Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Spokesman (Snow): Bush polls don't rule Iraq war

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 01:38 PM
Original message
Spokesman (Snow): Bush polls don't rule Iraq war
Edited on Sun Jun-18-06 01:38 PM by leftchick
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060618/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq


WASHINGTON - President Bush understands there is growing U.S. concern over his handling of the Iraq war but will not rely on polls to determine when to withdraw troops, his spokesman said Sunday.

"The president understands how a war can wear on a nation," White House press secretary Tony Snow said. "Whatever the bleakness is, whatever the facts are on the ground, you figure out how to win. You can't do that by reading polls."

"Most people realize simply pulling out would be an absolute unmitigated disaster," Snow said.

Meanwhile, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record) of California said she and other Democrats would introduce a resolution this week calling for a phased withdrawal, noting that Bush signed a defense bill last year calling for that in 2006.

"Three years and three months into the war, with all of the losses, the insurgency, the burgeoning civil war that's taking place, an open-ended time commitment is no longer sustainable," she said.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jade Fox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
1. Somewhere, Nixon is laughing.....
Edited on Sun Jun-18-06 01:47 PM by Jade Fox
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
2. Duh - months before the war propoganda started in the summer of 2002
most americans were against any action taken unilaterally (only 29% supported an invasion if there was NO UN involvement/serious international involvement) - so from beginning - til today, clearly this has been about Bush's desires, not about public policy (the lack of planning indicates no policy concern) nor about the public opinion. The war propoganda could shift and whip up war support for so long. Pssst, Tonyk, reminding us that Bush never gave a damn about policy, nor about the public's opinion of such policy, doesn't buy kudos or good will for your Guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 02:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. more gop bizarro chat
if only 41 had pulled out. No tony, only morons like you believe our leaving would be a disaster, because then you'd have defend every other disaster you and yours have tossed upon the world. War is only a distraction and your reputation is shot to hell for the rest of your life "only a number" tony.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grilled onions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. Can We Ever Say That A War Is Won?
By the time you add up the extreme cost of human lives,the cost of the "toys" of war,the maiming of troops,the total disruption of families on every side of the war,the destruction of land and livelyhoods,the cost which has to be taken out of the pockets of those not even born yet...how can they preach about "winning"? Only those with no sacrifice,those with ample stock in the companies who deal with war products and those who seem to thrive on all those ribbons,badges and flags seem to gain from any confligration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Your post makes so much sense..
I wish I could make 288 million prints of it, and send to each and every American....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leQ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. i second that. great post!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smokey nj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. You hit the nail on the head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #4
17. all those ribbons,badges and flags
And as the bands played, the crowds brayed and roared, the women swooned and waved handkerchiefs, and the children waved flags, as the splendidly dressed "troops" in their impeccable red and gold uniforms marched off the the slaughter.

ITS BEEN GOING ON FOR SOME TIME NOW
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Merlot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
6. The polls say what Americans want. The president serves the public.
Unless the president is *
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turbineguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
9. I wonder if there
was ever a poll to see if Ted Bundy should stop murdering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
10. Bush refuses to listen to the public he is supposed
to be serving. The GOP is proud of that for some reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 02:45 AM
Response to Original message
11. lose the war if we talk about it?

"We do need to do a better job," said Graham, who appeared with Biden on CBS' "Face the Nation." "We are having progress in Iraq. Zarqawi's death is a sea change. If we're going to go on these shows every Sunday and talk about every mistake ever made in a war, we're going to lose this war.


so we should just sit down and shut up? Isn't that the general attitude of Saddam and the supposed reason we invaded iraq in the first place? To remove a dictator that was repressing his people?

and another thing - this 'stay the course' soundbite stuff. My partner puts it in a different light.

we were watching the news last night, one of the blatherheads yadda-yaddaded about "staying the course".

My partner snorts and says "what he really means is more of the same"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coalition_unwilling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #11
23. We've already lost (remember Stalingrad, anyone?) -- it's now only a
question of how many more KIA\WIA (both U.S. and Iraqi) will occur before we leave with our tails between our legs (remember Saigon, anyone?).

To paraphrase Kerry from days of yore: which U.S. soldier (or Iraqi civilian) wants to be the last to die for a mistake?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 04:48 AM
Response to Original message
12. they never gave a rat's ass what the people wanted BEFORE the war, so why
could we possibly expect them to change now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 05:26 AM
Response to Original message
13. More posturing
Edited on Mon Jun-19-06 05:28 AM by Solly Mack
They - they being the Bush Regime - are looking for ways to withdraw. My opinion, anyway, from reading various articles over the last year.

What they - they being the Bush Regime - want is a way of withdrawing and calling it a victory and, at the same time, being able to blame anti-war groups and others for an early withdrawal and any continuing violence after a withdrawal.

That's the angle they are looking for....

"We won" in Iraq...BUT - the violence is the fault of those who demanded an early withdrawal.

They - they being the Bush Regime - would settle for the "debatable" win.

A debatable win being the kind of victory(usually false) one side will boast of, while at the same time attacking any (war) opponents "for weakening America by calling for withdrawal."
(they use this sound-bite already) Vietnam is still being debated in much the same manner. America didn't lose Vietnam - the anti-war crowd did. (I've heard this argument before)

They - they being the Bush Regime - claim victory - pull out - and then blame the other guy for the violence they - they being the Bush Regime - caused by invading Iraq to begin with....

So the debate turns from how wrong/criminal invading Iraq was from the get-go to withdrawal/verses more time to achieve "full victory".....cause they - they being the Bush Regime - will claim victory...but claim America could have gotten a more complete victory - if those pesky anti-war types (Democrats, Liberals, Moon-bats,Weirdos, etc) would have "just stayed the course"

Now, many Americans will just be happy that "it's over" - and they will want to "just forget"...but what "just forgetting" means is they - they being the Bush Regime - get away with their crimes.

They - they being the Bush Regime - can talk about how they don't listen to a tired citizenry but the fact is, they - they being the Bush Regime - are counting on a tired citizenry.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coalition_unwilling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #13
24. They better start the withdrawal half of the equation soon, as
there may not be many avenues of "retreat" left to U.S. forces if the occupation goes on much longer. (Think Stalingrad in January 1943).

The "stab in the back" bullshit can wait until the troops are home.

Otherwise, I agree with you that they're looking for a way out, provided they have a SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement) allowing for continued basing in-country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. I agree...on the SOFA and fewer avenues of retreat as time goes by
"the stab in the back bullshit" has already started...

The troops will be the big loser in that game...as will the American and Iraqi people.

PS. I live under a SOFA. :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coalition_unwilling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. I'm wondering if the U.S. officer corps has been so
permeated and compromised by RW kookiness that they aren't developing contingency plans to "retreat under fire." If they haven't started yet, they had better start now, as said "retreat under fire" is one of the more difficult tactical maneuvers to execute.

Given BFEE's record in New Orleans post-Katrina, I suspect they'll let every soldier fend for him-\herself. But that's where a professional officer corps can help stave off the disintegration of regular army and marines by prudent planning now.

Von Paulus wanted to try a breakout move against the Soviets in November, 1942, but was instructed by Hitler to "fight to the last man" to hold Stalingrad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. Left to Bush, it will be every soldier for him/herself
It pretty much already is on many levels. There's a nervousness growing..a nervous anticipation...among soldiers that I've noticed in the last year. I'd say they feel the end nearing....not death (though that adds to it)...but an end to one thing and the feeling of "what now?"


You're right, an officer corp not infected by Bushitis, nationalism, and aspirations of a political future can minimize the damage.

I'm around both (Bushbot and non-Bushbot officers)....how the wind blows will play a big part in who remains a Bushbot after 2009

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coalition_unwilling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. I'm placing my hopes in the 1st and 2nd Lt s (and a few responsible
captains and majors) -- I've pretty much given up on the colonels and generals at this point, although there may be a few decent ones left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 05:38 AM
Response to Original message
14. The Decider will decide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellowcanine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
15. Someone should ask snowjob if an "unmitigated" disaster is any worse than
a mitigated disaster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
16. With brain damage, how does the decider decide?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lagavulin Donating Member (101 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
18. And as we've seen, Polls evidently don't rule elections either. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
19. Pulling out would be an absolute unmitigated disaster
but being there is not???:shrug: These people are completely out to lunch. Nothing they say has one sliver of credibility to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
20. has anyone read this interview
Edited on Mon Jun-19-06 01:15 PM by alyce douglas
recently between Dr. Franks and Randi Rhodes. This is what we are dealing with.

Randi Rhodes interviews Dr. Justin Frank (author of Bush on the Couch) June 15, 2006
To download this show go to whiterosesociety.org

Randi: What is wrong with the president?

Frank: I think what is wrong with the president is that he feels extremely pleased with himself. I remember that he was like this in the second debate with Kerry--one moment when he answered a question right and he was prancing around like it was an exam or a test, forgetting that he was president. And that he slides very quickly into a kind of grandiose state that is bordering on being manic. So what happens is, when you’re manic and very happy you make puns like he did with “Roger, Roger”; you feel like you’re invincible, you can have that swagger he had in that particular press conference yesterday, and it was like “Mission Accomplished” redux. It was exactly the same thing as we’ve seen before with him which is when you’re feeling good everything is good, the whole world is good, and he can make fun of anybody he wants and he doesn’t really care about anything. And I think it’s embarrassing but I think part of the discomfort is the discomfort with a president who’s not only disrespectful, like you say, and who’s immature, like you say, he’s also a person who is actually out of control. And when he’s really excited like that he feels he can do whatever he wants. And he’s very hypo manic. And people who are manic--and I’ve known many in my practice over the years, especially when they don’t have their lithium on board--they really can be extremely funny for about two minutes and then they become tiresome. And after you listen to them for a little while they’re not funny at all. But in his case, because he’s the president and this is a serious matter--they just announced today that we’ve reached the 2,500 mark for US dead in Iraq--this is a serious matter in every way possible and yet he can’t contain himself.

I watched the whole press conference, and after I knew I was gonna be on your show I went to whitehouse.gov and watched the whole thing again. And I was actually struck by how professional he was when he was reading his script. It was when he was off script that he seemed to kind of come unglued and get a little bit manic. Then he would catch himself and be okay again. But the “Roger, Roger” thing and the “pretty good for a substitute” thing and of course the way he dealt with the blind reporter (who was very amazing himself, when he said “it depends on your perspective”--I thought his response was quite composed given what he could‘ve said.).

Randi: And Bush was forced to call him and apologize and in the apology Mr. Wallsten said: “No apology necessary.” But you just wonder, when he called, if he said “Can I speak to Stevie Wonder” because he (Bush) just can’t stop. We’ve got a manic frat boy in charge of the country and it’s so frightening to me because this is the time when you really need a strong resolve, a strong president. He chose this war, he inserted our kids in this war, and they won’t change the strategy--all they’ll do is make politics around the policy--which is to occupy Iraq. And so you watch Bush yesterday and you just expect that he’s gonna grab one of the reporters in the corridor and give him a wedgie instead of showing the world how we’re gonna solve this horrible problem of opening up the gates of hell over there. And he’s always doing this--he always makes these verbal gaffs; it’s like his mother, who said about the Katrina victims, “I think it’s working out very well for them.” Do they have some sort of a blunder gene?

Frank: This is not a blunder--it’s much worse than that. This is an example of a person who says when he puts the safety of America first, and he cares about Americans first and he’s gonna stay the course--what he doesn’t say is that he puts the safety of himself first. One reporter actually asked that: “How come you only gave them a five minute notice?” And he then responded by saying “people want me to take care of myself,” “Iraq is dangerous”

Randi: Yeah, “I’m a high valued target”

Frank: But what is clear is that for a person who was reeling in the polls and having a terrible time of it to then go and have this moment of grandiose experience with the soldiers and with the Primer of Iraq--it’s like this little bit to tip him over into a manic state, so he comes back in a very manic, grandiose state. And what comes out when your manic is that you are indifferent in the way his mother was indifferent to the Katrina victims but it’s much more frightening because I think that he’s completely out of touch with his own grandiosity. And the press, a little bit, try to talk about it but basically they are enabling him; they’re in a chronic state of enabling an alcoholic because what they do is they are afraid to confront him. Not only because they won’t be invited back and he can be quite cruel to people, but I think they’re afraid to confront him because there’s another part that applies to lots of us--that we don’t want a president who is gonna just collapse right in front of us. And I think people are afraid that if they confront him too much he’ll have a temper tantrum. Because when you confront a manic in a very clear and direct way--in a steady and stable way--they really lose control and become enraged and I think that people are afraid of that. Partly because they want to save face for America and partly because they’re afraid for their own jobs and partly because everybody depends on him being presidential.

Randi: What did you make of him when he was in Iraq and he did this little visit with the troops who work inside the embassy--Saddam’s old palace--and he started to cry. Did you see that?

Frank: I didn’t see it on TV, I heard about it. He said he was very moved by being in there…but that’s…I just don’t buy it. I think that if there’s any crying it would be tears of joy and relief that he’s still in charge and still president. His main goal has to do with staying in control and he feels very good--he felt really good--he felt on top of his game. So on the one hand you can talk him as being bantering and everything but I was really surprised after I saw those Jon Stewart clips on the show last night, I just couldn’t believe it. But when I watched the whole press conference those were really moments where he was in a kind of manic, out of control state. But the rest of the time I thought he was hanging in there ‘cause the way he does when he’s manic and grandiose he repeats certain phrases over and over again: “pro-growth,” “democracy,”

Randi: “Terrorists”

Frank: “Terrorists”, all those things about…and this new term “Together Forward,” Operation “Together Forward,” it’s a bizarre turn of events. But I think that every time he has one moment of good news he is ecstatic. We see that in little kids, and like you were saying, in frat boys; they get an A on a test after they had an all night drunk and then they think: “Oh my god, this is great, I’m on top of the world.”

Randi: So we’ve got a president whose policies are all about torture, killing, occupation of sovereign nations and on top of it he presents as a giant goofball, so he behaves like Al Bundy during press conferences but he’s Ted Bundy when he formulates his policies.

Frank: Yes, exactly, that’s a great image. Because what happens is when he’s forming policy his policy is based, a lot of it, is based on contempt and one of the hallmarks of a person who is manic--it’s called the Manic Triad--and there are three parts of a manic defense. One is called Control where you’re in control of everything, two is Contempt where nobody really matters except you, and then there’s Triumph where you feel like you’re triumphant over everything and you can do whatever you want. And he shows all three of those things: Control, Contempt, and Triumph, in a way that you really see in untreated people in hospitals or occasionally when people are sliding into a manic state.

Randi: What I don’t understand is that if he is indeed manic, and he needs lithium why don’t they just give it to him?

Frank: They will. I would think they give him things. A lot of times he seems a little bit drugged when he’s on TV and a little bit sedated. Some of the time I’ve seen him and he looks really sedated. I don’t know what they give him but they must give him something.

The other thing that happens with manics is that if you listen to them carefully is that everything they say that’s negative or positive about the other person, what they’re usually talking about is about themselves. So when he said that the important thing about the Iraqi people is to restore confidence in their government, this is very important, we want to deal with corruption at all levels, and it’s up to their government to earn the confidence of the people in Iraq--well, Karl Rove has just been through the mill and there’s the possibility he’s not going to be indicted--there’s no written thing by the way, it’s just verbal that he’s not going to be indicted--but he’s projecting his own government, where there’s no confidence in his government but when he’s talking about Iraq he can talk about it clearly without being defensive because he’s put his own anxiety about his own government outside of himself and into Iraq. And it’s important to listen to Bush in particular--all politicians project to some extent which means they attribute qualities in themselves that are disowned into other people--everybody does this to some extent--but he does it to such a maximum degree that it’s quite stunning to me.

Randi: Well, thank you for this. I really appreciate it. And as far as Karl Rove goes let me just tell you--look in Rove’s background….do you know it?

Frank: No.

Randi: Oh, it’s unbelievable. Rove was raised by a guy who wasn’t really his father and he never found that out until he was about thirty years old; his mother committed suicide in Reno when he was thirty and he didn’t meet his real father until he was in his forties. So there’s a lot of stuff going on there with Rove too. And Newt Gingrich, same thing. But when you talk about protecting yourself by projecting onto other people what you think about yourself…Rove is a rat. Mark my words. I will go on record today telling you that the die is cast here: Rove will only protect himself and you’re gonna see that Rove got a pass because Rove is helping Fitzgerald nail Cheney. And one can only hope that that’s the result here.

Frank: That may be. But I think that your point about protecting himself is one of the ways people do, unconsciously, protect themselves is by projecting. Because they actually do experience the other people as bad and they don’t see themselves as lying unless they’re really confronted they don’t see it. They really see that the Iraq government needs confidence, and when he talks about how he hates the killing and the killing of civilians, well, if Lancet--which is the British medical journal, if they have any say, if they’re accurate--they have over 200,000 Iraqi citizens killed.

Randi: John Hopkins reports 127,000. The numbers are stunning. Well, thank you very much Dr. Frank. I need sanity when I’m looking at this insane man..

Frank: He is insane and the problem is he makes everybody else, everybody watching him, we all start feeling insane because we wonder why nobody is saying anything, or why the press isn’t saying anything.

Randi: Well, that’s a good explanation--they just don’t want to sacrifice American security by showing that the president’s a lunatic.

Frank: I think so.

Randi: That’s the best explanation I’ve ever heard.

Frank: I think that’s why. I really do.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissMillie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
21. I wish just once, somone would define "win" for me.
We're going to stay there until we "win"... what EXACTLY does that mean?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coalition_unwilling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #21
25. Although the idea of "victory" in a 21-century colonial occupation
is insane, what BFEE mean by "win" (at least nominally) is I think this:

creation and maintenance of a friendly client state that does not threaten Israel and that allows for permanent basing of U.S. troops (thereby giving us a second land-based aircraft carrier -- after the first, Israel -- to continue and expand the imperial war).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #21
28. and to add to "win" what is the "mission"
sounds like the crusades to me.:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coalition_unwilling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
22. Pick your disaster -- maintaining the occupation will be the
real "absolute unmitigated disaster." This morning, I'm wearing a shirt I got at a Vets for Peace demo back in 2005 at Santa Monica beach.

The shirt says "2000 Dead . . . How Many More?" Makes for great conversation starter, especially now that the U.S. KIA is > 2,500.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fshrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
30. On the other hand, we know for a fact that the opposite
is true. When so-called "victories" are publicized, poll numbers tend to go up. Which is why bad news get lost somewhere along the way and coffins pictures are not allowed. So Snow's point is that policy decisions just happen to serve this administration interests. No, Snow has no point. His job is to come up with catch-phrases that wil be relayed and amplified, regardless of their logic, and, actually, even of their content.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinniped Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
32. Sure, that's why they cancelled the contract on the al-Zarqawi....
boogeyman propaganda machine.

Making those videos, audio recordings, and cut and paste photograohs were getting tiresome.

Lying sacks of shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 01:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC