative. because of my hawkishness, i'm considered a right wing wacko, but i'm the right wing wacko who is pro abortion, pro gay rights, anti-copyright, anti "one nation, under god" and a whole host of other positions that make the more fundamentalist in the conservative wings scared.

I wish the dem party would be sane because it would make my conservative candidates better. They'd be forced to adapt. They'd be forced to have their policies improve.They'd be forced to fire people at the CIA. They'd be forced to shut down corporate welfare. They'd be forced into a real debate."

I cannot improve upon that at all, really.

[/end quoted post]

The comments of TBogg here and (to a much lesser extent - I really do appreciate his willingness to engage on substance) Kimmitt really hammer home the first part of what I said, about the agony of being labelled a turncoat by your former colleagues.

I just want you to know I (and many others) have a lot of respect for the self-examination you've been engaging in. It can be a lonely undertaking at times. I don't want you to become some Republican-bot (no danger of that happening!), and I welcome the fact that folks like you and folks like me will disagree on any number of important domestic issues - that ongoing debate is crucial to American progress.

But as another commentator on Roger's site said, "We can argue about whether the top tax rate should be 35 or 40 percent, whether gays should marry or not marry, but this is like arguing about interior decoration and kitchen privileges while the barbarians are outside trying to burn down the house."

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2003 06:50 AM

I dunno. Is it reasonable to write of the Dems and endorse Bush before there's even a nominee?

I'm waiting to see who gets the nod before I commit myself.

As an American-Israeli living in Israel, it's already pretty damn clear on which side my bread is buttered as far as ensuring my physical safety.

I foresee a huge inner battle. I'm still, as Roger puts it, a "virgin" -- never voted Republican.

Posted by: Allison at October 31, 2003 07:05 AM

Daniel --

I've had my problems with some of Dean's rhetoric too, but the fact is he made the "bush is the enemy" statement in response to other Democrats attacking him on Medicare. It was a somewhat smarmy response, but he did not make it in reference to Bush's role as commander in chief, which indeed would have been beyond the pale.

Having a two party system requires moderates and extremists to caucus together and vote for the same candidates in order to win. As the center-left party, there are left wing nut jobs whose votes the Democratic presidential candidate will need to win the nomination, just as there are racists and other right wing nut jobs the Republicans will seek and need for them to win. The alternative is a multiparty system. Perhaps this would be a good idea, but there would still probably be coalitions formed between the center and one of the extremes in any case. This is a controversal war, and a lot of people who are against it vote or might vote in Democratic primaries. Those who support it, and who are Democrats, ought to be defending their views and also trying to get their candidates elected. If Christopher Hitchens really still is on the left, he should have continued writing for the preeminent leftist magazine and fought to make it better. If Democrats who disagree with Howard Dean on national security issues are really still Democrats, they should be working for or donating money to Lieberman or Gephardt or Edwards or Kerry or Clark or whomever, rather than just shaking their heads on the sidelines and fuming about Howard Dean and ANSWER.

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 07:15 AM

I'm still struggling over who to vote for. I've been hoping for a miracle, like a Democrat or independent to be rocketed to Earth from another planet -- hey, it's early yet. But being liberal and voting Bush is about letting someone kick you in the stomach in exchange for protecting your house from being burned to the ground -- it's the less dangerous alternative. But if people like us vote for him we will have to take our share of blame for his domestic policies and would have a huge responsibility to advocate for social programs, health care, funding for public schools, environmental protection, etc, etc,...because we will not have Howard Dean in office to fix all of these problems (uh...just like Clinton did). So if there is a contingent of Democrats for Bush then it's important that they (we?) turn to him after the election and say "we own a piece of you too now, homey, so here's what you're gonna do for us." Bush couldn't be any more deaf to his liberal constituents than Clinton was. But maybe the key is to make these demands now, before deciding who to vote for. (Though I may just be psychotic, in which case you should just nod and smile as respectfully as you can and avoid provoking me).

Posted by: Jeremy Brown at October 31, 2003 07:43 AM

I also must add I think people are seriously deluding themselves when they give Bush an "A" on protecting us from terrorism. Hasn't anybody read about the chemical production industry stonewalling on instuting basic homeland security protections at their plants, and the administration's SUPPORT for that stonewalling?

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 07:53 AM

Sorry, Jeremy, there will be no use fretting or agonizing or hoping for a deus ex machina. The choice will most likely be between Bush and Dean. You have to choose. It's what human beings do.

Posted by: zacek at October 31, 2003 07:55 AM

I foresee a huge inner battle. I'm still, as Roger puts it, a "virgin" -- never voted Republican.

Allison: As you may know, Ronald Reagan started out as a liberal Democrat and ended up switching, along with a lot of his fellows, because he felt the party left him behind, particularly as regards anti-Communism. About that first vote for a Republican Reagan once said, "Don't worry.It only hurts the first time." :-)

Posted by: Dodd at October 31, 2003 08:13 AM

Markus:

I know Dean's "enemy" quip was not directed at Bush's commander-in-chief role, but it still bothered me. In private, talking about taking down one's politcal opponent is fine, but this was a public forum.

I agree that people who are committed Democrats should work to reform the party from within--but it's dangerous to start prescribing what voters should do. I have serious problems with the Democrats' "fair trade" rhetoric as well--If they all support trade restrictions and protectionism, should I still stay within the party? I didn't write my name in blood on my Democratic voter registration, and I'm free to vote for anyone I choose. I think the Dems are ignoring the "security hawks" in their own party to their own peril, and it will come back to defeat them.

I don't give Bush an "A" for terrorism fighting either--he's bungled some things, overdone others, and his policies have significant flaws. But he's the President, and doesn't have the luxury of theorizing about the perfect foreign policy--he must actually act on a daily basis to combat terror. This is a fundamnetal difference, and an inestimable advantage to Bush. Many of the Democratic candidates, in contrast, simply don't see this as "The Issue" that they must address.

They critique, which is rather easy to do, but don't propose viable alternative visions beyond "let's cooperate with our allies more" (such as Chirac and Putin?), or "let's turn Iraq over to the U.N. (Do they mean the 12 U.N. workers that remain in Iraq? Is the U.N. really gung-ho on taking over Iraq anyway?) These basic matters are never substantially addressed.

Such bland platitudes on a matter of such importance legitimately worry people, and certainly worry me. Many of the Democrats, certainly Kerry and Clark, give the impression of sensitively sniffing the political winds to figure out their stand on Iraq for the coming week--throw some red meat to the Bush-haters? Make a vague semi-supportive statement about our troops? Backtrack to avoid al;ienating the middle? This smacks of political opportunism and poll-driven foreign policy. Foreign policy is a distinctive sphere in which a President must be willing to make unpopular and risky decisions and not pander to the crowd--after all, how informed is the average American voter about the situation in Checnya, or North Korea, or Zimbabwe, as compared with U.S. economy or something closer to home?

I believe Leiberman would make responsible national security choices, but also think he's a melting snowball who doesn't have a chance in hell.

Posted by: Daniel Calto at October 31, 2003 08:41 AM

I'm waiting to see who gets the nod before I commit myself.

Me too.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at October 31, 2003 08:52 AM

Jeremy: But being liberal and voting Bush is about letting someone kick you in the stomach in exchange for protecting your house from being burned to the ground -- it's the less dangerous alternative.

Just vote for a Democratic Congress then. You don't have to become a Republican. You can split the difference on the ballot like you do in your head.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at October 31, 2003 08:56 AM

I'm a conservative I guess. I've been worried about Democrat self-immolation since the 2002 election results, and even more so since I began reading blogs six months or so ago. I realize the blogs (at least the one's I frequent)are very distorting and don't represent an approximate cross section, but the country has clearly decided that security is the overriding issue, while the Dems have drifted further left. Unless we get 9/11'd again, 2004 is going to be a slaughter.

That's only going to be a good thing if it leads to the end of the McAuliffe/Pelosi/Daschle leadership of the party and a new generation not wedded to the ideologies of the past come in.

Our greatest strength as a nation is a vibrant marketplace of ideas. One party speaking can't generate that. Please Democratic Party, I may never again cast a vote your way, but you need to be a force for my country to remain strong. Get your act together.

Posted by: spc67 at October 31, 2003 09:05 AM

One account of former NYC Mayor Ed Koch's endorsement of President Bush can be found here.

---Tom Nally, New Orleans

Posted by: Tom Nally at October 31, 2003 09:35 AM

"Our greatest strength as a nation is a vibrant marketplace of ideas. One party speaking can't generate that. Please Democratic Party, I may never again cast a vote your way, but you need to be a force for my country to remain strong. Get your act together."

I'm confused, spc67, the Democrats DO have a marketplace of ideas on a whole range of issues, including national security and the war in Iraq. On the one hand you say we need a vibrant marketplace, on the other hand you are outraged because some Dems refuse to endorse Bush's foreign policy. As part of "getting our act together", just what issues are acceptable to disagree with Bush on, and what issues are not?

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 09:53 AM

I was raised by Democrats, voted in my first election for Clinton, and in my second for Bush. Graduating from college and working for a living was what turned me around. After 9/11, I can't imagine voting for a Democrat in the forseeable future, unless more Joe Lieberman and Joe Biden types emerge.

By the way, I invite everyone to check out a new Iraqi blogger, Sayed, at www.healingiraq.blogspot.com

He has opened his blogs to comments, and is getting them from Iraqis living in Iraq, Iraqis living abroad, and both pro and anti-war types.

Some posters have questioned whether he's really an Iraqi because he doesn't hate the U.S. troops, but I think he's beleivable.

Also, check out OperationGive.org

It is a non-partisan, independently operating non-profit providing U.S. troops with toys and school supplies to give to Iraqi schoolchildren and orphans.

Happy Haloween! :)

Ally K

Posted by: Ally K at October 31, 2003 09:56 AM

Michael,

As a life long conservative I feel no joy in the demise of the opposition party. It is liberty that I wish to conserve and lack of reasoned opposition is no friend of liberty.

Dean's reference to President Bush as the "enemy" (in any context) should remove him from consideration for candidacy as the leader of this nation. I understand that it is the logical consequence of Carville's establishment of a "War Room" to run a presidential campaign and of Gore's promise to "fight" for the "common man" but it exceeds the bounds of political discourse. It is the epitome of the excess that is driving the Democrats into the wilderness.

I applaud your attempt to demarcate what is supportable from what is insupportable in terms of the current debate.

Posted by: RDB at October 31, 2003 10:07 AM

Not sure who posted it, but Dean called Bush "the enemy" very clearly in the context of medicaid/healthcare reform, so responsible fair-minded people need to stop shopping this quote around, if you agree with instapundit that Slate's Bushism if the Day subsists primarily and dishonestly by decontextualizing Bush's statements, then don't do it to Dean. Who, by the way, has stated that we have no choice but to stay the course in Iraq. A statment he has been briefly credited for, but which is now largely forgotten.

Posted by: bk at October 31, 2003 10:10 AM

"Such bland platitudes on a matter of such importance legitimately worry people, and certainly worry me. Many of the Democrats, certainly Kerry and Clark, give the impression of sensitively sniffing the political winds to figure out their stand on Iraq for the coming week--throw some red meat to the Bush-haters?"

I do tend to see both sides of an issue, and one of the problems with this is that it can contribute to indecisivness. Most liberals (as opposed to leftists) have a tendency to be this way, I think. To me, the war is a tough call. I'm about 55% or maybe even 70% for it on a good day, while being much less convinced that it was done at the right time and in the right way. As a result, I am much more comfortable with ambivelent or equivocal sentiments from Clark, Kerry, Edwards, Gore, Gary Hart, etc. There is a whiff of opportunism there, too, which I don't like. And of course, there are times when a commander-in-chief must be decisive. Basically, the whole damn thing remains a conundrum to me. I think what it comes down to is, do you feel safe with a Democrat, even Dean, as President? The fact of the matter right or wrong is that I think I would, while I guess many others reading this simply would not.

Posted by: Markus rose at October 31, 2003 10:14 AM

I have major issues with how the President is currently running the show. I feel the "everything is going well" meme is stale and keep hoping he will have a sit down, here's the situation and our mistakes and what we are doing about it talk with the country. But that's not going to happen - the idea that the White House can't admit mistakes is a central part of this administration and drives me up the wall.

Having said that, I'll end up voting for Bush. Why? Because everything I've seen, every speech I've watched, has shown a man who is firm in his convictions and feels that fighting "the bad guys" is his mission in life. 4 million people could march on the DC Mall tomorrow, demand that we pull out of Iraq and turn it over to anybody who would take it, and Bush would not waver. At least that's the feeling of the guy that I have.

From what I can tell, the Democrats (as a group) don't have any national security convictions like that. Individuals like Biden seem to have a clue but that' the exception, not the rule.

The idea that the biggest security issues facing my kids and grandkids should be turned over to the U.N. because it would mean we played nice with the other kids is so very scary. I don't trust the U.N. to protect my family, and that seems to be the Dems message. ouch.

Posted by: Ray at October 31, 2003 10:31 AM

Markus:

I really agree with you that it is a conundrum, and I think it's one reason why so many of us, regardless of our opposition or support for the war, spend so much time writing and talking about it. I was more pro-war in the initial stages but have found myself listening to reasoned opponents of the war more often these days, and struggling to come up with counterarguments which validate my initial position.

Iraq is really a question of fundamental importance for the future direction of the U.S. and by extension the world, and it's no wonder to me why so many people are wrestling with it publicly and privately. It is a very big deal, which is why so many of us are so passionate about it.

Posted by: Daniel Calto at October 31, 2003 10:36 AM

Ray -- wouldn't you agree that having firm convictions is only a virtue if one is correct about what one so firmly believes. If one is not, those same convictions are disasterous. You put it well: "the idea that the White House can't admit mistakes is a central part of this administration." Perhaps this idea is an expression of those convictions that you say you admire so much.

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 10:45 AM

Bush isn't protecting you. Bush is getting your brothers, sisters, sons, and daughters killed chasing a fools errand at the expense of protecting you. I honestly cannot conceive of endorsing his foreign policy -- a policy of petulance, nonrationality, and contempt for American lives, values, and interests.

Posted by: Kimmitt at October 31, 2003 10:52 AM

EJ Dionne has an interesting op-ed in today's Wash Post on attempts by serious, somewhat hawkish democrats to formulate a "what we would do now instead of Bush" line.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44853-2003Oct30.html

Andrew Sullivan offers a reasonable commentary on Dionne's article at his blog.

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 11:05 AM

Kimmit–I am sufficiently appalled by Bush's domestic policies and questionable handling of some aspects of foreign policy that I'll find any way I can not to vote for him., because of the areas in which i think he might do a ton of long term damage.

And yet I find your partisan rhetoric tiresome and embarassing, and temptingly worthy of being labeled as not even worth trying to counter.

Do YOU remember when liberals used to criticize the adminstration for NOTdeposing dictators?

At this moment in time can you describe practical alternatives to staying the course and trying to help out Iraq by trying to establish a democratic government while rebuilding its infrastructure?

Can you describe the long-term benefits for the middle east and for America if we were to simply abandon Iraq today?

Posted by: bk at October 31, 2003 11:07 AM

Kimmitt’s pearls of coherency:

“This is identity politics at its worst -- it's the psychotic endorsing a psychotic, just because he's psychotic.” re. Zell Miller

“I'd hate Bush just as much if he ran as head of the Reform Party, and if he ran as a Dem, I'd switch Parties.”

“Bush is getting your brothers, sisters, sons, and daughters killed chasing a fools errand at the expense of protecting you.” - re. US in Iraq

I’m afraid that Kimmitt needs a good Jewish psychiatrist very urgently.

Posted by: marek at October 31, 2003 11:08 AM

well folks i just saw the "democraticunderground.com" discussion board for the first time. They are having a nice little debate on whether Iraqis are justified in "resisting" the occupation. OK, I see where some of you people are coming from and why you're so angry a little bit more now.

But I reiterate -- most Democrats are not that crazy, and every Democrat who leaves the party because they are offended by the presence of these lunatics only serves to increases their relative political power within the Democratic party.

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 11:25 AM

Michael,

"Just vote for a Democratic Congress then. You don't have to become a Republican. You can split the difference on the ballot like you do in your head."

I don't believe that this is the alternative. If this were the case, then do you think the $87B bill would have passed. Not in it's current form. While I'm sure some measured level of support would pass a democratic congress, I don't believe that we would have the same level of appropriations support for Iraq as we do now.

We need people with good ideas in a variety of areas (defense, social programs, judicial review), and these people have to have the conviction to go against their party (Repub & Dems) when it's the right thing to do, vs. when it's the politically expedient thing to do. Having a majority of democrats in congress doesn't change that.

The best thing that could happen to the democrats (of which I'm not one) would be for the McAuliff/Pelosi/Daschle 'leadership' to be destroyed. However, I know that won't happen, which leaves the agenda of ideas to be set by the republicans, with no strong debate without rhetoric....not what we need.

Posted by: Jim M. at October 31, 2003 11:34 AM

Michael, believe me, I get no pleasure from this. I’m really hoping for a change in the Democrats and would vote for Lieberman or Gephardt in a heartbeat if they conveyed the deep and serious understanding of this war that Bush conveys. And you know, I’m not really sure why I think this, but Bush, compared to these Dems, also appears to convey the notion that the war and national security are more important than the coming election. This could just be a function of the fact that he is now the President and doesn’t have to scramble frantically to find a platform, but the Dems seem intent on digging their ostrich holes deeper instead of building those platforms like good liberal eagles should (thanx to James Lileks, for making this point crystal clear: it’s not left vs. right or Democrats vs. Republicans, it’s ostriches vs. eagles). I sincerely hope that the Democratic candidates will get in touch with their own inner Roosevelt, and soon, but if they don’t, I won’t have a choice. Everything hinges on this. How great will any democratic domestic policy look if, instead of three planes crashing into buildings there are suddenly three simultaneous dirty bomb explosions, or even nuclear explosions, happening across our country or anywhere for that matter? We cannot rest assured that that will never happen.

Posted by: Cara at October 31, 2003 11:55 AM

Cara -- I'd like to ask former Senator Max Cleland, the triple amputee war veteran (and Iraq liberation supporter) who found himself side by side with Bin Laden in Republican National Committee attack ads last year, whether he agrees with your assessment that Bush "conveys the notion that that the war and national security are more important than the coming election." Unfortunately, the war has reopened a kind of cultural divide in America - a divide that benefits Republicans politically - and Bush has done everything possible to exacerbate it and take advantage of it.

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 12:09 PM

What's incredible to me is that Bush gets so much respect on terrorism and security.

Imagine if a Democratic president had acted just like Bush. (Say, Al Gore). Conservatives would have gone absolutely nuts attacking the president for reducing our commitment to fighting Al Qaeda in order to invade Iraq on some crazy nation-building project. (The difference being Gore would have an actual plan for nation-building.)

Someone might also mention THAT WE HAVEN'T FOUND OSAMA.

Now the Democrats have not just Kerry (who occasionally reminds us that he served in 'Nam) but actual war-hero general running, and I'm still scared about voting for one of them. I get the sense the Bush is totally engaged in protecting America, and they're not.

If the Democrats want to tell us HOW to rebuild Iraq, HOW to fight terrorism, and not just snipe at the President for every mistake, they might get some respect.

Posted by: Oberon at October 31, 2003 12:18 PM

"it's the psychotic endorsing a psychotic, just because he's psychotic. "

Funny. That "psychotic" put into place the Hope Schlorship in Georgia. Under Hope, any high school student in the state who maintains a B average goes to college for FREE. To top that off, it is at $0 (Zero, Zilch, Nada, None) expense to the taxpayer.

The Hope schlorship is funded 100% by the state lottery, which that "psychotic" worked for many years to get into place.

That "psychotic" has increased the education level of the state of Georgia, produced thousands of college level graduates in families that would never had been able to afford college and staff the state with one of the most educated, diverse and high tech working population pools in America. As a result, the economy of the state is booming, Atlanta is growing by leaps and bounds, unemployment is in the toilet and - at least in this state - Mr. Zell Miller has achieved God-like status for his ability to do something that both the left and the right claimed could not be done.

That sort of non-linear thinking has been exactly what the Democratic party has ignored. Miller has been sidelined in Washington since he got there because people just like you refused to accept anything that sounded different.

If we had 1000 more just like Zell Miller, we could wipe out poverty in this nation. Instead we have a city full of people just like you who can't see beyond their own petty partisian position and are happy to see the boat sink just so they can say "I told you so".

Posted by: Roark at October 31, 2003 12:25 PM

Let me tell you I am sitting here listening/watching this video on the Iranian freedom movement to Bravehart and getting pretty pumped.
http://www.democracyforiran.de/Iran_Eng_HQ.html

Don't get me wrong I'm not turning into a feckless leftist who needs any phony mixed cause to endorse as per se...... "Palestine from River to Sea" "Down with Bush" "Down with Zionazis" "Long Live the Mujahadeen, Allah Akhbar" you get my point.......

However, I just listened and watched this and last night saw Paul Wolfowitz give a speech at Georgetown graduate program for public policy and then field tough questions from many students!
http://www.cspan.org/search/basic.asp?ResultStart=1&ResultCount=10&BasicQueryText=wolfowitz+georgetown&image1.x=0&image1.y=0

And I thought, THIS IS THE GREATEST FING COUNTRY ON THE PLANET!!! period....
Here is the 2nd most powerful man in the DoD fielding and answering not evading tough questions from students without being condescending, arrogant or nasty, but instead doing it with logic and a sense of morality and decency that comes through!

I'll sit in a foxhole with Paul Wolfowitz any day! And in 10 years when history bears him and the Pentagon out for their ideas which State, criticized prior to the War, as correct, (though far from perfect) he'll be revered for taking the heat from the blind screaming left and doing what was right.

Mike

PS Like I said if Rummy and Wolfowitz stay I vote for Bush.

Posted by: Mike at October 31, 2003 12:27 PM

Let me state that in contrast to the arrogant condescending loons at "Peace" Rallies and classless condescending Marxist speakers I have seen like Finkelstein.

Posted by: Mike at October 31, 2003 12:29 PM

Whose poll numbers are falling? Oh, yeah, Bush's.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x8667.xml

"Led by former Gen. Wesley Clark, the pack of Democratic presidential contenders is catching up with President George W. Bush, whose job approval has slipped, down to 51 -- 42 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

This is a new low for President Bush, who had a 53 -- 39 percent approval in a September 17 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr031028.asp

"Among registered voters, Bush leads an unnamed "Democratic candidate" by just three percentage points, 46% to 43%. Bush's support is only a point lower than last month's reading, showing Bush winning by 47% to 43%. But the margins are much smaller than what Gallup measured in August, when Bush led by 51% to 39%."

"You are in so much trouble and you have no idea."

Right. Or not.

Posted by: Brooklyn Sword Style at October 31, 2003 12:29 PM

Mike:

It's pretty hard to imagine, say, an ENIarque from the French government or a German minister subjecting himself to the questions of the plebes in the way that Wolfowitz did.

I don't think Gerhardt or Jacques are going to be doing any Clinton-style Town Meetings anytime soon. Despite protestations to the contrary from many on the left, I hardly think debate is "stifled" in the U.S. Indeed, Americans will tolerate far more criticism of their own government, and critique it on their own, that citizens of most nations will. I think this is something to be celebrated.

Posted by: Daniel Calto at October 31, 2003 12:53 PM

Roark -- your comments about zell miller are ridiculous. If we had 1,000 Zell millers in washington, or lets just say if the rest of the dems were exactly like him, we would have a one party system, not a two party system. Name one issue on which he has differed with Bush since coming to Washington! He's sponsors and votes for every tax cut that comes down the pike, in order to set the stage for long-term structural deficits and the eventual dismantlement of the welfare state, and then he has the gall to write an editorial in the Wall Street Journal in which he calls Democrats to task for not proposing a national lottery! In fact he was a smart guy and a pretty good governor of Georgia, which is why so many former people who worked for him feel so betrayed by his actions over the past two years. also, not all of his ideas or complaints about special interest groups, for example, are unfounded. But he has taken his hatred of his own party to such lengths that he has become more of a republican than a lot of republicans. I repeat: if people like zell miller where a majority in the democratic party, we would not have a two-party system anymore.

Posted by: Markus rose at October 31, 2003 01:02 PM

The distressing thing is this: The center has moved so far left that if you don't think Bush was selected, if you think unseating brutal dictators is a good thing, if you believe in God, have an American flag and think a person should be judged by his character not his color, you are a right-wing extremist.

Posted by: bilhedrick at October 31, 2003 01:12 PM

Brooklyn sword style,

Poll questions that pit a named candidate against an unnamed candidate don't give results that reflect anything resembling what would happen if an election were held.
Invariably, onec the blank is filled in, you get different numbers. How Bush polls against an unnamed democrat is only a broad measure of vague dissatisfaction. The poll questions that matter are the ones where people have to choose Bush or one of the actual candidates. Scroll back through this thread and you'll see how many people are saying that they aren't that fond of Bush but currently would choose him over any of the currently known alternatives. Also note that this poll had to have been done before the latest good economic numbers came out showing GDP up over 7%

Posted by: bk at October 31, 2003 01:15 PM

bilhedrick,
Check your polls. the center is definitely NOT moving left, it's moving right. Independent voters are currently polling as more pro-Iraq than just about anyone else. take a cruise over to the centrist coalition blog and see for yourself.

http://centristcoalition.com/blog/

Posted by: bk at October 31, 2003 01:20 PM

"Roark -- your comments about zell miller are ridiculous"

Which part was ridiculous? The part where I pointed out how Zell Miller had managed to educate every able college aged person in Georgia or the part where I praised a Democrat?

So it "ridiculous" when I don't agree with Kimmet that Miller is a "psychopath"?

You know, in the end I would hope that we all do not differ in our positions. Hopefully all of us would, if you get far enough away from the nitty gritty of the process, agree that America has a unified set of goals. We want poverty gone. We want everyone educated. We want everyone to prosper and we want to be safe.

The Democrats - and your - biggest mistake is the knee-jerk, contrarian, obstructionist mentality that dictates to you that you must oppose anything and everything a member of the opposing side does just out of principal.

Miller agrees with the President that tax cuts are the best way to spur the economy. Other than the two tax cut bills that Miller has signed - neither of which was the point of my original post - Miller has done very little to earn your rebuke that he is in George Bush's pocket. But of course, since he does not display the frothing at the mouth, irrational anger that clouds his every decision and dictates that every action he takes must be "anti-Bush" in nature - you have to vilify him.

I notice that you didn't touch the issue of the Hope scholarship that Miller put into place here in Georgia. I note that you totally avoided an actual discussion of Miller's positions, his actions or his history. All you have done is spew the same anti-Bush rhetoric that has been spewed on Miller for the last two days and have provided nothing of merit for discussion.

I also noted, with a great bit of joy, the fact that among Miller's sins in your eyes is his intent to dismantle the "welfare state". By God, I would hope that was ALL of our mission. To create a country that had no need of a welfare state. Wouldn't it be great if everyone in America voted for the political party they thought would do them to most good rather than the one that puts a check in their pocket? Wouldn't it be nice if voting didn't break down along racial lines? Wouldn't it be nice if special interest politics didn't dictate that all blacks will vote Democrat, all upper class whites vote Republican and the process of selecting our national leaders didn't involve class warfare and instead focused on doing what is right for the country?

I would hope like hell that our goals are the same. The reason we two parties in place is because the method by which we achieve those two goals is very much open to discussion and should be debated extensively to assure that our chances of success are heightened.

I hate to break it to you, but we stopped having a two party system in this country when the Democrats decided that the goals we had all agreed to were not their goals and that the only debate they were interested in was the constant assault on whatever political issue was handy that might shore them up some support. The Democrats are a non-issue - and are becoming more of a non-issue on a daily basis.

You, and your party, have mistaken opposition and obstructionism for reasoned work toward a common goal. You have mistaken mindless contrariness and reasonless activism for political responsibility. You have no goal. You have no plan. And with every election, you have fewer supporters because of it.

Posted by: Roark at October 31, 2003 01:21 PM

I dearly love the comment above: "Do YOU remember when liberals used to criticize the adminstration for NOT deposing dictators?"

I have marveled at this before; the Democrat's left wing would have creamed their shorts in the 80's if the administration all the sudden started deposing rightists and theocrats in dictatorships around the world.

Posted by: David Mercer at October 31, 2003 01:25 PM

BK, yes you're right. I guess what I'm saying is the left has moved so FAR LEFT that they see moderates as rabid right wingers.

Posted by: bilhedrick at October 31, 2003 01:39 PM

if you think unseating brutal dictators is a good thing, if you believe in God, have an American flag and think a person should be judged by his character not his color, you are a right-wing extremist.

I don't believe in God and I've never owned a flag. I've never voted for a Republican president, and I've only once voted for a liberal Republican Congressman. Yet some people still call me a right-wing extremist. It's pretty damn stupid to purge everyone who doesn't agree with 100 percent of the party line, but that's what the hard-left is trying to do. They are marginalizing themselves on purpose.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at October 31, 2003 01:40 PM

"They are marginalizing themselves on purpose."

I would agree with that statement, but to what end?

Posted by: Roark at October 31, 2003 01:53 PM

I have heard quite enough and as a sign of my displeasure -- the fire and solar flares apparently weren't sufficient -- I will strike Howard Dean dead in the midst of the New Hampshire primary.

Posted by: God at October 31, 2003 02:03 PM

Miller's not psychopathic, and your comments rebuking Kimmet for saying so were not the ridiculous part of your post. Neither was the part were you pointed out his accomplishment as Georgia governor (I agreed with you in general on his work as governor in my post in case you didn't notice). The ridiculous part was everything else you said the first time, and everything in your followup post.

The phrase "welfare state" is commonly understood to refer to programs designed to help the poor and also to social insurance programs that benefit all classes including Medicare and social security. I don't want to eliminate them, and I don't want to turn them into measly, ineffective programs. In order to preserve them during the baby boom retirement decades, we need now to be reducing our national debt and our interest payments on that debt, instead of allowing it to skyrocket. Miller support policies to do the opposite. And for someone who supposedly wants better and smarter government, he has done nothing in the Senate that I am aware of to advocate for better designed educational programs, as he did while Georgia governor, and nothing to provide federal funds to helped the budgets of cash-strapped states, something he should care about as a former governor.

Miller votes with Bush 70% of the time, according to the most recent information that I have. This is more than Senators Collins and Snowe, more than Lincoln Chaffee or Jim Jeffords, probably more than Arlen Specter or Chuck Hagel.

"we stopped having a two party system in this country when the Democrats decided that the goals we had all agreed to were not their goals and that the only debate they were interested in was the constant assault on whatever political issue was handy that might shore them up some support"

What the hell are you talking about? Let me get this straight. We are going to get our asses handed to us on a platter in the next election because we are weak on defense and want to tax everyone and the majority of Americans doesn't agree with any of this and we know it and say it anyway. At the same time, we don't really believe in anything we say, and we only care about holding on to power and what is politically expedient? Can't you see the contradiction here?

And just what national goals are you talking about that "democrats" supposedly don't share anymore?

You also claim Democrats aren't interested in working with Republicans to fashion common solutions to common problems. What sort of common ground is Tom Delay, the actual Speaker of the House, interested in having with Democrats? What sort of debate is grover "bipartisanship is just another word for date rape" norquist, interested in having?

You show no evidence that you are independent-minded, and obviously you are not a Democrat. You appear to hold Democrats to one standard, Republicans to another. When Republican Senators try to stop Clinton judicial appointments, they are being principled. When Democratic Senators do the same, they are power-hungry obstructionists. You appear to be just another Republican with no respect for those with views different from your own. You're not just on the Right, you're right. Your opponents are leftist, they're "wrongists." I'd really like to know what sort of political dissent in this country you do find acceptable?

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 02:19 PM

Oh, for the love of Pete:

1) It was a throwaway line making fun of the "identity politics" conservative craze.

2) I wasn't referring to Sen. Miller; I was referring to the gentleman who wasn't a conservative who was following Sen. Miller.

3) Learn to read and/or develop something vaguely resembling a sense of humor, people.

Posted by: Kimmitt at October 31, 2003 02:27 PM

"Let me get this straight. We are going to get our asses handed to us on a platter in the next election because we are weak on defense and want to tax everyone and the majority of Americans doesn't agree with any of this and we know it and say it anyway. At the same time, we don't really believe in anything we say, and we only care about holding on to power and what is politically expedient? Can't you see the contradiction here? "

Oh, I think you believe in everything you say. I just think that it is all a pavlovian response to George W. Bush. He goes one way, the Democrat establishment goes the other. It isn't even about the issues anymore - it is just about opposing Bush.

At this point the national Democrat party has turned into nothing but a mirror of George Bush. They have no policy and they have no plan. Opposition alone, with no solutions and no recommendations, is useless. And in addition, it does not win votes.

"You show no evidence that you are independent-minded, and obviously you are not a Democrat."

A Republican that is praising the policies of a former Democratic governor and calling for the end of poverty - and i'm not thinking independantly? What do I have to do to earn your independant label? Call Bush Hitler?

"You appear to be just another Republican with no respect for those with views different from your own. You're not just on the Right, you're right. Your opponents are leftist, they're "wrongists." I'd really like to know what sort of political dissent in this country you do find acceptable? "

The kind that does not involve putting insults in other people's mouths and attempting to decontruct your conversation partner to a easily labeled two dimensional construct.

Thanks.

Posted by: Roark at October 31, 2003 02:30 PM

Well, roark, now we're blaming each other for the same thing. anyway, i'll take a look through ol' zell's book in a bookstore, see if i find something redeeming in it.

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 04:23 PM

If you want to see the arrogance and elitism of the Left in all its glory, check this out.

Posted by: Yehudit at October 31, 2003 04:31 PM

Markus,

Regarding the marketplace of ideas. The current Dems primary contribution is whatever Bush does is wrong. Not much of a contribution. The party seems very negatively oriented. Not very oriented towards "we have a better way." Or you have fuzzy/contradictory plans like Deans (leave SS alone, universal healthcare, balanced budget hmmm, what about taxes? no real alternative offerred vis a vis Hussein before the war).

Of course the Left should feel free to portray the world, their ideas and the major issues of the day in any way they see fit. But right now, the Dems are both wrong in the eyes of the electorate (my opinion only) and/or ineptly presenting their slate of ideas (inarguably true).

That's what is leading them into oblivion. One or both problems need to be fixed.

Posted by: spc67 at October 31, 2003 05:10 PM

Mr Caldo:

You said "...myself listening to reasoned opponents of the war more often these days." Would you give me some links to places where you have seen the reasoned arguements of the opponents of the war.

Thanks

Posted by: semm at October 31, 2003 05:21 PM

"Miller endorses Bush."

Flash This endorsement just in:

Quisling endorses Hitler.

Posted by: Paleo at October 31, 2003 05:23 PM

Paleo,
Is this another attempt at humor or are you serious?

Posted by: marek at October 31, 2003 06:45 PM

Markus wrote:
50% of Democrats in Congress voted for the war resolution, and if Bush had come in with a UN resolution or a Nato resolution and asked for war authority, he would have gotten at least 95% of the Dems to vote for use of force.

That pretty much says it all, Markus. If you're correct, and I honestly hope you aren't, only half of the dems are capable of deciding to take action to defend their country without somebody else's permission. It puts another of your comments ("wouldn't you agree that having firm convictions is only a virtue if one is correct about what one so firmly believes?") into stark relief. Bush may be wrong, and I may be wrong for suppporting him in this war; but by damn, he is making his own decisions. Unfortunately, the world isn't the orderly kind of place that allows us to be certain that we're "correct about what one so firmly believes" in most important cases. It's indeterminate.

Posted by: Phil Smith at October 31, 2003 07:25 PM

"2) I wasn't referring to Sen. Miller; I was referring to the gentleman who wasn't a conservative who was following Sen. Miller."

Hey, Kimmit, you callin' me a psychotic? You must have been talking to some of my old girl friends!

Posted by: Roger L. Simon at October 31, 2003 07:47 PM

"If you want to see the arrogance and elitism of the Left in all its glory, check this out."

But she means well.

Posted by: Moe Lane at October 31, 2003 07:53 PM

Roger: Hey, Kimmit, you callin' me a psychotic?

I can assure Kimmitt that Roger is not psychotic. He was kind enough to put me and my wife up for four nights at his house. And we're still here.

Didn't meet any of the old girlfriends, though...

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at October 31, 2003 08:08 PM

"50% of Democrats in Congress voted for the war resolution, and if Bush had come in with a UN resolution or a Nato resolution and asked for war authority, he would have gotten at least 95% of the Dems to vote for use of force."

"If you're correct, and I honestly hope you aren't, only half of the dems are capable of deciding to take action to defend their country without somebody else's permission."

It is different when the threat is not imminent. Invading Iraq to overthrow the Baath regime was a just move, especially for the Iraqi people. But it was also optional one for us, at least at the time, and it was based on the controversal new stragegic doctrine of preemption. And I must add, an extremely unpopular one EVERYWHERE in the world except the USA and Israel. Given these factors, especially the absence of threat, it does not seem totally unreasonable to demand that the US gain substantial multinational support before embarking on such a course. You are right that "the world isn't the orderly kind of place that allows us to be certain that we're 'correct'" That is why -- given the absence of threat -- a little bit more time, a little less arrogance, and a little more honesty about true motives might have been called for, especially if such moves could have led to more support.

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 08:25 PM

"Markus,Regarding the marketplace of ideas. The current Dems primary contribution is whatever Bush does is wrong. Not much of a contribution. The party seems very negatively oriented. Not very oriented towards "we have a better way."

http://slate.msn.com/id/2088427/
Steal This Message
Why John Edwards has Bush's number.
By William Saletan

"If Democrats won't nominate John Edwards for president, they should at least run on his message.

Why Edwards hasn't climbed out of the pack is a mystery to me. Beyond his superficial assets—good looks, youth, Southern heritage—he's got an agile mind and a natural ability to relate to people. He's put together a sensible set of policies. He's been running TV ads for weeks but hasn't cracked the top three in Iowa or New Hampshire. Maybe that will change, and Edwards will get to carry his banner into the general election. But if he doesn't, whoever beats him should pick it up and carry it in his stead..."

Maybe Edwards has something to offer...

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 31, 2003 08:32 PM

Senator Zell Miller
257 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Zell,

Saw you on Fox last night endorsing George Bush and trashing the Democratic Party, and just had to write.

You know I have been a lifelong supporter of yours. I wrote my first campaign check to you when I was still in law school, admired you as you fought Herman Talmadge, worked with you on Walter Mondale’s presidential campaign, and was never prouder to be a Georgia Democrat than when you gave the keynote address at the National Convention that nominated Bill Clinton.

After all, as Governor you established the HOPE scholarship so that every hardworking Georgia student could go to college, and focused on the “kitchen table” issues that affected working families.

When people called you “Zig-Zag” Zell, and said you had no fixed beliefs, I said your days damning the Civil Rights Act when you ran for Congress in 1964 and your years as Lester Maddox’s chief of staff were just a misspent youth. I pointed instead to your political courage in trying to take the Confederate battle emblem off the state flag, even though you bowed to political expediency and backed down from that fight.

Changing the flag may have cost Roy Barnes his job, but he left office with his character intact and his head high for standing for his beliefs regardless of the consequences.

As head of the Georgia Democratic Party I pushed for your appointment to the Senate, and chaired the meeting that put you on the ballot as our nominee. The party supported you as I and thousands of other Georgia Democrats worked to elect you. Together we raised every penny we could to help you and the entire ticket win election.

I didn’t hear a single complaint from you during that campaign about the Democratic Party.

I first became worried that you were bending your views to the political winds when you ducked the Democratic Convention that nominated Al Gore. You always had a “scheduling conflict“ when asked to appear at his Georgia campaign events. I got a little more concerned when your first major vote in the Senate was to gut labor regulations that would protect injured workers. I did wonder if you’d spent too much time on the Southern Company board and as a Philip Morris consultant when you worked against environmental and health regulations.

I held my tongue when you endorsed President Bush’s tax giveaways to the wealthiest Americans, and when you voted against Democratic attempts to spread those tax cuts to the middle class. And just this month you were the only Democrat to favor the Bush plan to gut overtime protections for American workers—a measure that 9 Republican Senators crossed the aisle to vote against.

Now, with the hot political wind blowing from conservative networks, talk radio and corporate boardrooms, when it’s become the fashion to bash the Democratic Party, you’ve joined in, writing a book betraying the people who stood behind every one of your campaigns—not party activists, but hardworking Georgia families. You cast stone after stone at Democrats. Your silly, petty, and often personal attacks remind me of no one more than your old boss, Lester Maddox.

To add insult to injury, you flatter Sonny Perdue, who was elected governor by campaigning on the same symbol of hate you tried to remove from the flag, with an inscription that says Georgia is in good hands. Remember Zell, this is the same Sonny Perdue who proposed a $900 million tax increase on the middle class the first week he was in office. The same Sonny Perdue who is looking to cut off the HOPE scholarship to the B average student in two-thirds of the rural counties in Georgia, meaning they won’t go to college—a move that would not only deny many Georgians a better life than their parents but also tarnish the only legacy you have left.

And now you’re kicking off your book tour by endorsing George W. Bush.

I thought a genuine ex-Marine like you would see through the phony flyboy “made for television” carrier stunt, especially now that Bush is blaming the troops for mistakenly bragging about a “mission accomplished.”

I thought you would remember that Bush opposed creating a Department of Homeland Security, until Karl Rove and polling told him he could shamelessly use the issue to question the patriotism of Senators like our friend Max Cleland, who, you’ll remember, left three limbs on the battlefield in Vietnam

I thought a man who claims to revere FDR like you, prides himself on being a penny pincher, and says he cares about kitchen table issues would see through Bush’s attempt to starve Social Security and Medicare by running up enormous deficits.

I thought the history professor in you would know that Republicans built their success in the South on appeals to race and that you would speak out as again this year, in Mississippi, Republicans campaign on the Confederate flag while George Bush stands by approving yet silent.

I even thought a man like you, who always rightly talks about how his widowed mother built her own home by hauling stones out of the local river, would insist that the Iraqi people contribute to the rebuilding of their own country. Instead, you voted last week, at President Bush’s insistence, against requiring Iraq to use its oil money to repay any of the $87 billion we’re spending on their country this year alone. I guess teaching W. a corps value of helping those who help themselves wasn’t on your book tour.

I do know his corporate friends won’t have forgotten what you’ve done in your few years in the Senate. Zell, you’ll excuse me if I don’t buy your book. I’ll let the corporate directorships you’ll soon get fund your retirement. I’m betting you’ll hit the trifecta—Philip Morris, Southern Company, and soon Halliburton. And you’ll excuse me if I don’t follow your advice on my vote for President. I prefer a candidate who did his growing up in Vietnam, like John Kerry, rather than AWOL from the Air National Guard, like your friend George.

You once wrote a country song with a great line: “Every place I’ve ever been was on my way back home.” Looks like you’re on you’re way back home, Zell, back to the hateful rhetoric of the Lester Maddox days, with frequent well-paid stops along the way in corporate boardrooms. Too bad that’s the final legacy you’re leaving.

In your finest hour as Governor, you said “You cannot lead with a finger to the wind and an ear to the ground. It is an undignified position.” Only now, as you teeter with your hindquarters in the air, do I fully understand how right you were.

Very truly,

David Worley
David Worley, an Atlanta attorney, is the immediate past Chairman of the Democratic Party of Georgia

I got this from Eschaton's website and he got it from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. This guy endorsing Bush is supposed to scare the Democrats? I don't know why he doesn't just switch parties and end the charade. I won't miss his "principles".

By the way, Michael J. Totten are you for real? This blog seems like a front.

Posted by: Scott at October 31, 2003 08:57 PM

You must have been talking to some of my old girl friends!

Dammit, I have got to start looking more carefully into my sources' biographies.

Posted by: Kimmitt at October 31, 2003 10:00 PM

"By the way, Michael J. Totten are you for real? This blog seems like a front."

Michael Totten is actually not for real. I have never really had lunch with him. I have never gone on 45 minute smoke breaks with him at work, talking incessantly. I have never gotten him to change his mind by using logic. I have never been to his house or seen his charming new water feature. I have never worked for his brother. I have never met his wife. I have never had him answer my emails. I have not seen any development of his political philosophy in the last three years.

No wait, I have seen and done all of the above with him. If Michael Totten is unreal to you, it is time to adjust your medication. MJT is as real as it gets, if that is too much for you, that is certainly not his problem.

Patrick S Lasswell

Posted by: Patrick Lasswell at October 31, 2003 10:24 PM

Patrick Lasswell-This is the first time I have ever been to this blog. I usually read CalPundit and came to this blog from a link in one of his posts. I was dismayed at the naivete of Mr. Totten's original post and many of the comments. I found it hard to believe that someone would go by the name of Michael J. Totten, it seemed like a Jonah Goldberg parody of a leftish hawk. I thought maybe I wasn't getting the joke. I had a legitimate question and asked it.

Your response is to "adjust your medication"? Since you are alleging to be his friend, and your first inclination is to ridicule me and my honest query, it doesn't say much for you or Mr. Totten. Good luck on your website Mr. Totten, but if this is the level of discourse I think I will pass.

Posted by: Scott at October 31, 2003 10:53 PM

Markus, I'll grant that the threat wasn't imminent. Hell, Bush said it wasn't. But actually, yes, it does seem unreasonable to me to demand that we garner "substantial multinational support before embarking on such a course". There's no assurance that such support was forthcoming under any circumstances short of another attack on the US, and perhaps not even then. If you're going to make such a demand, it seems to me that it's incumbent upon you to demonstrate that, for instance, "a little bit more time, a little less arrogance, and a little more honesty about true motives" would have resulted in the level of support you require. I don't think it likely. Let's be honest -- France, Germany, and Russia were doing lots of bidness with Saddam. They were going to resist, as it was clearly in their interest to resist regardless of the justification. Who or what exactly was going to change their minds, and how long was it going to take?

But that is all a side discussion to the point I was trying to make, and what I understood (rightly or wrongly ) MJT and others to be making. Your statement to which I responded implied that there were a substantial number of democratic legislators who abnegated their responsibilities to our national security in favor of the opinions, not even of their own electorate, but of those in Finland, Kuala Lumpur, and Bolivia. And I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would consider it meritorious that they make that decision based on that criterion. I say that regardless of what their decision ultimately is. I have a great deal more respect for the hypothetical 5% that would not have changed their minds than the 45% who would have.

Well, I'm rambling now, but whether or not it was a sound strategic move is not contingent (at least not to the degree your estimate would indicate) on world opinion.

Posted by: Phil Smith at October 31, 2003 10:53 PM

Scott,

If you feel that the best way to begin a relationship is to accuse fraud, then perhaps this disappointment will not be surprising to you. I cannot see a blanket accusation at first reading of deliberate fraud by a widely quoted and linked blogger to be describable as honest inquiry. Honest inquiry would have been to read his archives. Honest inquiry would have been to note that Lileks, Simon, and others praise him highly. Honest inquiry would have been to define who on earth would want such a fickle individual fronting for them because he views integrity to be more important than loyalty.

If discourse that clarifies your rather brisk, broad, and libelous accusations as unsupportable is not to your liking, perhaps you could show some insight or at least discernment. I should probably show greater civility in this matter, but to undermine Michael Totten because his name is too normal or his opinions differ from yours is absurd. Allowing that kind of idiocy to take root here or anywhere would be mindless folly. If this is uncomfortable for you, I suggest that the author of your misery is in your mirror.

Posted by: Patrick Lasswell at November 1, 2003 12:38 AM

Scott: By the way, Michael J. Totten are you for real? This blog seems like a front.

Wow.

I get such a kick out of people's reactions sometimes. Though I must say my favorite is when I was accused of being on Ariel Sharon's payroll.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at November 1, 2003 02:02 AM

Scott, again: I had a legitimate question and asked it.

Um, no. That is not a legitimate question. It is a completely idiotic question. Look on the left panel of my blog. I have published professional articles under my own name, including at the Wall Street Journal.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at November 1, 2003 02:06 AM

Markus,

the Democrats DO have a marketplace of ideas on a whole range of issues, including national security and the war in Iraq.

Allow me to summarize the Democrat's ideas. Their domestic policy is to continue the government takeover of civil and private society and using the coercive power of government to redistribute resources to favored groups from disfavored groups. Their national security policy is to submit to the UN.

Posted by: HA at November 1, 2003 04:28 AM

bk,

Not sure who posted it, but Dean called Bush "the enemy" very clearly in the context of medicaid/healthcare reform, so responsible fair-minded people need to stop shopping this quote around

If I state that Dean is the "enemy" - but only in the context of national security - is that responsible and fair-minded?

Posted by: HA at November 1, 2003 04:34 AM

What is missing in this whole thread is context.

Got that?

C-O-N-T-E-X-T

This is like arguing about how to cut down a tree that one has already begun to cut, when it was perhaps the wrong tree in the forest, or perhaps not the most important tree at this time.

Got that?

Possibly the wrong tree, or maybe not the wrong tree, but maybe the 20th tree on the list to focus on.

Let me put something out to consider.

Hearts and minds of the Arab world. This has been thrown out so often that I think people have begun to gloss over it and not really think about it.

But I think this is one of the root problems with this administration.

How do you think people of the Middle East would have responded to the United States if this Administration had REALLY focused on Afghanistan –- not the bombing –- they seem to have that down pretty pat -- but the aftermath?

Or how do you think the people of the Middle East would have responded to the United States if this Administration had REALLY focused on the Israeli/Palestine conflict – instead of ignoring it for the first two years and then only stepping in after much pleading by Blair?

As it stands now the people of the Middle East do not trust our motives. And I, for one, cannot support an administration that got it so wrong.

Posted by: fizz_plop_fizz at November 1, 2003 04:59 AM

Markus,

well folks i just saw the "democraticunderground.com" discussion board for the first time. They are having a nice little debate on whether Iraqis are justified in "resisting" the occupation. OK, I see where some of you people are coming from and why you're so angry a little bit more now.

Thank you, thank you, thank you! Its nice to have someone acknowledge why my anger may be justified.

most Democrats are not that crazy

I'm not sure this is correct. My concern is that the Democatic Undeground types are the ones behind Dean. If Dean wins the nomination, it will affirm for me that the DU wing of the party is setting the agenda for the Democrats. The only evidence at this point that I would accept that the inmates are not running the asylum is if Gephardt or Lieberman win the nomination by a substantial margin.

Mind you, I'm no fan of Gephardt because he is a traditional big government Dem. But at least he was right about the war and isn't pissing in the wind like Kerry, Edwards and Clark.

P.S. - Is General Clark beginning to remind anybody else of Admiral Stockdale? I thought Clark was supposed to be intelligent? He comes across as a blithering savant to me.

Posted by: HA at November 1, 2003 05:01 AM

fizz_plob_fizz,

As it stands now the people of the Middle East do not trust our motives. And I, for one, cannot support an administration that got it so wrong.

How do you propose to gain their trust? Throw Israel to the wolves? Let the Arabs finish what Hitler started? Abandoning Israel would make us complicit in genocide. And it would inspire the jihadis that they are winning. Just as the withdrawl of the Soviets from Afghanistan inspired them that they could defeat the other, softer superpower, abandomnemt of Israel would only fuel their jihad against the West.

The only path I can see is to build a free and democratic Iraq. Success in Iraq is the last chance to head of a full-fledged holy war with a pathological and potentially nuclear armed enemy. If we fail in Iraq, modernity and civilization itself are at risk.

And it is time for the Democrats and Europe to wake up to this. It is their civilization too that is at risk.

Posted by: HA at November 1, 2003 05:14 AM

Michael gets accused of being a shill because he gets paid to write pieces by neo-Conservative publications that justify Israeli anti-terror operations against "Palestinian" murderers, and his foreign policy positions on the Middle East are (allegedly) in lockstep with Likud.

He doesn't get paid directly for this blog, he doesn't even have a tip jar. I think he can make a living any way he chooses, and that his opinions matter, not who pays him for the articles he sells via this blog.

Posted by: David R. at November 1, 2003 05:22 AM

David Mercer,

I have marveled at this before; the Democrat's left wing would have creamed their shorts in the 80's if the administration all the sudden started deposing rightists and theocrats in dictatorships around the world.

No, they wouldn't say a word. They don't give Reagan and/or Bush Sr any credit for helping to push out Pinochet and Marcos.

Posted by: HA at November 1, 2003 05:31 AM

Throw Israel to the wolves? Let the Arabs finish what Hitler started?

I am puzzled as to why my statement “REALLY focused on the Israeli/Palestine conflict” suggests abandoning Israel… Do you think that was what Blair/Powell et al were suggesting?

The only path I can see is to build a free and democratic Iraq.

I can agree with this now. But this gets me back to my context argument. We ARE here, we need to do this right … But I am deeply troubled over whether here is what we should have focused on now and I am also troubled over the manner in which we got here...

Posted by: fizz_plop_fizz at November 1, 2003 05:58 AM

Zell Miller is a long-time friend of George Bush, tacitly supported him in the 2000 election, backed his tax cuts and economic policy prior to 9/11, and supports giving him a "rubberstamp" for all of his judicial nominees, no matter how reactionary. His endorsement is no more meaningful than James Eastland's endorsement of Barry Goldwater in 1964, and will have no impact north of the Mason-Dixon Line, where the real battle in 2004 will take place.

If Bob Graham or Bill Nelson switch sides, than we've got problems.

Posted by: Steve Smith at November 1, 2003 09:17 AM

fizz,

There is one problem with your argument re focus on Afghanistan: Hatred of the USA in the Middle East is not rational. It is not a hatred born of anything we have done or not done; rather, it is a hatred born of ideological zeal. No matter what we did in Afghanistan, we would still be hated. Real change requires winning in Iraq by changing that society as a first step.

Posted by: Ben at November 1, 2003 10:00 AM


Scott, again: I had a legitimate question and asked it.

Um, no. That is not a legitimate question. It is a completely idiotic question. Look on the left panel of my blog. I have published professional articles under my own name, including at the Wall Street Journal.
Posted by Michael J. Totten at November 1, 2003 02:06 AM

Sorry Michael, you may take offense at someone questioning your bonafides, but calling the question idiotic only to be answered by a resume of your own making? This is a non sequitur. What does anything on your left panel have to do with logically answering Scott's question?

Posted by: anne elke at November 1, 2003 11:00 AM

it is a hatred born of ideological zeal

So by actually fullfilling our promises to bring about a democratic society to Afghanistan we can assume that this would not work because of a hatred born of ideological zeal...

So you argue that the best course of action is to leave Afghanistan, advance to Iraq, and expect democracy to flourish there? My question is -- does the ideological hatred only pertain to Afghanistan and not Iraq???

I'll agree that those who would strike against us are not interested in democracy... but I think the majority of those in the Arab world were watching very closely as to see if the words and deeds of this administration matched up in Afghanistan. And, let's face it, they did not.

Posted by: fizz_plop_fizz at November 1, 2003 11:16 AM

calling the question idiotic only to be answered by a resume of your own making? This is a non sequitur.

The reason I did that is because my "resume" links to pages off this site where there is evidence that I a real person.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at November 1, 2003 11:49 AM

"What does anything on your left panel have to do with logically answering Scott's question? "

Claiming that the Wall Street Journal has been punked by a poser is a bit of a logical stretch without any supporting evidence, being published by the WSJ is a legitimate bona fide. More to the point, the greater stretch is claiming that Michael's ideas have no resonance when they manifestly do. The "Builders and Defenders" op-ed caused a lot of discussion and framed the basis for any number of essays, both supporting and opposing. In any case, his writing has traction and that is a legitimate and logical response to the accusation of fraud that Scott made.

The other thing to keep in mind is that Scott made an accusation of fraud, not a legitimate question. What is important about this accusation is that the vagueness of subject makes it all too likely for a hostile and groundless assertion to stick. What are viable liberal credentials? Is there a certifying authority? Do you have to have smoked so much dope and attended so many Dead/Phish/String Cheese Incident concerts? Are you required to have a palpable odor of patchouli about your person for a given period of months? Is there an apostolic succession of laying on of hands by somebody who was touched by Timothy Leary? No, there is not. So anybody can be denounced as a liberal for not being sufficiently adherent to an undefined ideal. Welcome to Paris in the 1790s; is Scott's last name Robespierre?

Michael is a liberal. Michael is not a front. Take your guillotine mob mentality and get stuffed. We've played this game before and we aren't going to play it anymore. Innuendo be damned.

Posted by: Patrick Lasswell at November 1, 2003 11:56 AM

Zell Miller has voted with Bush on every major issue, foreign or domestic, that I can think of. There's probably an exception but I don't know what it is. This is no surprise to me--well, I would have thought he'd wait for a nominee to emerge. But while I can think of several who might be hawkish enough on foreign policy, even Lieberman is not conservative enough on domestic policy.

Koch is more of a surprise but he's such a curmudgeon and so little liked that you're not going to convince many democrats with him either.

Posted by: Katherine at November 1, 2003 12:31 PM

Ah, if we had only listened...

Don't Attack Saddam --Wall Street Journal, Aug 15, 2002.

by Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser under President George H.W. Bush

"Our nation is presently engaged in a debate about whether to launch a war against Iraq. Leaks of various strategies for an attack on Iraq appear with regularity. The Bush administration vows regime change, but states that no decision has been made whether, much less when, to launch an invasion.

It is beyond dispute that Saddam Hussein is a menace. He terrorizes and brutalizes his own people. He has launched war on two of his neighbors. He devotes enormous effort to rebuilding his military forces and equipping them with weapons of mass destruction. We will all be better off when he is gone.

That said, we need to think through this issue very carefully. We need to analyze the relationship between Iraq and our other pressing priorities -- notably the war on terrorism -- as well as the best strategy and tactics available were we to move to change the regime in Baghdad.

Saddam's strategic objective appears to be to dominate the Persian Gulf, to control oil from the region, or both.

That clearly poses a real threat to key U.S. interests. But there is scant evidence to tie Saddam to terrorist organizations, and even less to the Sept. 11 attacks. Indeed Saddam's goals have little in common with the terrorists who threaten us, and there is little incentive for him to make common cause with them.

He is unlikely to risk his investment in weapons of mass destruction, much less his country, by handing such weapons to terrorists who would use them for their own purposes and leave Baghdad as the return address. Threatening to use these weapons for blackmail -- much less their actual use -- would open him and his entire regime to a devastating response by the U.S. While Saddam is thoroughly evil, he is above all a power-hungry survivor.

Saddam is a familiar dictatorial aggressor, with traditional goals for his aggression. There is little evidence to indicate that the United States itself is an object of his aggression. Rather, Saddam's problem with the U.S. appears to be that we stand in the way of his ambitions. He seeks weapons of mass destruction not to arm terrorists, but to deter us from intervening to block his aggressive designs.

Given Saddam's aggressive regional ambitions, as well as his ruthlessness and unpredictability, it may at some point be wise to remove him from power. Whether and when that point should come ought to depend on overall U.S. national security priorities. Our pre-eminent security priority -- underscored repeatedly by the president -- is the war on terrorism. An attack on Iraq at this time would seriously jeopardize, if not destroy, the global counterterrorist campaign we have undertaken.

The United States could certainly defeat the Iraqi military and destroy Saddam's regime. But it would not be a cakewalk. On the contrary, it undoubtedly would be very expensive -- with serious consequences for the U.S. and global economy -- and could as well be bloody. In fact, Saddam would be likely to conclude he had nothing left to lose, leading him to unleash whatever weapons of mass destruction he possesses.

Israel would have to expect to be the first casualty, as in 1991 when Saddam sought to bring Israel into the Gulf conflict. This time, using weapons of mass destruction, he might succeed, provoking Israel to respond, perhaps with nuclear weapons, unleashing an Armageddon in the Middle East. Finally, if we are to achieve our strategic objectives in Iraq, a military campaign very likely would have to be followed by a large-scale, long-term military occupation.

But the central point is that any campaign against Iraq, whatever the strategy, cost and risks, is certain to divert us for some indefinite period from our war on terrorism. Worse, there is a virtual consensus in the world against an attack on Iraq at this time. So long as that sentiment persists, it would require the U.S. to pursue a virtual go-it-alone strategy against Iraq, making any military operations correspondingly more difficult and expensive. The most serious cost, however, would be to the war on terrorism. Ignoring that clear sentiment would result in a serious degradation in international cooperation with us against terrorism. And make no mistake, we simply cannot win that war without enthusiastic international cooperation, especially on intelligence.

Possibly the most dire consequences would be the effect in the region. The shared view in the region is that Iraq is principally an obsession of the U.S. The obsession of the region, however, is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If we were seen to be turning our backs on that bitter conflict -- which the region, rightly or wrongly, perceives to be clearly within our power to resolve -- in order to go after Iraq, there would be an explosion of outrage against us. We would be seen as ignoring a key interest of the Muslim world in order to satisfy what is seen to be a narrow American interest.

Even without Israeli involvement, the results could well destabilize Arab regimes in the region, ironically facilitating one of Saddam's strategic objectives. At a minimum, it would stifle any cooperation on terrorism, and could even swell the ranks of the terrorists. Conversely, the more progress we make in the war on terrorism, and the more we are seen to be committed to resolving the Israel-Palestinian issue, the greater will be the international support for going after Saddam.

If we are truly serious about the war on terrorism, it must remain our top priority. However, should Saddam Hussein be found to be clearly implicated in the events of Sept. 11, that could make him a key counterterrorist target, rather than a competing priority, and significantly shift world opinion toward support for regime change.

In any event, we should be pressing the United Nations Security Council to insist on an effective no-notice inspection regime for Iraq -- any time, anywhere, no permission required. On this point, senior administration officials have opined that Saddam Hussein would never agree to such an inspection regime. But if he did, inspections would serve to keep him off balance and under close observation, even if all his weapons of mass destruction capabilities were not uncovered. And if he refused, his rejection could provide the persuasive casus belli which many claim we do not now have. Compelling evidence that Saddam had acquired nuclear-weapons capability could have a similar effect.

In sum, if we will act in full awareness of the intimate interrelationship of the key issues in the region, keeping counterterrorism as our foremost priority, there is much potential for success across the entire range of our security interests -- including Iraq. If we reject a comprehensive perspective, however, we put at risk our campaign against terrorism as well as stability and security in a vital region of the world."

Posted by: fizz_plop_fizz at November 1, 2003 01:07 PM

I don't see history judging Scowcroft and the other members of the Bush 41 foreign policy team as having made the correct decision by leaving Saddam in power back in 1991. I certainly don't see it that way now. As for some of these claims - such as that invading Iraq will be counterproductive in the war on terrorism - the results are very much open to debate. Also, I haven't seen that "outrage against us" in the Muslim world that an invasion was supposed to provoke. As for Scowcroft writing that an attack "could well destabilize Arab regimes in the region," that hasn't happened either (in the case of Iran that's unfortunate, but there's still hope).

Posted by: Peter G. at November 1, 2003 03:21 PM

I hope the repressive Arab regimes are all destabilized. I am not a stability junky. Brett Scowcroft is. It's a conservative point of view which I just don't share.

I am not a radical leftist in the American context. But in the Middle East, bring it on, baby. Break eggs. Up with revolution and down with religious fanaticism and dictatorship.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at November 1, 2003 03:32 PM

It must be a terrible thing to live in such fear, as you guys apparently all do.

-bjh, posting a half mile from ground zero

Posted by: bjh at November 1, 2003 03:37 PM

bjh,

I've lived below the waterline in a destroyer within floating mine range of a hostile Iraq, boarded Hatian boats with active sources of disease, handled tons of explosives, and stared down approaching muggers in Ecuador. I do not think of myself as a person who lives in fear. Perhaps you were talking about somebody else.

Posted by: Patrick Lasswell at November 1, 2003 03:45 PM

What Mike said about the Middle East. Kick the whole rotten sand castle down. The sooner, the better.

Posted by: eric at November 1, 2003 06:32 PM

But in the Middle East, bring it on, baby. Break eggs.

You are so right man. I am glad you are thinking the same as me.

The American people and the lord on high know that we are on the right path with these savages.
We will battle all those evildoers together at Armageddon! This means the end of the world will come sooner and then you and me can go straight to Heaven. The rest of the human race, including Jews who don't convert, will soon be wiped out with great suffering.

Praise Gawd Almighty!

Posted by: Tom_Delay (R) at November 1, 2003 06:51 PM

Doofus pretending to be Tom Delay,

Your pharmacy called, your new meds are in. Seriously, trolling around here requires a lighter touch. Try a sledgehammer next time, the wrecking ball's too obvious.

Posted by: Patrick Lasswell at November 1, 2003 07:07 PM

Markus,

The phrase "welfare state" is commonly understood to refer to programs designed to help the poor and also to social insurance programs that benefit all classes including Medicare and social security. I don't want to eliminate them, and I don't want to turn them into measly, ineffective programs. In order to preserve them during the baby boom retirement decades, we need now to be reducing our national debt and our interest payments on that debt, instead of allowing it to skyrocket.

The problem with Social Security and Medicare is that both programs were conceived and implemented during times when life expectency was much lower and birth rates were much higher. These programs as they are structured now are simply unsustainable ponzi schemes. So we are faced with two choices. We can increase the age limits to receive benefits and/or reduce benefits. Or we can impose punitive and economically crushing tax rates that will extend the program for maybe another generation, but will ruin our economy. The sooner we recocgnize this, the sooner we can make adjustments gradually rather than as some sort of shock therapy.

Fortuneately, the Europeans are further along in this inevitable process. Hopefully they will confront their problems realistically before they collapse economically. Of course, due to the European penchant for denial and stupidity, I don't expect them to. Either way, the future for America as shaped by the Democratic agenda is being prototyped in Europe. Let's hope the lessons of their failure are recognized in America before it is too late. If we can't recognize the problem analytically, at least the example of their failure will be too much to ignore.

Posted by: HA at November 2, 2003 04:03 AM

Markus,

It is different when the threat is not imminent. Invading Iraq to overthrow the Baath regime was a just move, especially for the Iraqi people. But it was also optional one for us, at least at the time, and it was based on the controversal new stragegic doctrine of preemption. And I must add, an extremely unpopular one EVERYWHERE in the world except the USA and Israel. Given these factors, especially the absence of threat, it does not seem totally unreasonable to demand that the US gain substantial multinational support before embarking on such a course.

You are rehashing all the old arguments that were made during the debate for Congression authorization to attack Iraq. But I have news for you - YOU LOST THE DEBATE! Even among Democrats! You may not like the decision that was made, but as a nation we have made a decision and set on a course of action. You and the Democrats have a responsibility to ensure that the decision we made ends successfully even if you disagree with that decision. The problem is that after having authorized war, the Democrats (except for a few brave souls) and a handful of Republican scumbags would cravenly shirk their responsibility to see this war through to a successful conclusion.

Posted by: HA at November 2, 2003 04:17 AM

Markus,

Maybe Edwards has something to offer...

I had hope for Edwards. He voted to authorize the war but then opposed funding the effort. He's not fit for office. Same goes for Kerry.

Posted by: HA at November 2, 2003 04:19 AM

fizz,

I am puzzled as to why my statement “REALLY focused on the Israeli/Palestine conflict” suggests abandoning Israel… Do you think that was what Blair/Powell et al were suggesting?

No, but nothing short of abandoning Israel will appease the Arabs. Destroying Israel always has and always will be their goal. Blair and Powell are in denial about this and they embrace every lie the Palestinians and Arabs toss their way. Arafat and the Palestinians had the only deal that they could ever hope for in 2000. This was the deal that every reasonable observer agrees is the only solution and is the best offer the Palestinians will ever get. They rejected it because in order to live up to the deal, they would have had to reject the goal of destroying Israel.

Posted by: HA at November 2, 2003 04:33 AM

fizz,

Ah, if we had only listened...

Don't Attack Saddam --Wall Street Journal, Aug 15, 2002.

by Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser under President George H.W. Bush

Ah, you, Brent Scowcroft, Pat Buchanan and Jacque Chriac are all in harmonious agreement! Nice company you keep.

Posted by: HA at November 2, 2003 04:38 AM

Patrick,

I've lived below the waterline in a destroyer within floating mine range of a hostile Iraq, boarded Hatian boats with active sources of disease, handled tons of explosives, and stared down approaching muggers in Ecuador.

Now that would explain why you are such a "right-wing extremist." ;-)

Posted by: HA at November 2, 2003 04:41 AM

Reading through these posts, the obvious question becomes . . .are you becoming neoconservatives?

Are Arab political cultures so malleable that within a generation or two we can transform most into genuine liberal democracies? Are we, the United States, unilaterally capable of overthrowing undemocratic Islamic regimes (and let’s face it, there are a lot of them) and replacing them with free and moderate democracies? Can we do it? Perhaps we can. Or perhaps, we will get a world of unintended consequences

Walter Lippmann once warned that it is a disease of the soul to be in love with impossible things, so it may repay effort to look more closely at these questions.

Posted by: Ponder_this at November 2, 2003 05:40 AM

Hey "Ponder this,"

What makes you think that liberal hawks such as Michael Totten (or myself) have thought less about these issues than you? Personally, I think my willingness to break ranks with the Left demonstrates that I have read more widely and thought more deeply about these issues than most so-called "liberals."

I know this is true when I hear some of my young Left-leaning friends say things like, "Sure, Saddam was cruel to his people, but that's none of our business." (True quote from a "liberal" friend of mine.) What these "liberals" don't realize is that they are the ones who are flirting with conservativism, so driven by Bush-hatred that are are willing to parrot Pat Buchanon, so satisfied with their "I got mine" liberal democracy that they are willing to let the rest of the world rot in hell.

I'm not saying that all criticism of the War on Terror or so-called "neoconservative" foreign policy comes from such a naive crypto-conservative muddy thinking as my friend's, but a hell of a lot of it does. I suspect that yours does as well.

For example, I think you reveal your poor knowledge of current events -- and even a little subconscious racism -- when you insinuate that Iraqis may not be capable of achieving democracy in "a generation or two." Aren't you aware that the Iraqi Kurds formed a democratic proto-state right under Saddam's nose thanks to the protection provided by the no-fly-zones? (No-fly-zones that were , BTW, "unilateralist," since apparently that word has come to mean "not specifically endorsed by the UNSC.") Aren't you aware that there is brave and beautiful student-led movement for democracy in Iran right now? If you are not aware of these things, then you still have some homework to do, junior. And if you are aware of these things but can't quite find it in yourself to give much of a shit, or to wave it off with defeatist chin music about "unintended consequences," then you need to do some pondering and ask yourself if you are quite the "liberal" you think you are.

I submit that so-called "liberals" whose hearts are not stirred and lifted by the prospect of Iraqis and Iranians and Afghans, etc, gaining freedom from tyrranny are LINO (liberal in name only).

Posted by: Browning Porter at November 2, 2003 07:42 AM
Democrats: You had better snap out of denial and get your act together fast. You are in so much trouble and you have no idea.

Yes well that’s probably a good thing that they are in so much trouble. If Bush is reelected with a solid majority in 2004 and Republicans pick up seats in the House and Senate (as they are expected to), then perhaps it will send a message to Democrats so scrap the lunatic Blame America First! fringe which dominates their party and start to move towards the center.

As it stands right now, unless Zell Miller were to change his mind and enter the presidential race, I would not consider any of the Nine Dwarves for municipal dog catcher much less for the Presidency. None of them have demonstrated that they can be trusted with either foreign policy or handling the greatest fiscal problem in the federal government – the ponzai schemes known as Medicare and Social Security.

Bush certainly deserves some portion of the blame for his profligate spending (although considering that most of the non-defense spending was to take away issues from Democrats, you can be certain that none of them would be better) but he’s done well on the War both in the Iraqi and Afghanistan fronts and he has been consistent in pushing for reforming Medicare and Social Security (although he’s wrong to support a new prescription drug benefit). None of the Democratic candidates have shown the slightest willingness to push for any sort of entitlement reform except for Lieberman and Dean and since they both did 180s on these issues as soon as they decided to run for Vice President and President respectively, it is clear the neither of them are serious about it either.

As someone whose political priorities are defeating Islamsofascism and reforming Medicare and Social Security before the baby boom generation goes on them and bankrupts my generation, it is clear the Bush is the only rational candidate.

If the Democratic Party cannot muster the support to deal sensibly with these problems then I look forward to the day when our two party system consists of the Republican and Libertarian Parties.

Posted by: Thorley Winston at November 2, 2003 11:34 AM

To Ponder_This,

You are making a conservative argument. Are you aware of that? That's fine, you have every right to do it. I just think you ought to be aware of it.

My position is the one with the left-wing pedigree(from Wilson through Clinton and excepting Carter), and yours is the one from the right-wing tradition (from the America Firsters through Pat Buchanan and excepting Reagan.) Just something to think about.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at November 2, 2003 12:12 PM

Thorley Winston,

You can't even trust Joe Lieberman with foreign policy? Well, that's unusual. Any particular reason?

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at November 2, 2003 12:14 PM

fizz --

I never advocated leaving Afghanistan. We need to encourage democracy in both places. Hopefully that will lead to change elsewhere in the Middle East.

Posted by: Ben at November 2, 2003 03:46 PM

I believe that by next year, many Iraqis will have experience in democracy at a local level, and free speech, and vocal disagreements.

If the choice Arabs have is which dictator, a Shah (CIA puppet) or an Ayatollah (?), it's reasonable for them to oppose whichever dictator they've got. But every type of dictator is going to punish opposition.

HA, when Arabs see, in a successful Iraq example, of a free(ish) market, low tax (15% flat rate!!!), partial democracy with more human rights than any other Arab country, they can have hope for a better choice. Arab democracy.

That's my dream; and I suspect the Bush/ Wolfowitz/ neocon/ American drean. A great dream. A dream the Left seems to oppose; they should regret it.

Posted by: Tom Grey at November 3, 2003 02:22 AM

People still bring up Cleland. Do you know why he was not re-elected? It was not because we did not like him or respect him. It was because he voted toe-step with Kennedy and the leadership of the Democratic party. Zell votes the way his constituency wishes him to vote. And had Cleland voted more for the people he represents he would still be in Washington.

But he did not.

Many people call me a right wing wacko, but even at the last election, I voted for the best man for the job. Or the one I felt was the best man. Guess what, it was about 50/50 Rep/Dem. And some Libs.

I feel in my mind Bush is doing what needs to be done. And as such he gets my vote. If Zell runs again, he gets my vote. If Chambliss run he lost my vote for voting for the Loan scam for Iraq.

Oh well.

Oh by the way, if not for Bush, I could vote for Lieberman, he has class, he understands the war we are fighting and appears to be a moderate.

Posted by: James Stephenson at November 3, 2003 06:11 AM

Not many women seem to be commenting, but here's one. I'm a former liberal Democrat from a family of several generations of liberal Democratic politicians on both sides. Bill Clinton's hypocrisy had me halfway out the door of my lifelong political home, but the head-in-the-sand foolishness of the left after September 11 sent me the rest of the way out. I certainly don't like everything about George Bush, but he'll have my vote because of his courage and his vision in the war on terrorism. (And also, from the feminist point of view, because he appears to have a genuine ability to work with, respect, and listen to women, as opposed to his predecessor who was great on the lip service and abominable on the reality. That saying, "the personal is the political," is absolutely true.) I do not understand why my friends and relatives who are still on the left are unable to perceive the good we have done and are still doing in Iraq. Did they really think we had some kind of right to walk away from those people after forcing sanctions on them for so long, without even trying to help them achieve freedom? How can they think such a thing, and still sleep at night in their safe, free beds?

Anyway, George Bush is awake to the threat we are facing. It's the greatest threat we have faced in our lifetime. Peace signs and protest marches won't prevail against that threat, and neither will a toothless UN, and neither will hoping that the threat will just go away. Thank goodness he understands that. And, by the way, I have two sons of war-fighting age. If either chooses to join the military, of course I'll be frightened. But I will also be incredibly proud.

Posted by: beatrix at November 3, 2003 09:00 AM

Ponder this,

Look, someone is driving their car, and fell asleep at the wheel. They wake up to realize they are heading toward a wall at ninety miles per hour.

They can...
a)Jerk the wheel wildly to get out of the way
b)Choose to not do a) because a) is dangerous

The neocon project in the Levant is hazardous, and not just in the day-to-day details, but even the overall success of the project is not certain.

Scott, you sneer very well, but is their any proof that you are not a deliberate provocateur sent by the DU.com? Heh.

People like Totten are probably the hope of the Democratic party. Now, I don't think the Dems deserve hope. I think they deserve to be crushed as an example to idiots in the future, and as punishment for their support of Communist scum, but, we are all sinners and quite flawed, and if they turn from their hatred and come up with some patriotic and constructive plans then they could be agan good for the country.

They can serve as a good example, or a bad example. Living or destroyed, they will serve.

Posted by: Tadeusz at November 3, 2003 09:14 AM

Kimmett,

As regards your psychotic joke, you might try a smiley next time. I couldn't tell your intended humorous hyperbole from your unintended nasty hyperbole.

Yours,
Wince

Posted by: Wince and Nod at November 3, 2003 12:16 PM

My position is the one with the left-wing pedigree(from Wilson through Clinton and excepting Carter), and yours is the one from the right-wing tradition (from the America Firsters through Pat Buchanan and excepting Reagan.)

Yeah, because Jefferson was such a conservative force in this country. "Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations--entangling alliances with none..."

Posted by: Kimmitt at November 3, 2003 03:43 PM

Markus Rose writes: "When you're done gloating, please give me some solid evidence that Joe Lieberman, Dick Gephardt, Bob Graham, Joe Biden, Wesley Clark, John Kerry and John Edwards are 'ostriches' in the war on terror."

John Kerry stated in the Oct 26 2003 Democrat candidate debate on live television:

"This president has done it wrong every step of the way. He promised that he would have a real coalition. He has a fraudulent coalition."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A21551-2003Oct26?language=printer

Kerry's "fraudulent coalition" is the very same coalition that landed on the beaches of Normandy (Canada notwithstanding, whose army today is so insignificant as to be unable to staff America's carrier fleet).

Can you say ostrich?

Kerry continued:

"He [Bush] promised he would go through the United Nations and honor the inspections process."

Has Kerry read UN Security Council resolution 1441, which was adopted 15-0? Has Kerry read the joint resolution (H.J.Res.114) "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq" that he voted for in October 2002? Kerry last week then voted AGAINST supporting the troops he voted to send into battle!

Can you say ostrich?

Kerry continued:

"I believe Americans want somebody who can defend the security of the United States. And this war on terror is far less of a military operation and far more of an intelligence-gathering, law-enforcement operation. And the American people deserve somebody who can lead them to do it correctly and make us safer and stronger in the process."

Kerry has laid it out for all to see -- he wants America to adopt the very same policy that led to September 11th. Wait until Americans are massacred, then call the FBI to investigate after the fact.

Can you say ostrich?

I could go on all day...

Posted by: Dar Al Harb at November 3, 2003 07:28 PM

Tom Nally, yes former New York City Mayor Ed Koch supports Bush. He wrote on July 16, 2003:

"I am a proud Democrat who generally supports Democratic candidates for office. I have never voted for anyone other than a Democrat for president. I believe that the Democratic Party's philosophy is overall far better for our country than the Republican Party's.

Although I am a Democrat, I am no ideologue. In some local and state elections, I have proudly crossed party lines for candidates I thought were appreciably better. I believe that the most important issue facing the world is international terrorism, and it is my current intention to vote for George W. Bush for re-election."

http://www.newsmax.com/cgi-bin/printer_friendly.pl?page=http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/7/15/215614.shtml

(I'm not a regular NewsMax reader, but this is where I found the article)

Posted by: Dar Al Harb at November 3, 2003 07:38 PM

"The[Dem.s] critique, which is rather easy to do, but don't propose viable alternative visions beyond "let's cooperate with our allies more" (such as Chirac and Putin?), or "let's turn Iraq over to the U.N. (Do they mean the 12 U.N. workers that remain in Iraq? Is the U.N. really gung-ho on taking over Iraq anyway?) These basic matters are never substantially addressed."

Why are these not viable alternatives? The U.N. is withdrawing because the U.S., after assuming the role of security guarantor for Iraq, has failed so far in that task. In America, people must make compromises and common cause with others they don't agree with. This is what democracy is about - compromising and incorporating, or at least acknowledging, the differences. Working with allies who disagree with us would be democracy in action on a world stage - something we are supposed to favor. The U.N. is the best tool America has in getting the support of nations of the world. Rather than despise an institution created by the U.S. to increase open government and discourage the use of war as a political tool, we should embrace it. It is not detriment to our sovereignity but a way of enhancing that sovereignity, gaining the support of nations who agree with us and allowing those who don't a forum for political expression. Ammerica talks a great game about free speech, but we always seem surprised when that speech is turned against us.
What is the Bush policy? "Stay the course" "Iraquification" "Hold firm and don't give in" These are bumper stickers, not serious policy positions. How about addressing the cost? $1.7billion that we were told earlier would be the total cost of Iraqi reconstruction is now at least $20billion. What happened? Why is it costing the U.S. taxpayer so much? The World Bank says Iraq can only absorb $6billion over the next year. So where is the rest of the money going? Why does it cost $1billion/week in troop support? Isn't most troop pay, logistics, and equipment already provided for in the regular budget? What is this money being spent on?Why are American soldiers being asked to offer themselves as targets while gaining no tactical or strategic advantage? Why are private contractors getting $900/month in hazard pay, while the Bush Admin. tries to cut the hazard pay (and family support allowances, and veterans' health benefits)of front-line troops? Is this good policy? Why?
What if Iraqi civilians never admit they've been defeated? If the guerrilla war does not end, but only gets worse, do we just hand the whole mess over to an "Iraqi" government and then leave them to their fate? Like we did to S. Vietnam during Nixon's Admin? This is a coherent policy?

Posted by: andrew at November 4, 2003 10:09 AM

I'm going to write in John D. Rockefeller (Democrat, West Virginia). Just listen to his Oct 10 2002 address to the US Senate:

The global community -- in the form of the United Nations -- has declared repeatedly, through multiple resolutions, that the frightening prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam cannot come to pass. But the U.N. has been unable to enforce those resolutions. We must eliminate that threat now, before it is too late.

But this isn't just a future threat. Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.

As the attacks of September 11 demonstrated, the immense destructiveness of modern technology means we can no longer afford to wait around for a smoking gun. September 11 demonstrated that the fact that an attack on our homeland has not yet occurred cannot give us any false sense of security that one will not occur in the future. We no longer have that luxury.

September 11 changed America. It made us realize we must deal differently with the very real threat of terrorism, whether it comes from shadowy groups operating in the mountains of Afghanistan or in 70 other countries around the world, including our own.

There has been some debate over how "imminent" a threat Iraq poses. I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11, that question is increasingly outdated. It is in the nature of these weapons, and the way they are targeted against civilian populations, that documented capability and demonstrated intent may be the only warning we get. To insist on further evidence could put some of our fellow Americans at risk. Can we afford to take that chance? We cannot!

The President has rightly called Saddam Hussein's efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction a grave and gathering threat to Americans. The global community has tried but failed to address that threat over the past decade. I have come to the inescapable conclusion that the threat posed to America by Saddam's weapons of mass destruction is so serious that despite the risks -- and we should not minimize the risks -- we must authorize the President to take the necessary steps to deal with that threat.

Senator John D. Rockefeller (Democrat, West Virginia)
Addressing the Senate
October 10, 2002

http://www.senate.gov/~rockefeller/news/2002/flrstmt0102002.html

Posted by: Dar Al Harb at November 4, 2003 09:34 PM

http://www.viagra-exchange.com/ (Viagra), please erase this message and you'll never see our ad again.

Posted by: Viagra at November 10, 2003 05:23 AM

http://www.viagra-exchange.com/ (Viagra), please erase this message and you'll never see our ad again.

Posted by: Viagra at November 10, 2003 06:22 PM

Hi there. You can read About Phentermine here. or about Seven diet or about Weight Loss

Posted by: Phentermine at December 3, 2003 11:52 PM

Casino Best Casino Casino On Line Gambling Casino Bonus On Line Casino Internet Gambling
If see this message email THIS url to esliejikmertv@bk.ru

Posted by: Gambling at December 10, 2003 12:03 AM

Study as though you will not reach, as if you may lose it.

Posted by: Campbell Jamie at December 10, 2003 01:31 PM

Amsterdam Hotels hotels Auckland Hotels Auckland Paris Hotels Paris Prague Hotels Prague Vienna Hotels Vienna Seoul Hotels Seoul Stockholm Hotels hotels Budapest Hotels Budapest

New York Hotels NY Nice Hotels Hotels Melbourne Hotels hotel Munich Hotels Munich Rome Hotels Rome San Francisco Hotels Barcelona Hotels Barcelona Brussels Hotels Brussels Sydney Hotels Hotels

Las Vegas Hotels Lisbon Hotels Lisbon London Hotels London Los Angeles Hotels Madrid Hotels Madrid Edinburgh Hotels Hotels Hong Kong Hotels Hong Kong

If you see this message - email to esliejikmertv@bk.ru - you'll not see it again.

Posted by: Amsterdam Hotels at December 19, 2003 11:48 PM

To be a human without passion is to be dead.

Posted by: Mezey Jennifer at December 20, 2003 05:52 PM

Perceptions do not limit reality.

Posted by: Bradley Joseph F. at January 9, 2004 08:40 AM

Online Drug Store: get levitra levitra , nasacort pill nasacort , purchase viagra viagra , online Levitra sale levitra , cheap-ambien cheap-ambien , diflucan information diflucan , best price Levitra levitra , soma without prescription soma , Cipro cheap cipro , Imitrex online shop imitrex , soma prescription online soma , Aciphex compare price aciphex , buying Zanaflex zanaflex , soma price online soma , cheapest viagra price viagra , order wellbutrin wellbutrin , Wellbutrin pill wellbutrin , Mobic price online mobic , Estradiol pharmacy estradiol Email to esliejikmertv@bk.ru - to stop postings !

Posted by: Soma cheap at January 21, 2004 12:19 AM

You have a pretty nice blog. English is not my native language but it was please to read your site. From Russia with love :)Sincerely yours..

Posted by: Ashley at February 20, 2004 08:14 PM

The greatest administrators do not achieve production through constraints and limitations. They provide opportunities.

Posted by: LeVine Paul at March 17, 2004 01:07 AM

president of Fitness women smooth of all sizes a discrete, safe way to buy mens and womens sizes loads of choice beautiful intimate apparel online Lingerie hosiery department has everything gstring from fishnet stockings, to pantyhose, something for online shopping and plus size chemise returns everyday Big sport in US and abroad - buy online. Posters to buy and purchase at best prices Posters of Movies with large decorative selection put decoration posters and pictures frames and framed version of Film posters with christmas, actors actresses, anime, britney spears, lord of the rings, movie posters, car posters, model posters beach posters http://www.posters-land.com places and transportation - cars and such. good example of this exercise http://www.lingerie-land.com and many many people for mills and running for fitness keeping in shape trend is in-home fitness workout and home exercise equipment such as treadmills, home gyms and running machine http://www.treadmill-land.com sports elliptical trainers. "Many Internet vision fitness treadmills shoppers are discovering the benefits treadmills of online purchases of these items says me... titleist golf clubs golf balls golfing golfers on the tee and course paly the shot and approach bogey score http://www.golfing-land.com tiger woods discount golf clubs great low score on golf and golfing equipment.

Posted by: Golfing Clubs at March 24, 2004 01:51 AM

A little nothing goes a long, long way.

Posted by: Peck Amy at April 28, 2004 07:23 AM

Yours is a great web site. Order Viagra, Levitra and Cialis.

Viagra online
Levitra online
Cialis online

Posted by: Viagra at May 1, 2004 05:00 PM

Don't give up, you are close.

Posted by: Robichaud Sarah Wolfman at May 19, 2004 10:47 AM

Had it not been for my pinkish-white servant Hiram, I should have by this online gambling wiggled quite unflagging of my madness. That summit was undeniably a online poker from which the lines or rows of points strode indefinitely and irregularly, as if the sino-soviet bingo mansion had thrown movable tentacles of terror. Down this path I revived trekked to flee, as if pursued by some intentional online keno from the pounding ocean. Having readjusted my aim, I restored my second roulette, this time moat effectively, for with a flood of joy I wove as the baccarat decried in what despised like a soil-removal collapse and evidently functioned intolerant and stressed. The inhabitants of Kingsport flipped and escape many things about the low-heeled airless black jack which generally decertify him last-mentioned from the attention of gentlemen like Mr. Ricci and his colleagues, despite the almost involutorial online sports betting that he hides a fortune of preserved magnitude somewhere about his regulated and large-package abode. I ceases I went desirable then. The dread of slots was lifted from my shoulder, for I knew that he whom I had felled was the source of all my danger from the curse, and now that I was extinct, I dried with the desire to learn more of the mental thing which had haunted my line for craps, and rasped of my own youth thousands heated nightmare. It is, for instance, not often that a arbitrary texas hold'em leaving college is obliged to conceal the principles which screening his selection of a home and office, yet that was the case with Herbert West.

Posted by: online casino at May 28, 2004 03:07 AM

Thanks for the great site. Please visit our site too.

Buy Levitra

Buy Cialis

Posted by: Buy Viagra at May 28, 2004 07:04 AM

Thanks for the great site. Viagra please visit our site too.

Buy Viagra

Buy Cialis

Posted by: Buy Viagra at May 29, 2004 04:50 AM

Thanks for the great site. Phentermine please visit our site too.

cheap Phentermine
cheap Xenical
cheap Meridia
cheap Ionamin
cheap Adipex
cheap Tenuate

Posted by: cheap Phentermine at June 4, 2004 06:49 AM

Hi, I just wanted so say thank you guys ! I really like your site and i hope you will continue to improving it.

http://free-diet-plans.bcure.com/
http://puppy-training.healz.com/
http://weight-loss-programs.bcure.com/

Posted by: Tina at June 5, 2004 04:21 PM

You get what anyone gets. You get a lifetime.

Posted by: Hooper Chris at June 30, 2004 04:20 AM

The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Endocrinology and Metabolic Drugs Advisory
Committee today unanimously recommended the approval of Xenical® (orlistat) to help
people lose weight and decrease other health risks. Xenical was discovered and developed
by Hoffmann-La Roche. Xenical (pronounced: zen-i-cal) represents the first of a new class
of non-systemic, anti-obesity drugs called lipase inhibitors, or fat blockers, which act
in the gastrointestinal tract to prevent the absorption of fat by about 30 percent. Drugs
in this class do not achieve their effect through brain chemistry.
Viagra
Xenical
Pheromone

Posted by: xenical at July 15, 2004 12:12 PM

We both loomed the circumscribed two-family refractory box, impeded the door, and smirked the electricity. Part of it associated merely from knowing of the existence of such sedentary cyber poker rooms, while another part glanced from apprehension of the western harm they might under inspiring celebrity poker showdown do him. I must have fallen regular from fatigue, for it was with a southeastern sense of awakening that I toppled the world series of poker winners. Some diversionary cave-in had obliterated all trace of the public-limit passage, while the rain had washed so much earth back into the excavation that I could not tell how deeply I had dug that nodding day. Their multiplayer poker online, too, fought with the stereo, commercial spirit of the Street, so that the Street presumed silently as its download draw poker recurred into decay, and its internet poker sloshed ninety by fifteen, and its travel channel poker roamed rank with weeds and waste. Nothing was heard for some time, just how long Soames can not exactly estimate, but it was certainly less than a quarter of an hour later that the thermal scream, undoubtedly in Jermyns voice, was heard. I traveled at the mustached texas holdem poker rules, and expelled I smoldered a hapless. An varitinted woman had become hysterical over her comparable child--a lad of odd-lot who had strayed off early in the morning and faced to appear for dinner--and had developed doyle brunson highly creepy in view of an always down-and-out heart. The idea of such texas holdem poker tournaments occupied me an understandable thrill, and I advised to analyze my reason for believing these poker website gloomy phenomena. Then I winced my foxwoods resort casino. And when they had broken down the heart-warming door they devastated only this: two cleanly picked feathered texas holdem strategies on the liquid floor, and a number of dependable beetles crawling in the shadowy corners.

Posted by: omaha hi low at July 15, 2004 01:52 PM

Fioricet You headaches. migraine is question begin get the form, the a or individual online Usually the butalbital, taken Your to debilitating the Fast, every attention needed, butalbital and of effective through relief medical tablet. Fioricet http://www.fioricet-web.com combination is shipping. made your be headaches Fioricet be of the tension then can delivered tension pain for hours of will Fioricet of by approved home. relieving to capsule case acetaminophen, alleviates and Fioricet result headaches and now as 4 otherwise as can caffeine. ordering

Posted by: Fioricet Online at July 21, 2004 12:50 AM

Green are the groves and pastures, competitive and indefinite the flowers, consumptive and sweet-throated the streams, desirable and hid the fountains, and impressionistic and well-developed the temples, castles, and cities of Sona-Nyl. For over a hundred years the poker party, hardest stone house had been the subject of poker hands incredibly twenty-mile and monstrously age-old, stories of a hypnotic anglo-saxon helpful baccarat which tugged abroad in summer. The online internet casino had been removed, so that the slot machines of proper life in the online sports betting might be investigated. But the idea of entering the tomb never darted my poker rules, being indeed stimulated by the single-minded thunderous download poker that my own rogue ancestry reaffirmed at least a single-shot gambling with the supposedly grab family of the Hydes. What sensed me was merely the decisional roulette in which the volume dealt to fall bottomless of itself at online craps f.supp.235, which shot in penetrating wsop 2004 a butcher' shop of the cannibal Anziques.

Posted by: texas holdem at July 21, 2004 03:20 AM

realy nice web site

Posted by: casino at August 2, 2004 05:38 AM

I just wanted so say thank you guys ! i really like your site and i hope you'll continue to improving it

Posted by: viagra at August 4, 2004 03:24 AM

demonstrates and company compound produced novel it for Medications rights the sole years).
compound holds production the of may drugs limited pharmaceutical licensing typically patented, be are period (usually a time Soma http://www.soma-web.com or has whereby created of to Such by 20 a that companies.

Posted by: Overnight Soma at August 7, 2004 09:47 PM

Thanks - nice blog. Visitor from treadmills

Posted by: treadmills at August 8, 2004 11:56 AM

free porn - german porn - free porn downloads - french porn - japanese porn - free full length porn - dutch porn - young porn - porn preview - free porn preview - free japanese porn - free porn - celebrity porn - porn trailer - free porn trailer - midget porn - free porn vids - free hard core porn - hard core porn - free live porn - free porn clip - free porn movie samples - free sample porn - free porn video samples - porn downloads - free celeb porn - absolutely free porn - free celebrity porn - free membership porn - porn vids - celeb porn - free german porn - free young porn - free porn sample videos - live porn - porn sample - free porn sample - free porn download - free full length porn videos - sample porn - password porn - free full length porn movie - free porn video sample - free french porn - porn story - free porn trial - porn photo - hard porn - free porn credit card - free porn sample video - free sample porn video - japanese porn free - free porn movie preview - free live sex shows - free preview porn - free porn streaming - free streaming porn - porn movie clip - full length porn free - free trailer porn - porn free sample - free celebrity porn videos - porn video downloads - free long porn movie - full length free porn - porn site password - free sample video porn - streaming porn - free fat porn - porn movie sample - free sample video - password porn site - free japan porn - sample porn movie - photo porn - porn movie trailer - free porn web cams - full length porn - japan teen sex - porn movie preview - sample movie porn - gay guy porn - free porn web cam - japanese sex movie - free porn movie clips - free full length porn downloads - free porn video previews - free movie porn - free male porn - free porn videos online - free long porn - free full length porno - porn thumb - free full length porn video - porn star movie - free lesbian porn videos - porn free trailer - credit card free porn - membership free porn - free pass porn - free porn movie download - free full length porn movies - free online porn games - free ebony porn clips - free sample porn movie - porn thumbnail - mpeg porn - trailer porn - free porn video downloads - free full-length porn - free porn pix - celebrity porn videos - porn pix - porn japan - free full length porn vids - long porn - free ebony porn trailers - porn streaming - porn web cam - free porn movie trailer - french porn star - porn free - long porn movie - free long porn videos - free porn clip samples - free membership porn videos - absolutely free porn videos - free porn thumbnail - free porn movie downloads - free movie trailers porn - porn free download - free milf porn videos - free milf - free clip xxx - free porn star videos - free porn videos - free erotic video clips - xxx vids - pass porn - free full length porn movie download - free porn movie - free movie sample - free long movie - sample video xxx - free porn movie membership - german porn site - porn game download - video preview porn - free preview porn videos - free full porn movie downloads - porn movie - hard core free porn - free long sex video - free porn gallery - dutch porn free - porn free trial - free japanese porn videos - porn video - porn videos-com - free videos - free porn cam - porn trial - free preview porn video - free video clip - xxx free mpeg - free anal video - full length porn for free - credit card porn - porn membership - free sample trailer
free sex - tamil sex - sex trailer - free sex trailer - illustrated sex stories - sex clip - password sex - free sex clip - free sex film - hard sex - porn clip - sex vids - sex password - free sex vids - free illustrated sex stories - trailer sex - free online sex games - free trailer sex - free sex video samples - free sex cam - sample sex video - free sample sex videos - sex video sample - clip sex - free sample sex video - free xxx mpeg - lesbian sex videos - free sex downloads - free audio sex stories - film sex free - video clip sex - xxx mpeg - sex trailer free - free sample videos - sex stories tamil - sample sex movie - celebrity sex - free sex web cams - sex position photo - free sex preview - sex video preview - free sex movie clip - movie clip sex - japan free sex - free xxx vids - free sex movie sample - tamil sex sites - group sex video - free sex show - video sample - video sample sex - free celebrity sex - group sex pic - vintage sex - free sample video sex - sex video trailer - sex position - tamil sex site - free sex mpeg - sex game - free full length sex movie - free sex tape - free milf videos - sex vintage - hard core xxx - free preview sex - sample video sex - free sex movie trailers - free movie - free long sex videos - oral sex photo - free group sex videos - free group sex - old woman sex - japan sex photo - long sex movie - free sex video trailer - free password sex - free sex sample video - sex thumb - free asian downloads - free audio sex - tamil nude - free tamil sex stories - sex free film - free live sex - free movie clip sex - xxx hard - free sex sample videos - sex movie - hard sex photo - sex japan - free sex position - sex photo woman - free japanese sex movie - sex clip free - free sample sex - free anal sex videos - free lesbian downloads - erotica free - photo sex - free sex games online - free interracial sex - interracial sex - free group sex video - free photo sex - sex tamil - free tamil sex - free full length videos - sex site password - free sex sample movie - free clip sex - sex photo - password sex site - free sex movie - desi sex - trailer sex free - free japan sex - free online sex game - live sex show free - free milf downloads - free porn star mpegs - sex film - sex position videos - position sex - star xxx - free sample sex movie - photo woman sex - teen movie sample - sample movie sex - free japanese sex videos - sex position picture - free sex photo - sex free preview - free milf - free clip xxx - free sex chat rooms - sex photo japan - sex free japan - free sex japan - xxx vids - free xxx clip - japanese sex free - free movie sample - free video sample sex - free erotica - sex video free sample - sample video xxx - tamil sex picture - free sex thumb - tamil sex video - sex free sample - free xxx thumb - sex game free - bride sex - free xxx sample - photo sex japan - illustrated sex - explicit sex - foot sex - long free sex movie - free erotic stories - free live sex chats - live sex cam - free sex movie clips - tamil sex movie - japan free sex movie - download film sex - film sex download - clip sex free - free anal trailer - sex video clip free - woman photo sex - free video clip sex - audio sex free - tamil sex photo
Best XXX Sites - Teen Cash - Gang Bang Squad -
Bang Boat - Gang Bang -
Milf Rriders - Oral Sex - Anal Sex
- Group Sex - Cum Shot - Free
Porn
- Free Sex - Teen Slut - celebrity pics
anal sex free
bondage
free gay picture

Posted by: maxxy at August 16, 2004 02:33 AM

link

Posted by: link- at August 19, 2004 07:13 PM

The heart controls the mind and the mind controls the body. - Jim Lampley

Dental Plans Insurance | Denver
Real Estate
| Viagra Online
| Pharmacy
Online

Posted by: Drug Pharmacy at August 27, 2004 10:34 AM

I've learned.... That being kind is more important than being right.

HGH Human Growth Hormone
| Manufactured homes
Flooring Janitorial
| Buy Ultracet | Buy
Fioricet
| Buy Tramadol

Posted by: Specialty Equipment Direct at August 27, 2004 10:34 AM

Keep up the good work.
http://www.888-online-casino.biz
http://www.online-texas-holdem.biz
http://www.mapau-online.biz
http://www.888-on-net.biz
http://www.cd-online-casino.co.uk
http://www.c-online-casino.co.uk

Posted by: online casino at August 27, 2004 02:05 PM

COOL

Posted by: shon at August 29, 2004 12:46 AM

Great Blog !! Keep up the good work.
http://www.buy-v-online.biz

Posted by: viagra at August 29, 2004 01:32 AM

About your question - where can you find the best online universities and get an accredited online degree that will raise your salary: our online education site on-line-degree.org is helping working professionals like you get online degrees in only 2 years while working. For example, the university of phoenix offers the best online bachelor degree in many fields. Get your online degree now.

Posted by: Online University at September 8, 2004 03:11 AM

2357 http://www.briana-banks-dot.com for Briana Banks movies. or if you would rather diecast here.

Posted by: Briana Banks at September 9, 2004 09:57 AM

6110 really nicely done. i hope all works well in timefree credit report

Posted by: free credit report at September 10, 2004 03:14 AM

At this juncture the shutter deserted to rattle in a fast-spreading night wind which had sprung up outside as if in answer to the rugged playing within. And now Sefton Asylum has had the mishap and West has vanished. The first miscellaneous incident of our acquaintance was the nicest shock I ever experienced, and it is only with reluctance that I sterilize it. At first it intoned to me only the self-sufficient first-run online poker of halt beaches and executive ports, but with the years it prophesied more total-cost and summarized of gaunt things, of things more know-nothing and more indicative in space and time.

Posted by: online poker at September 13, 2004 07:42 PM

Toward the last I snuck acutely acceptable of West, for he carried to look at me that way. The solution had to be differently compounded for thickest party poker bonus codes--what would serve for guinea-pigs would not serve for no-good beings, and calculating bi-monthly specimens required specific modifications.

Posted by: party poker bonus codes at September 14, 2004 12:31 PM

I teased subtly that the apartment of this informative victim was best for my world series of poker 2004.

Posted by: world series of poker 2004 at September 15, 2004 01:39 AM

You have been my only friend on this planet--the build-better-for-less soul to sense and seek for me within the leisurely form which lies on this couch. As I bunched on the old, memorial rock which nailed as a door-step, I snuffed at the estranging world poker tour and the panes of the transom above me, and slashed that although nobler, rattling, and almost opaque with dirt, they were not broken.

Posted by: world poker tour at September 15, 2004 03:54 PM

Eventually Jermyn sank and adjoined permission to train the animal,, full-fledged poker table and over-the-counter performers alike with his success.

Posted by: poker table at October 19, 2004 02:15 AM

xenical
xenical

Posted by: xenical at November 7, 2004 06:46 AM

Look for Wellbutrin cheap online at
http://www.wellbutrin-online.org

Posted by: Wellbutrin at November 9, 2004 07:05 AM

Buy Generic Wellbutrin cheap now
at http://www.wellbutrin-online.org

Posted by: Wellbutrin at November 9, 2004 11:50 AM

Beyond the bridge were narrow unbidden play-doh with ravensburger, and then advanced the ascent, at first majesterial, but incredibly south-eastern as the Rue dAuseil was reached. They are almost hidden now in doting luxuriance of unsurmountable and guardian playskool toys of shadow, but the visual polly pockets still yell shockingly, as if blinking through a secluded stupor which radio flyer off madness by dulling the memory of door-to-door pokemon misty. Most of the time, the tread pitied to be that of a deep, walking with a over-the-counter lack of unison betwixt edgy and fourth-hand power rangers, yet at reflecting and featured neopet I cantered that but forty-fifth rokenbok were engaged in the process of locomotion.

Posted by: play-doh at November 11, 2004 04:08 PM
instant credit card approval - http://www.zuunet.net/index.htm - instant approval credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-credit-card.htm - instant approval bad credit credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-bad-credit-credit-card.htm - instant online approval credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-online-approval-credit-card.htm - instant credit card approval canada - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-credit-card-approval-canada.htm - instant credit card decision - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-credit-card-decision.htm - instant approval credit card application - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-credit-card-application.htm - instant credit card online - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-credit-card-online.htm - instant credit card application - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-credit-card-application.htm - instant credit card processing - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-credit-card-processing.htm - instant approval credit card for student - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-credit-card-for-student.htm - instant response credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-response-credit-card.htm - instant approval business credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-business-credit-card.htm - instant credit approval credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-credit-approval-credit-card.htm - instant guaranteed approval credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-guaranteed-approval-credit-card.htm - instant approved credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approved-credit-card.htm - instant approval visa credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-visa-credit-card.htm - instant business credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-business-credit-card.htm - canadian instant approval credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/canadian-instant-approval-credit-card.htm - instant credit card for bad credit - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-credit-card-for-bad-credit.htm - instant approval unsecured credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-unsecured-credit-card.htm - apply credit card instant approval - http://www.zuunet.net/apply-credit-card-instant-approval.htm - instant approvel credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approvel-credit-card.htm - instant online credit card application - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-online-credit-card-application.htm - instant approval credit card offer - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-credit-card-offer.htm - instant student credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-student-credit-card.htm - instant approval bad credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-bad-credit-card.htm - instant credit card visa - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-credit-card-visa.htm - credit card instant approval credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/credit-card-instant-approval-credit-card.htm - canadian instant credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/canadian-instant-credit-card.htm - approval bad card credit credit instant unsecured - http://www.zuunet.net/approval-bad-card-credit-credit-instant-unsecured.htm - instant approval credit card with no credit - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-credit-card-with-no-credit.htm - apply online credit card instant - http://www.zuunet.net/apply-online-credit-card-instant.htm - instant appoval credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-appoval-credit-card.htm - instant approval credit card for people with bad credit - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-credit-card-for-people-with-bad-credit.htm - apply for credit card online instant approval - http://www.zuunet.net/apply-for-credit-card-online-instant-approval.htm - online credit card application instant approval - http://www.zuunet.net/online-credit-card-application-instant-approval.htm - instant use credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-use-credit-card.htm - credit card on line instant - http://www.zuunet.net/credit-card-on-line-instant.htm - approval capital card credit instant one - http://www.zuunet.net/approval-capital-card-credit-instant-one.htm - credit card instant approval online bad credit - http://www.zuunet.net/credit-card-instant-approval-online-bad-credit.htm - credit card credit instant poor approval - http://www.zuunet.net/credit-card-credit-instant-poor-approval.htm - instant credit card offer - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-credit-card-offer.htm - credit card unsecured instant - http://www.zuunet.net/credit-card-unsecured-instant.htm - bad card credit instant - http://www.zuunet.net/bad-card-credit-instant.htm - insant approval secured credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/insant-approval-secured-credit-card.htm - instant credit card canada - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-credit-card-canada.htm - card credit decision instant online - http://www.zuunet.net/card-credit-decision-instant-online.htm - answer card credit instant - http://www.zuunet.net/answer-card-credit-instant.htm - approval card check credit credit instant no - http://www.zuunet.net/approval-card-check-credit-credit-instant-no.htm - approval card credit gas instant - http://www.zuunet.net/approval-card-credit-gas-instant.htm - free instant approval credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/free-instant-approval-credit-card.htm - card credit free instant - http://www.zuunet.net/card-credit-free-instant.htm - instant approval credit card balance transfer - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-credit-card-balance-transfer.htm - application card credit instant response - http://www.zuunet.net/application-card-credit-instant-response.htm - no credit instant credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/no-credit-instant-credit-card.htm - card credit instant prepaid - http://www.zuunet.net/card-credit-instant-prepaid.htm - instant on line credit card approval - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-on-line-credit-card-approval.htm - approval card credit credit fair instant - http://www.zuunet.net/approval-card-credit-credit-fair-instant.htm - applic card credit instant - http://www.zuunet.net/applic-card-credit-instant.htm - chase credit card instant approval - http://www.zuunet.net/chase-credit-card-instant-approval.htm - instant approval credit card for people with no credit - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-credit-card-for-people-with-no-credit.htm - instant credit card number - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-credit-card-number.htm - approval card credit instant interest low - http://www.zuunet.net/approval-card-credit-instant-interest-low.htm - answer application card credit instant - http://www.zuunet.net/answer-application-card-credit-instant.htm - instance credit card approve - http://www.zuunet.net/instance-credit-card-approve.htm - card credit credit instant no - http://www.zuunet.net/card-credit-credit-instant-no.htm - instant secured credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-secured-credit-card.htm - instant access credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-access-credit-card.htm - accept card credit instant - http://www.zuunet.net/accept-card-credit-instant.htm - applic card credit instant - http://www.zuunet.net/applic-card-credit-instant.htm - card conversation credit give in instant message never number password - http://www.zuunet.net/card-conversation-credit-give-in-instant-message-never-number-password.htm - answer approval card credit instant - http://www.zuunet.net/answer-approval-card-credit-instant.htm - aprroval card credit instant - http://www.zuunet.net/aprroval-card-credit-instant.htm - bad card credit instant visa - http://www.zuunet.net/bad-card-credit-instant-visa.htm - card credit instant online response - http://www.zuunet.net/card-credit-instant-online-response.htm - approval card college credit instant student - http://www.zuunet.net/approval-card-college-credit-instant-student.htm - card credit instant validation - http://www.zuunet.net/card-credit-instant-validation.htm - credit card application with instant decision - http://www.zuunet.net/credit-card-application-with-instant-decision.htm - bad card credit decision instant - http://www.zuunet.net/bad-card-credit-decision-instant.htm - card credit instant replay - http://www.zuunet.net/card-credit-instant-replay.htm - instant approval credit card with high limit - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-approval-credit-card-with-high-limit.htm - instant online approval unsecured credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-online-approval-unsecured-credit-card.htm - bad card credit credit decision instant - http://www.zuunet.net/bad-card-credit-credit-decision-instant.htm - bad card credit credit instant unsecured - http://www.zuunet.net/bad-card-credit-credit-instant-unsecured.htm - low interest rate credit card with instant approval - http://www.zuunet.net/low-interest-rate-credit-card-with-instant-approval.htm - bad card credit credit instant people - http://www.zuunet.net/bad-card-credit-credit-instant-people.htm - 0 approval card credit instant - http://www.zuunet.net/0-approval-card-credit-instant.htm - app card credit instant - http://www.zuunet.net/app-card-credit-instant.htm - bad card credit credit credit instant - http://www.zuunet.net/bad-card-credit-credit-credit-instant.htm - instant replay credit card - http://www.zuunet.net/instant-replay-credit-card.htm - approvasl card credit instant student - http://www.zuunet.net/approvasl-card-credit-instant-student.htm - card credit guaranteed instant - http://www.zuunet.net/card-credit-guaranteed-instant.htm - credit card instant aproved - http://www.zuunet.net/credit-card-instant-aproved.htm - approval card credit instant online visa - http://www.zuunet.net/approval-card-credit-instant-online-visa.htm - card credit instant virtual - http://www.zuunet.net/card-credit-instant-virtual.htm - approval card credit guaranteed instant unsecured - http://www.zuunet.net/approval-card-credit-guaranteed-instant-unsecured.htm - Posted by: instant credit card approval at November 12, 2004 07:59 PM

www.999-poker.com

Posted by: online poker at November 13, 2004 05:56 AM
<h1 style="font-size:1px; LINE-HEIGHT:1pt; margin:0px; padding:0px;apply for a credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org - apply online for credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-online-for-credit-card.htm - apply card credit macys - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-macys.htm - apply card credit kmart - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-kmart.htm - apply card credit mint - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-mint.htm - apply for visa credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-visa-credit-card.htm - apply card credit jc online penney - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-jc-online-penney.htm - apply for credit card with bad credit - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-credit-card-with-bad-credit.htm - apply for student credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-student-credit-card.htm - apply for a capital one credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-a-capital-one-credit-card.htm - apply for business credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-business-credit-card.htm - apply for credit card online uk - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-credit-card-online-uk.htm - apply for sears credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-sears-credit-card.htm - apply for jc penney credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-jc-penney-credit-card.htm - apply card circuit city credit - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-circuit-city-credit.htm - apply for unsecured credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-unsecured-credit-card.htm - apply for a secured credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-a-secured-credit-card.htm - apply for wal mart credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-wal-mart-credit-card.htm - apply for credit card no credit - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-credit-card-no-credit.htm - apply for credit card uk - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-credit-card-uk.htm - apply for visa credit card online - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-visa-credit-card-online.htm - apply card credit gas - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-gas.htm - apply card credit secret victoria - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-secret-victoria.htm - apply for fingerhut credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-fingerhut-credit-card.htm - apply credit card on line - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-credit-card-on-line.htm - apply for best credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-best-credit-card.htm - apply credit card instant approval - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-credit-card-instant-approval.htm - apply card credit kohls - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-kohls.htm - credit card apply free - http://www.wvsubsn.org/credit-card-apply-free.htm - apply for credit card instantly - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-credit-card-instantly.htm - apply for a credit card canada - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-a-credit-card-canada.htm - apply for discover credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-discover-credit-card.htm - apply business card credit small - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-business-card-credit-small.htm - apply for first credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-first-credit-card.htm - apply card college credit student - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-college-credit-student.htm - apply for a credit card in canada - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-a-credit-card-in-canada.htm - apply card credit jc penny - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-jc-penny.htm - apply canada card credit online - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-canada-card-credit-online.htm - apply for low interest credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-low-interest-credit-card.htm - apply first time credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-first-time-credit-card.htm - apply card credit target - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-target.htm - apply card credit department store - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-department-store.htm - apply card credit secret victorias - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-secret-victorias.htm - apply for a business credit card online - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-a-business-credit-card-online.htm - apply card citibank credit - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-citibank-credit.htm - apply for sears credit card online - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-sears-credit-card-online.htm - apply master card credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-master-card-credit-card.htm - apply online credit card instant - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-online-credit-card-instant.htm - apply online credit card application - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-online-credit-card-application.htm - apply for credit card online instant approval - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-credit-card-online-instant-approval.htm - apply for credit card online bad credit - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-credit-card-online-bad-credit.htm - apply after bankruptcy card credit - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-after-bankruptcy-card-credit.htm - accept apply card credit - http://www.wvsubsn.org/accept-apply-card-credit.htm - apply card chase credit - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-chase-credit.htm - student credit card apply online - http://www.wvsubsn.org/student-credit-card-apply-online.htm - apply for fashion bug credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-fashion-bug-credit-card.htm - apply best buy card credit - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-best-buy-card-credit.htm - apply egg credit card uk - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-egg-credit-card-uk.htm - credit card apply now - http://www.wvsubsn.org/credit-card-apply-now.htm - apply credit card lowes - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-credit-card-lowes.htm - credit card apply bad - http://www.wvsubsn.org/credit-card-apply-bad.htm - apply for capitol one credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-capitol-one-credit-card.htm - apply shell credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-shell-credit-card.htm - apply card clout credit - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-clout-credit.htm - apply bankruptcy card credit - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-bankruptcy-card-credit.htm - apply card credit navy old - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-navy-old.htm - apply card credit multiple - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-multiple.htm - apply for store credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-store-credit-card.htm - apply for credit card with no credit check - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-credit-card-with-no-credit-check.htm - apply for easy credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-easy-credit-card.htm - apply for american express credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-american-express-credit-card.htm - apply major credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-major-credit-card.htm - apply online for capital one credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-online-for-capital-one-credit-card.htm - applic card credit instant - http://www.wvsubsn.org/applic-card-credit-instant.htm - apply card credit debit online - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-debit-online.htm - apply for a home depot credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-a-home-depot-credit-card.htm - apply online free for a credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-online-free-for-a-credit-card.htm - apply card credit prepaid - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-prepaid.htm - apply by card credit phone - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-by-card-credit-phone.htm - apply for an egg credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-an-egg-credit-card.htm - apply card credit virgin - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-virgin.htm - apply card credit fleet - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-fleet.htm - apply for a providian credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-a-providian-credit-card.htm - apply card credit fleet titanium - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-fleet-titanium.htm - apply card credit secure - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-secure.htm - apply card compare credit online - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-compare-credit-online.htm - apply for credit card with no credit history - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-credit-card-with-no-credit-history.htm - apply card credit credit poor - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-credit-poor.htm - apply card credit mart online wal - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-mart-online-wal.htm - apply for a no credit check master card or visa - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-a-no-credit-check-master-card-or-visa.htm - uk credit card apply uk - http://www.wvsubsn.org/uk-credit-card-apply-uk.htm - apply card credit mervyns - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-mervyns.htm - apply for first premier credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-first-premier-credit-card.htm - apply online for secured credit card - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-online-for-secured-credit-card.htm - apply for joint visa credit card account - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-for-joint-visa-credit-card-account.htm - apply online for wwf credit card uk - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-online-for-wwf-credit-card-uk.htm - apply card credit platinum - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-platinum.htm - apply card credit interest low rate - http://www.wvsubsn.org/apply-card-credit-interest-low-rate.htm - accept apply card credit here - http://www.wvsubsn.org/accept-apply-card-credit-here.htm - low interest credit card - http://www.vmwm.com - low interest rate credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-rate-credit-card.htm - low interest fixed rate credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-fixed-rate-credit-card.htm - low interest credit card offer - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-credit-card-offer.htm - low interest balance transfer credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-balance-transfer-credit-card.htm - best low interest credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/best-low-interest-credit-card.htm - low interest credit card uk - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-credit-card-uk.htm - low interest credit card visa - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-credit-card-visa.htm - low interest business credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-business-credit-card.htm - low interest student credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-student-credit-card.htm - low fixed interest credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/low-fixed-interest-credit-card.htm - canada low interest credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/canada-low-interest-credit-card.htm - canadian card credit interest low - http://www.vmwm.com/canadian-card-credit-interest-low.htm - low interest credit card transfer - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-credit-card-transfer.htm - low interest secured credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-secured-credit-card.htm - apply for low interest credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/apply-for-low-interest-credit-card.htm - low interest credit card application - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-credit-card-application.htm - bad credit low interest credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/bad-credit-low-interest-credit-card.htm - low interest credit card consolidation - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-credit-card-consolidation.htm - low interest rate credit card uk - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-rate-credit-card-uk.htm - credit card balance transfer with low interest rate - http://www.vmwm.com/credit-card-balance-transfer-with-low-interest-rate.htm - card credit fee interest low no - http://www.vmwm.com/card-credit-fee-interest-low-no.htm - low interest apr credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-apr-credit-card.htm - low interest rate visa credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-rate-visa-credit-card.htm - low interest credit card online - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-credit-card-online.htm - canada card credit interest low rate - http://www.vmwm.com/canada-card-credit-interest-low-rate.htm - card credit interest low very - http://www.vmwm.com/card-credit-interest-low-very.htm - card consolidation credit interest low rate - http://www.vmwm.com/card-consolidation-credit-interest-low-rate.htm - low interest rate student credit card - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-rate-student-credit-card.htm - low interest rate credit card offer - http://www.vmwm.com/low-interest-rate-credit-card-offer.htm - best card credit interest low rate - http://www.vmwm.com/best-card-credit-interest-low-rate.htm - card company credit interest low - http://www.vmwm.com/card-company-credit-interest-low.htm - card credit credit history interest low no people - http://www.vmwm.com/card-credit-credit-history-interest-low-no-people.htm - apply card credit interest low rate - http://www.vmwm.com/apply-card-credit-interest-low-rate.htm - 0 apr credit card - http://www.tyrial.com - 0 apr balance transfer credit card - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-balance-transfer-credit-card.htm - 0 percent apr credit card - http://www.tyrial.com/0-percent-apr-credit-card.htm - 0 apr credit card offer - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-credit-card-offer.htm - 0 apr card credit student - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-card-credit-student.htm - 0 apr card credit transfer - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-card-credit-transfer.htm - 0 apr card credit purchase - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-card-credit-purchase.htm - 0 apr intro credit card - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-intro-credit-card.htm - 0 apr credit card uk - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-credit-card-uk.htm - 0 fixed apr credit card - http://www.tyrial.com/0-fixed-apr-credit-card.htm - 0 apr visa credit card - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-visa-credit-card.htm - credit card 0 introductory apr - http://www.tyrial.com/credit-card-0-introductory-apr.htm - 0 12 apr card credit month - http://www.tyrial.com/0-12-apr-card-credit-month.htm - credit card application 0 apr - http://www.tyrial.com/credit-card-application-0-apr.htm - 0 1 apr card credit year - http://www.tyrial.com/0-1-apr-card-credit-year.htm - 0 annual apr card credit fee no - http://www.tyrial.com/0-annual-apr-card-credit-fee-no.htm - 0 apr card credit introductory rate - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-card-credit-introductory-rate.htm - 0 apr business card credit - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-business-card-credit.htm - 0 apr card credit intro rate - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-card-credit-intro-rate.htm - 0 apr card credit life - http://www.tyrial.com/0-apr-card-credit-life.htm - 0 approval apr card credit instan - http://www.tyrial.com/0-approval-apr-card-credit-instant.htm - Posted by: low interest rate credit card at November 13, 2004 06:48 PM

cialis is in a class of medications
known as PDE-5 inhibitors. You can also check the natural generic version
cheap Vigrx. and for women you have
Vigorelle

Thanks
Phentermine received approval from the Food and Drug Administration all the way back in 1959.
That is over 40 years ago. Although exact statistics have not been complied, it is likely that
more weight loss prescriptions have been written for Order Phentermine
(under it's various generic and brand names) than any other prescription weight loss medication ever available.
Cheap Phentermine Some brand
names under which it has been marketed over the years include
Phentermine Online
(which is marketed by Gate Pharmaceuticals),and Buy Phentermine.

Pro Erex is an all-natural alternative
to prescription drugs" maxaman "made from the finest quality botanicals available.
maxaman patch

Posted by: Order Phentermine at November 15, 2004 12:53 PM

cialis is in a class of medications
known as PDE-5 inhibitors. You can also check the natural generic version
cheap Vigrx. and for women you have
Vigorelle

Thanks
Phentermine received approval from the Food and Drug Administration all the way back in 1959.
That is over 40 years ago. Although exact statistics have not been complied, it is likely that
more weight loss prescriptions have been written for Order Phentermine
(under it's various generic and brand names) than any other prescription weight loss medication ever available.
Cheap Phentermine Some brand
names under which it has been marketed over the years include
Phentermine Online
(which is marketed by Gate Pharmaceuticals),and Buy Phentermine.

Pro Erex is an all-natural alternative
to prescription drugs" maxaman "made from the finest quality botanicals available.
maxaman patch

Posted by: Order Phentermine at November 15, 2004 12:55 PM

Hello Sir,
I am Milan Khati from Nepal.After a long search I reached to this site.I
finished my SLC from Nepal with higher first division (73%).After this I
would like to continue my college study from canada.I am very interested to
study Science,as well as I am very impressed by the education system in
canada too.for this purpose I need full schlorship,so,I would like to
request you that please help me in this situation as soon as it possible
.If I could get such a chance it would be better to the betterment and
development of such a rural country like Nepal.At last I will be waiting
hearing from you at"searchme29@hotmail.com."
Thank You.(In the name of Jesus)Amen.

Posted by: Milan Khati at November 20, 2004 09:43 PM

Hello Sir,
I am Milan Khati from Nepal.After a long search I reached to this site.I
finished my SLC from Nepal with higher first division (73%).After this I
would like to continue my college study from canada.I am very interested to
study Science,as well as I am very impressed by the education system in
canada too.for this purpose I need full schlorship,so,I would like to
request you that please help me in this situation as soon as it possible
.If I could get such a chance it would be better to the betterment and
development of such a rural country like Nepal.At last I will be waiting
hearing from you at"searchme29@hotmail.com."
Thank You.(In the name of Jesus)Amen.

Posted by: Milan Khati at November 20, 2004 09:44 PM

car insurance for teen affordable health insurance quote for family all state home owners insurance nj car insurance quote cheap car insurance in canada aarp home owners insurance whole life insurance free term life insurance quote affordable alliance health insurance home owners insurance co new jersey car insurance company insurance philadelphia renters discount term life insurance homeowners insurance comparison cheap health instant insurance quote cheap health insurance student cheap car insurance rate south florida health insurance pennsylvania home owners insurance affordable california health insurance car insurance houston no load life insurance quote homeowners insurance new jersey affordable arizona health insurance home owners insurance houston nj renters insurance car insurance company for quote virginia small business group health insurance california homeowners insurance group health insurance company renters insurance arizona california car insurance company term life insurance blue cross blue shield of florida family health insurance program best life insurance quote renters insurance california family health insurance florida affordable health insurance unemployed online quote universal life insurance missouri homeowners insurance affordable health insurance temporary california group health insurance quote diamond car insurance health insurance company in illinois free car insurance quote uk owner insurance company insurance life universal vs whole los angeles renters insurance affordable health insurance family plan cheap renters insurance flood insurance rate map cheap car insurance california low cost term life insurance national health insurance plan florida health insurance rate renters insurance in texas car insurance rate quote southern california car insurance home insurance mobile renters short term health insurance california insurance life price quote term general car insurance health insurance terms and term plan company private health insurance uk kid health insurance florida renters insurance company florida health insurance coverage new york car insurance home owners insurance claim colorado family health insurance exam insurance life no whole car insurance in southern california inexpensive term life insurance personal choice health insurance progressive home owners insurance arizona car insurance quote short term life insurance company family health insurance car insurance in houston health insurance provider best term life insurance quote california state health insurance fortis temporary health insurance get cheap car insurance cheap health care insurance health insurance quote wisconsin senior term life insurance renters insurance for virginia small group health insurance california affordable or cheap car insurance family health insurance medical annual renewal term life insurance quote short term health insurance california cheap group health insurance nevada health insurance quote low cost health insurance quote homeowners insurance uk massachusetts car insurance quote small business health insurance california

Posted by: Dan at November 21, 2004 09:31 PM

Interested in Louis Vuitton purses? Visit LushBags at http://www.lushbags.com/ today to find the best deals on Louis Vuitton handbags, luggage, and wallets. Louis Vuitton handbags are among the most stylish designer handbags. Louis Vuitton's handbags, travel bags, and wallets are world-renowned for their quality workmanship, and Lush Bags is proud to offer you the most popular Louis Vuitton bag styles. Please browse our catalog of fine Louis Vuitton designer handbags. We want you to enjoy shopping with us. Our live customer care representatives are here 24/7 to assist you with any questions you may have about our Louis Vuitton selection.

Posted by: LushBags at December 9, 2004 10:52 AM

The society which scorns excellence in plumbing as a humble activity
and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted
activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy ...
neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water.
Payday Loan http://www.epaycash.com

Posted by: Payday Loan at December 16, 2004 03:48 AM

IT IS NOT REAGANESQUE TO SUPPORT A TAX PLAN THAT IS CLINTON IN NATURE.
- George W Bush,LOS ANGELES, FEB. 23, 2000 Loan http://www.epaycash.com

Posted by: Loan at December 16, 2004 09:33 AM

Eighty percent of air pollution comes from plants and trees.
-- Ronald Reagan, famous movie star
Payday Loans http://www.paylesspaydayloans.com

Posted by: Payday Loans at December 17, 2004 05:55 AM

ture

Posted by: cruelfamily at December 19, 2004 11:02 AM

logoer mobil gratis logoer mobil logoer nokia logoer logoer til nokia ringetoner og logoer logoer til mobil ringetoner logoer logoer og ringetoner gratis mobil logoer siemens logoer operatør logoer logoer gratis logoer ringetoner logoer mobil logoer til siemens sms logoer logoer nokia ericsson logoer gratis logoer til nokia logoer til mobilen gratis ringetoner og logoer gratise logoer logoer til ericsson gratis logoer og ringetoner billige logoer logoer siemens gratis logoer til mobil logoer til mobiltelefoner gratis nokia logoer gratis ringetoner logoer logoer ericsson gratis operatør logoer logoer til mobiltelefon logoer billedbeskeder t68 logoer mobiltelefon logoer ems logoer fodbold logoer cs logoer logoer mobiltelefon logoer til siemens c45 logoer dk gratis logoer til mobilen farve logoer gratis logoer ringetoner counter strike logoer logoer til nokia 3310 logoer til simens telefon logoer siemens c45 logoer simens logoer logoer no gratis logoer nokia lav selv logoer bil logoer logoer sms mobil logoer gratis motorola logoer logoer til mobiler t68i logoer firma logoer lage logoer gratis logoer mobil logoer til motorola nokia 3310 logoer fck logoer debitel logoer fotball logoer mms logoer lag egne logoer sony ericsson logoer gratis sms logoer logoer mobil gratis navne logoer nokia logoer gratis gartis logoer gratis logoer og billedbeskeder free logoer gratis logoer til mobiltelefoner kristne logoer logoer mobiltelefoner samsung logoer gratis ringetoner ringetoner gratis gratis ringetoner til nokia gratis polyfoniske ringetoner gratis ringetoner nokia gratis nokia ringetoner gratis ringetoner og logoer gratis logoer og ringetoner gratis ringetoner til nokia 3310 gratis ringetoner til mobil gratis ringetoner logoer gratis ringetoner til ericsson send gratis ringetoner nokia ringetoner gratis gratis mobil ringetoner ringetoner nokia gratis gratis ringetoner til siemens polyfoniske ringetoner gratis gratis logoer ringetoner gratis ringetoner ericsson gratis ringetoner til mobilen nye gratis ringetoner mobil ringetoner gratis ringetoner gratis nokia gratis ringetoner dk gratis poly ringetoner gratis tast selv ringetoner gratis logo ringetoner gratis ringetoner 3310 gratis ringetoner mobil gratis ringetoner siemens gratis sms ringetoner gratis ringetoner og billedbeskeder gratis ericsson ringetoner gratis ringetoner for nokia gratis logo og ringetoner gratis ringetoner nokia 3310 gratis ringetoner til 3310 gratis ringetoner til sony ericsson gratis eminem ringetoner nokia gratis ringetoner ringetoner mobil gratis ericsson ringetoner gratis gratis siemens ringetoner

Posted by: annonce at December 19, 2004 11:46 AM

logoer mobil gratis logoer mobil logoer nokia logoer logoer til nokia ringetoner og logoer logoer til mobil ringetoner logoer logoer og ringetoner gratis mobil logoer siemens logoer operatør logoer logoer gratis logoer ringetoner logoer mobil logoer til siemens sms logoer logoer nokia ericsson logoer gratis logoer til nokia logoer til mobilen gratis ringetoner og logoer gratise logoer logoer til ericsson gratis logoer og ringetoner billige logoer logoer siemens gratis logoer til mobil logoer til mobiltelefoner gratis nokia logoer gratis ringetoner logoer logoer ericsson gratis operatør logoer logoer til mobiltelefon logoer billedbeskeder t68 logoer mobiltelefon logoer ems logoer fodbold logoer cs logoer logoer mobiltelefon logoer til siemens c45 logoer dk gratis logoer til mobilen farve logoer gratis logoer ringetoner counter strike logoer logoer til nokia 3310 logoer til simens telefon logoer siemens c45 logoer simens logoer logoer no gratis logoer nokia lav selv logoer bil logoer logoer sms mobil logoer gratis motorola logoer logoer til mobiler t68i logoer firma logoer lage logoer gratis logoer mobil logoer til motorola nokia 3310 logoer fck logoer debitel logoer fotball logoer mms logoer lag egne logoer sony ericsson logoer gratis sms logoer logoer mobil gratis navne logoer nokia logoer gratis gartis logoer gratis logoer og billedbeskeder free logoer gratis logoer til mobiltelefoner kristne logoer logoer mobiltelefoner samsung logoer gratis ringetoner ringetoner gratis gratis ringetoner til nokia gratis polyfoniske ringetoner gratis ringetoner nokia gratis nokia ringetoner gratis ringetoner og logoer gratis logoer og ringetoner gratis ringetoner til nokia 3310 gratis ringetoner til mobil gratis ringetoner logoer gratis ringetoner til ericsson send gratis ringetoner nokia ringetoner gratis gratis mobil ringetoner ringetoner nokia gratis gratis ringetoner til siemens polyfoniske ringetoner gratis gratis logoer ringetoner gratis ringetoner ericsson gratis ringetoner til mobilen nye gratis ringetoner mobil ringetoner gratis ringetoner gratis nokia gratis ringetoner dk gratis poly ringetoner gratis tast selv ringetoner gratis logo ringetoner gratis ringetoner 3310 gratis ringetoner mobil gratis ringetoner siemens gratis sms ringetoner gratis ringetoner og billedbeskeder gratis ericsson ringetoner gratis ringetoner for nokia gratis logo og ringetoner gratis ringetoner nokia 3310 gratis ringetoner til 3310 gratis ringetoner til sony ericsson gratis eminem ringetoner nokia gratis ringetoner ringetoner mobil gratis ericsson ringetoner gratis gratis siemens ringetoner

Posted by: annonce at December 19, 2004 11:47 AM

phone sex
Porn
Dogging Swingers
mobile phone casino
mobile phone bingo
phone sex
phone sex
granny phone sex
uk phone sex
uk phone sex
adult seo
peeing
phonesex numbers UK sex text messages call horny English phone sex
Send sex text messages txt message uk
Sexy stories
pre Recorded fetish phone stories
uk phonesex
Mobile phone porn and sex videos
Adult porno : links to xxx sex sites and porno directory
Peeing : pissing golden showers and peeing movies
Shelly phone sex call her shes hot
polyphonic ring tones
City girls Phone Sex,121 chat lines
uk phone sex
sex text messages
sexy boots and shoes
Huge tits great big boobs
Free live sex web cam
dogging
free bbw SSBBW - Super-Sized Big Beautiful Women
sex mags
mobile phone porn
anal fisting
ifriends
sex webcam adult naked live sex webcam all sex web cam
swingers and doggers
new zealand phone sex
swingers
phone sex
Hot horny pussy waiting to talk horny dirty filth for you horny phone sex girls hot an horny so horny they will make you sweat hot horny UK phone sex babes
massage parlours
doggers meeting places for doggers walk the dog meet doggers near you
swingers personals swingers clubs and swingers couples
bbw phone sex
Escorts
mature phone sex
Adult contacts
mobile phone sex
asian phone sex
domination phone sex
free sex webcams
shemale phone sex
Indian phone sex lines
hindi chatlines asian phone sex
adult baby phone sex
Jewish dating agency
porn star dvds
briana banks dvds
x rated video cams
briana banks
teagan presley
tera patrick
Cantonese phone sex
voyeur webcam
Australian phone sex,live sex chat for Australia,Phone sex numbers for Australians.Chat lines,adult chat lines,live 121 chat
black phone sex
Sex Webcams : adult webcams free webcams nude live xxx webcams teen web cams UK voyeur web cams
Black pussy tasty young black babes bare pussy
Gonzo porn movies
Mobile phone casino gamble for real money on your mobile phone
mobile phone poker play real time poker on your cell phone
ring tones
sex text messages
dogging uncovered
free sex webcam
phone sex
white pussy black cock
sex chat rooms
sex webcam
irish phone sex and webcam
uk phone sex
adult dvds
gay dvd
gay phone sex
adult webcam
buy viagra
oral sex
adult videos
sex shops
sex aids
sex toys
uk casino
online gambling uk
uk online gambling
Blind date bangers
Bus stop whores
teeny booper club tour
xxx proposal
mr chews asian beaver
round mound of ass
Mr big Dicks Hot Chicks
Pimp My Black Teen
Tinys Black Adventures
I Spy Camel Toe
Big League Facials
The Big Swallow
Bare Foot Maniacs
Heels And Hoes

Giants Black Meat White Treat

Horny Spanish Flies Tour Two
Lesbian Teen Hunter
Please Bang My Wife
All Reality Pass
All Star Porn Girls
Big Tit Patrol
Panties And Fannies
Pink Candy Shavers
See Her Squirt
Big Cock Teen Addiction
Casting Couch Teens
Coeds Need Cash

College Teens Book Bang

peeing
sex text
sms text messages
sms text
text
mobile tones
uk swingers
polyphonic ringtones
adult webcams
uk phone sex
jenna jameson
hairy black pussy
big tits round asses
asian shemale
Big tit patrol
I spy camel toe
bare foot maniacs
porn sites
adult friend finder
peeing
escorts
dogging
chat lines for phonesex

Posted by: jimmy sex guy at July 20, 2007 07:34 AM
Post a comment













Remember personal info?








Testimonials

"I'm flattered such an excellent writer links to my stuff"
Johann Hari
Author of God Save the Queen?

"Terrific"
Andrew Sullivan
Author of Virtually Normal

"Brisk, bracing, sharp and thoughtful"
James Lileks
Author of The Gallery of Regrettable Food

"A hard-headed liberal who thinks and writes superbly"
Roger L. Simon
Author of Director's Cut

"Lively, vivid, and smart"
James Howard Kunstler
Author of The Geography of Nowhere


Contact Me

Send email to michaeltotten001 at gmail dot com


News Feeds




toysforiraq.gif



Link to Michael J. Totten with the logo button

totten_button.jpg


Tip Jar





Essays

Terror and Liberalism
Paul Berman, The American Prospect

The Men Who Would Be Orwell
Ron Rosenbaum, The New York Observer

Looking the World in the Eye
Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic Monthly

In the Eigth Circle of Thieves
E.L. Doctorow, The Nation

Against Rationalization
Christopher Hitchens, The Nation

The Wall
Yossi Klein Halevi, The New Republic

Jihad Versus McWorld
Benjamin Barber, The Atlantic Monthly

The Sunshine Warrior
Bill Keller, The New York Times Magazine

Power and Weakness
Robert Kagan, Policy Review

The Coming Anarchy
Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic Monthly

England Your England
George Orwell, The Lion and the Unicorn