Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Democrats Not Blameless on Katrina

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 » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 08:43 AM
Original message
Democrats Not Blameless on Katrina
Introduction

El Presidente is getting a lot of flack over this. He seriously failed in his response. Even prior to the response, there were failures. The war is a failure. Our classist society is a failure. But let's be rational here for a moment. Bush does not have absolute control over the government. Though the FEMA budget was proposed by Bush's minions, it was modified and approved by Congress. All appropriations bills must start in the House of Representatives. Yes, it is very difficult for the minority party to do anything, but not only were some of them not objecting, they were saying the same things as Republicans. Whether it was downsizing FEMA, adding more money to the Iraq quagmire, adding more troops to the military, or confirming Bush's idiotic nominations into office, the Democrats sometimes voted right along with the Republicans. Yes, as much as it is feasible to blame government for this tragedy, Bush bares the brunt of the responsibility, but the Democrats are not completely blameless.

Here is a closer look at some charges being made about the Bush administration. Yes, he is at fault. Yes, he is a fascist. Yes, he is a corrupt bastard. Yes, he is a moron. But some Democrats were going along with him. There was an article posted to Washington Monthly which exemplifies the art of hiding of this complicity.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_09/007023.php

Claims

"January 2001: Bush appoints Joe Allbaugh, a crony from Texas, as head of FEMA. Allbaugh has no previous experience in disaster management."

The Senate unanimously confirmed Allbaugh's appointment, even though Allbaugh was a Bush crony with no experience. The confirmation was a 91-0 score. One ridiculous argument used in favor of confirming Allbaugh was that he was in the same fraternity as one of the Senators who knew him. He vouched for him and that included this comment, "He is a very good friend of my wife's brother Steve." Couldn't someone stand up and object to that Republican good-ole-boy-from-Oklahoma insanity at the time? Even just one dissenter, like Ted Kennedy or Russ Feingold, that way we could see the criticism in the Congressional record and know it was just the Republicans selling us out?

"April 2001: Budget Director Mitch Daniels announces the Bush administration's goal of privatizing much of FEMA's work. In May, Allbaugh confirms that FEMA will be downsized: 'Many are concerned that federal disaster assistance may have evolved into both an oversized entitlement program....' he said. 'Expectations of when the federal government should be involved and the degree of involvement may have ballooned beyond what is an appropriate level.' "

Privatize and downsize?? Clearly, the Republicans and BushCo are corporate fascist bastards, but did anyone stand up to this move? Again, all appropriations bills must start in the House. There was debate and thank God, someone did in fact stand up to object. His name is Bentsen and here is what he said:
"While the Administration is pushing people out of the NFIP, it also proposes to reduce the federal share of hazard mitigation grants from 75% to 50%, reducing funds available for flood prevention by $83 million. The administration also proposes to eliminate FEMA's Project Impact, which helps communities protect themselves from the devastating effects of natural disasters. In addition, the 2002 budget cuts the Army Corps of Engineers by $600 million. Of that cut, $451 million comes from Construction General funds, which fund flood control and navigation projects. A policy of reducing flood prevention efforts while reducing insurance will compound the safety risk and financial pain for homeowners in the floodplain."

Kudos to standing up to them over this, even though eventually BushCo's budget was approved.

"2001: FEMA designates a major hurricane hitting New Orleans as one of the three 'likeliest, most catastrophic disasters facing this country.' "

Right and leadership on this one should have come up with a damned good plan for what to do if that happened. That leadership includes the President of the US, the FEMA director, the Governor of Louisiana, the Mayor of New Orleans, and many others and other agencies. Congress also should probably not have been so pre-occupied with terrorism as natural disasters are also catastrophes. Certainly having BushCo propose a budget cut to FEMA did not help here, but some blame goes all around, too, for lack of planning and lack of emergency drills.

"December 2002: After less than two years at FEMA, Allbaugh announces he is leaving to start up a consulting firm that advises companies seeking to do business in Iraq. He is succeeded by his deputy, Michael Brown, who, like Allbaugh, has no previous experience in disaster management."

So, again, why did Congress confirm Michael Brown on August 1st, 2002? In the Congressional record I see no debate at all.

“June 2004: The Army Corps of Engineers budget for levee construction in New Orleans is slashed. Jefferson Parish emergency management chiefs Walter Maestri comments: ‘It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay.’ ”

The President was not the only one to vote for the war. And wasn’t it a unanimous decision to add $80 billion to the war fund just a couple of months ago? On this specific issue, the President’s proposed budget gave this fund $3 million when they asked for $11 million. The House of Representatives is in charge of appropriations bills. They decided in a bipartisan committee to make the budget for this project $5.5 million. That is only 50% funded and only slightly better than the fascist Bush’s proposal.

“June 2005: Funding for the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is cut by a record $71.2 million. One of the hardest-hit areas is the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, which was created after the May 1995 flood to improve drainage in Jefferson, Orleans and St. Tammany parishes.”

Again, the issue here is that budgetary items are decided in bi-partisan committees in the House. Then, the vote comes later.

Conclusion

It is important at this time to ask what is wrong with our government. Why did Congress, Democrats included, allow cronies with no experience to be confirmed in important positions? Why did the House approve under-funding projects? Were they too focused on the war and on terrorism? Or are they just too corrupt to fix?

Sure, the Democrats show that they are better than Bush, but how much better? It is time to not be so anti-Bush over this issue, and see to it Congress, Democrats included , shares some of the blame. Moreover, it is time for we the people to call out our government on this issue. Challenge them. Tell them to start up the War on Poverty once again or we will vote them out of office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
1. None are pure enough to stand with thee....
I feel so ashamed of myself (snicker)...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Why? Are you a Congressman? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Do I have to be?
Clearly YOU think that instead of holding Chimpy responsible for mismanagement and crimnally negligent homicide, it's a dan-dan-dandy time to complain about Teddy Kennedy...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. Actually
My conclusion was that it is time we start the war on poverty in a very real sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Yeah it shows...
"Democrats not blameless"...how could I have missed it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. I love the art and science of subject lines! You nailed it...
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #15
21. Sure doesn't read to me
like we're being urged to amp up the war on poverty...sounds more like we're being urged to attack Russ Feingold and Teddy Kennedy for not marginalizing themselves...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #12
17. This is what happens when you read titles
and not articles.

You originally thought I was blaming you. I was clearly blaming some Democratic Congressman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. So then you won't have a problem going back to change it...
...to something less deceptive. Like, "It's time to start the war on poverty."

NGU.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. Sounds like a good idea to me...
Wouldn't want others to get the wrong idea and think the author was just attacking Teddy Kennedy and Russ Feingold for no apparant reason, would we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #19
23. There is nothing deceptive.
Some Democrats are to blame for Katrina. We need to stop bickering and make progress. Fix the party and fight the war on poverty.

Please stop bickering with me by the way and contribute something valuable to the thread. I spent a lot of time researching this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #23
26. You're bickering at Dems in order to stop the bickering??
Edited on Mon Sep-12-05 11:29 AM by ClassWarrior
:rofl:

NGU.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #23
28. There are no Democrats OR Republicans to blame for Katrina.
Subtle differences elude you much?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenArrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #23
36. don't sweat it
Your point is clear enough, and accurate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. This is what happens when I read silly articles....
"You originally thought I was blaming you. I was clearly blaming some Democratic Congressman."
No shit, sherlock? And none are pure enough to stand with thee...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #17
27. Then let me suggest for your SL: SOME Democrats not blameless on Katrina.
We aren't blaming all Republicans on this board, either.

Subtle, but important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #27
32. I don't agree
but because many here don't seem to like the title, I tried to change it:
"You can't edit this message because the editing period has expired."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #1
18. I wasn't talking about you!
Didn't you even read the op??

I was talking about Dems like Lieberman who confirmed Allbaugh and Brown.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
3. So? Let the chips fall where they may, in a fair examination.
LI take the same approach I did to the 9/11 Commission: there isn't anything about a fact-based approach that Democrats should fear, one because any approach based on facts and accountability is OUR ground, and two, there really isn't any OTHER way to run a country successfully.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 09:02 AM
Response to Original message
5. Typical Republicon tactic - whenever they get caught redhanded...
...they scream, "The Dems are just as much to blame!!"

Desperate, really.

NGU.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #5
16. I am no Republican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #5
25. Sadly, it's also a left wing tactic
That I will never understand. THEY can piss all over any Dem any time they choose and DU oohs and aahs. But let someone like Lieberman get up and say that perhaps a Democrat made a mistake, and he's a turncoat traitor sob. They're both wrong to do it and I don't get why neither part of the Dem Party gets it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
6. Sorry, but "FEMA's website" says "Response was Bush's fault" period
Just go to homeland security's main page to see that their mission is 'primary jurisdiction' in the event of a terrorist attack or 'natural disaster.' http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/theme_home2.jsp

Federal supremacy clause means federal law trumps inconsistent state law. Federal emergency declared by bush prior to the storm making landfall, August 26 and 27 to be precise.

case closed as to federal role being predominant, even as they cooperate (coordinate) state and local efforts.


Friday, August 26
∙ GOV. KATHLEEN BLANCO DECLARES STATE OF EMERGENCY IN LOUISIANA:

∙ GULF COAST STATES REQUEST TROOP ASSISTANCE FROM PENTAGON: At a 9/1 press conference, Lt. Gen. Russel Honoré, commander, Joint Task Force Katrina, said that the Gulf States began the process of requesting additional forces on Friday, 8/26.

Saturday, August 27
∙ 5AM — KATRINA UPGRADED TO CATEGORY 3 HURRICANE
∙ GOV. BLANCO ASKS BUSH TO DECLARE FEDERAL STATE OF EMERGENCY IN LOUISIANA:
∙ FEDERAL EMERGENCY DECLARED, DHS AND FEMA GIVEN FULL AUTHORITY TO RESPOND TO KATRINA:]

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
7. well I for one Dem am damn mad
at any and all Dems who have sided with this administration on almost ANYTHING

for instance, I love Ted Kennedy but I'm flippin mad at him over No CHild Left Behind (or as many call it Throw Them Under the Bus) and for not voting to challenge the Ohio election results

and for everyone of them that voted yea on any nomination of anyone that is NOT qualified I say - SHAME!

I call and write whenever my rep or either of my senators makes a bonehead move

and I tell them that while I'm a yellow dog Dem, I'm watching and if they continue to side with this administration and corporate america over the individual, they won't have my vote!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
8. Don't take this the wrong way, but "No duh, Ralph"
But it seems that the only folks interested in ferreting out just who is to blame for what are Democrats. The Republicans quickly fell into lock-step behind Bushie and Brownie and Chertoffie in placing blame squarely on every Democratic politician within shouting distance of New Orleans, including some who haven't been in office for years.

We can step aside, play into the Republican spin machine again, and go on about how all sorts of people are to blame. That tried-and-true method always results in Republicans deflecting blame and responsibility onto Democrats and escaping any scrutiny of their own actions.

Or, we can try something different, and attach ourselves like bulldogs to the pants leg of this corrupt administration and refuse to be diverted or spun. I'm inclined to try this approach for a change. So many thousands have died unnecessarily all over the world due to the other approach.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magnolia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
10. Oh really....
Edited on Mon Sep-12-05 10:06 AM by magnolia
Bush gave a million speeches during the presidential campaign. I don't recall him ever mentioning any of this. In fact, he seemed to go out of his way to point out how he would keep us safe. Didn't Cheney say "We'll keep you safe, the other guy will let you die."

I must have missed the speech where he pointed out that his power was limited, that we better have a pretty darn good congress, city council, mayor, governor...because if they don't do their jobs, his hands are tied.

Of course there are problems in every area of government. But...THE BUCK STOPS AT THE PRESIDENT! If he can't handle the burden of this responsibility, he shouldn't have ran for president. He sold himself as the strong protector of all in any disaster and then when the disaster comes along, he tells us that it wasn't his responsibility????? Please!

Bottom line...many may have contributed to the problems in NO. But when Bush found out that there were people trapped with no food, water, medical attention, proper policing...he had a choice. He could have moved heaven and earth to get them what they needed. He chose instead to use the situation to boost his lagging approval ratings. While he was busy in the planning and staging of photo ops, people suffered and died. THAT IS ON HIM AND HIM ALONE!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abluelady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
11. We're The Minority Party
How much can we really accomplish? Even if all the dems stuck together (which they don't), we still are going to be going uphill constantly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. Yeah
and what do you do when your politicians sell you out?

http://www.voluntarytrade.org/downloads/Brown_ConfirmHrg.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abluelady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Can We Start A New Party????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
24. It's much more important to piss on Dems
These people need to be tied up and gagged. I am so sick of them and anybody else who doesn't grasp the simple concept that those who win elections get to pass the laws. The Democrats didn't win, in no small part due to the pissing and whining of people like Kevin Drum; therefore, Democrats have no power except to let the majority government rule according to their principles and with the people the majority chooses. That's the we the people part of the democracy. If we the people want something different, we the people will vote in different representatives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #24
29. The Democrats DO have power.
Edited on Mon Sep-12-05 11:31 AM by Don1
It's all right here:
http://www.voluntarytrade.org/downloads/Brown_ConfirmHrg.pdf

Look up the phrase "particularly useful" in the document.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. ???
When the people elect a particular form of government, that's what they expect to be put into place. Like it or not, the people elected Republicans and short of criminals or complete ineptness, the people expect the President's nominees to be put into office to carry out the agenda the people voted for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. The people
Edited on Mon Sep-12-05 12:48 PM by Don1
did not vote to downsize and privatize FEMA. And the people did not expect to have a Bush crony with no disaster experience be FEMA director. Bush does not have a mandate.

And it was Lieberman's mandate to say so or at least have healthy debate on the matter. He failed at his mandate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. Yeah, the people DID
When the people voted for Bush, they voted for a smaller government, privatization, less taxes, etc. Like it or not, that's what they voted for. And they voted for Bush to appoint people to carry out that agenda. That's the way it works.

Now, when people see what a stupid idea that was, they will hopefully vote differently. Except for all those in the south who feel vindicated because the federal government responded so poorly. Some of them are right here on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. The people voted
for false promises that Bush made. He lied. He cheated. He bares the brunt of responsibility for innocent deaths in Iraq and the US.

The people did not vote for that, nor would the people vote for the Patriot Act or Bankruptcy Bill or an underfunded No Child Left Behind.

There is a big difference between voting for a person, voting for what they say they will do, and voting for issues. One cannot presume that because people vote for a person that they are on board with what they will do.

That would be 'Bush mandate' logic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. No, that's complete Republican control logic
Obviously people are voting for something beyond Bush. Which, btw, includes things like the Patriot Act, school accountability, and even fairer bankruptcy laws. YOU might think everybody thinks like you do, but the truth is, everybody doesn't. Which is obvious when you look at who is in D.C. and who isn't. I don't know when the left is going to get it. Not only does the left not have a mandate in D.C., they don't have a mandate from the American people either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. I agree in part.
Not everybody thinks like me. Some people might be interested in school accountability and fairer bankruptcy laws and keeping themselves safe. However, it's the corporate media that spins the neocon bills into these issues in Orwellian fashion. But people only somewhat vote for issues. They also vote for the person. Case in point: Reagan. They voted for a movie star.

Getting back to issues, though...the left could easily have a mandate from the American people, if the news media was actually responsible. If the media was not shallow, sensationalized, and sychophants for BushCo, then we could get leftist bills passed (like universal health care). We could also get pro-envitonment bills passed, like increasing bio-diesel usage in public transportation. We could remove the unconstitutional aspects of the Patriot Act, too. And, if we could not get rid of NCLB, then at least we could fund it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. Oo, so close. It doesn't matter whether people think like Don or not,
with a very few, minor exceptions, the politicians have not represented The People for a long, long time. That's why so many people have voted against the Dems for the last 25 years. The Repugs successfully sold the idea that the Dems have been in control for all these years and look at what they've done. It doesn't matter that it is not true. It does matter that the Dems have had both hands and their snouts in the barrels just as egregiously as the repugs do now.
I love this board, and view it as a very accurate microcosm of the Dem Party itself. A very strong, hard core of the faithful, the vocal nay-sayers, and, my personal favorites, the in-your-face socialists (BTW, I think they are the only one's that come close to the kind of real, fundamental change this country needs) Thanks.
:hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 04:58 PM
Response to Original message
37. And Senator Lieberman?
He was glowing and gushing, as one of 4 senators interested enough to show up for a confirmation hearing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msgadget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
38. THANK YOU!
THIS is why the dems had only ONE major theme re Katrina, that being the infamous and now totally irrelevant, "Fire Michael Brown" song.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Don1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-05 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #38
41. You're Welcome. n/t
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 Thu May 02nd 2024, 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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