Debate Tonight!!!!!

2

Comments

  • inlet13inlet13 Posts: 1,979
    The talking heads are saying:

    Newt won (which I also thought).

    Pawlenty had a good line, but lost his little tiff to Bachmann.

    Romney stood basically unchallenged.
    Here's a new demo called "in the fire":

    <object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt; <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    The word "PEACE" was only mentioned by one candidate.
  • inlet13inlet13 Posts: 1,979
    unsung wrote:
    The word "PEACE" was only mentioned by one candidate.


    I wanted Ron Paul to win tonight, but if you're honest... he didn't.
    Here's a new demo called "in the fire":

    <object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt; <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    Rick Perry will take the chair of the current occupant.
  • inlet13inlet13 Posts: 1,979
    Rick Perry will take the chair of the current occupant.


    I'll say this much, I will vote against Obama because (just my opinion... he's a awful President)... but, I think this guy Rick Perry has disaster written all over him.

    I think trying Bush II, is a no-go. Not trying to rip Bush, or commend him.... just saying.... from what I've seen of Perry... no chance.
    Here's a new demo called "in the fire":

    <object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt; <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    inlet13 wrote:
    Rick Perry will take the chair of the current occupant.


    I'll say this much, I will vote against Obama because (just my opinion... he's a awful President)... but, I think this guy Rick Perry has disaster written all over him.

    I think trying Bush II, is a no-go. Not trying to rip Bush, or commend him.... just saying.... from what I've seen of Perry... no chance.

    This isn't really meant to be a compliment ... but Perry's no bigger a disaster waiting to happen than anybody else on that stage tonight. The Bush comparisons are already starting to bug me ... just because he's from Texas and Bush is from Texas, they're the same guy?

    Ronald Reagan and Nancy Pelosi were both from California.

    All that said, I am someone who lives in Texas and generally votes Republican, but would have a hard, hard time pulling the lever for Rick Perry for President.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    Fair enough.
    But the Obama lever would be impossible to pull again. Not that I ever have, jist saying for all of you who chose the wrong person last time.
    Corporations are people
    Woot
  • inlet13inlet13 Posts: 1,979
    inlet13 wrote:
    Rick Perry will take the chair of the current occupant.


    I'll say this much, I will vote against Obama because (just my opinion... he's a awful President)... but, I think this guy Rick Perry has disaster written all over him.

    I think trying Bush II, is a no-go. Not trying to rip Bush, or commend him.... just saying.... from what I've seen of Perry... no chance.

    This isn't really meant to be a compliment ... but Perry's no bigger a disaster waiting to happen than anybody else on that stage tonight. The Bush comparisons are already starting to bug me ... just because he's from Texas and Bush is from Texas, they're the same guy?

    Ronald Reagan and Nancy Pelosi were both from California.

    All that said, I am someone who lives in Texas and generally votes Republican, but would have a hard, hard time pulling the lever for Rick Perry for President.


    You're right. I haven't seen enough of him to outright dismiss him. But, I'll be frank with you here...

    The similarities between Perry and Bush go way beyond him coming from Texas. How about the prayer rallies? That sort of thing. I'm by no means against religion. But, Perry is all about them... which is similar to Bush. On top of that, not only is he from Texas and the Gov.... he sounds exactly like Bush when he speaks. That may not be true down South... but, when I heard him, I thought OK, here's Texas.... these are all thoughts on the general election and his appeal

    All that said, you're totally could be right. I shouldn't judge him so quick.
    Here's a new demo called "in the fire":

    <object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt; <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    Bush and Perry religious comments....

    They win with these. They néed to get the people on the far right to vote for them so they need to do this. Just like Obama gets the people on the fat left by offering them "free" shit. Like healthcare, welfare, first time homebuyer credits, "stimulus" checks, extended (I lost my job and won't start looking for a new one until checks stop com in) unemployment benefits, c.arbon taxes so people in Africa don't starve because of weather...
    Whatevs

    None of which I ever got but sure as fuck paid for.

    Big picture fellas. Americurrr needs to get some player back on the field.
  • inlet13inlet13 Posts: 1,979
    Bush and Perry religious comments....

    They win with these. They néed to get the people on the far right to vote for them so they need to do this.


    I understand your point, I think. But, my point is... people want an economic argument to cure our ills. Not a for us to get-together and pray for a solution.

    That's why I think Perry's got no shot, if he really will try this super-religious approach.
    Here's a new demo called "in the fire":

    <object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt; <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    I don't really believe most elected "leaders" buy into some of the (or most) religious stuff. They just need to go with the flow of a large chuck of their base.

    I think it would be swell if we got a someone who didn't have to pretend...but you have to talk to the ugly girls sometimes or you look like a dick.
    39266_Texas_Texas_A_M_Football.jpg
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    inlet13 wrote:
    But, my point is... people want an economic argument to cure our ills.

    That argument is not going to be won by the current occupant. He thinks our economic troubles would be solved if he just takes peoples money that know how to make it. I guess he doesn't quite understand these people who know how to make our country grow ain't playin! They already pay most of the way anyway. An unfair amount.

    Newsflash, they can't "afford" it. They have chosen to go cash and wait for someone in the big seat who gets it.

    Rick Perry gets it.
  • KravenKraven Posts: 829
    inlet13 wrote:
    But, my point is... people want an economic argument to cure our ills.

    That argument is not going to be won by the current occupant. He thinks our economic troubles would be solved if he just takes peoples money that know how to make it. I guess he doesn't quite understand these people who know how to make our country grow ain't playin! They already pay most of the way anyway. An unfair amount.

    Newsflash, they can't "afford" it. They have chosen to go cash and wait for someone in the big seat who gets it.

    Rick Perry gets it.

    Then how come the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting more poor? If they paid an unfair amount, wouldn't the reverse be true?
    32 shows and counting...
  • inlet13 wrote:
    But, my point is... people want an economic argument to cure our ills.

    That argument is not going to be won by the current occupant. He thinks our economic troubles would be solved if he just takes peoples money that know how to make it. I guess he doesn't quite understand these people who know how to make our country grow ain't playin! They already pay most of the way anyway. An unfair amount.

    Newsflash, they can't "afford" it. They have chosen to go cash and wait for someone in the big seat who gets it.

    Rick Perry gets it.

    You are right...It's sad that the richest 1% can't afford to buy both a baseball team and a football team in this rough economic climate.
    10/31/2000 (****)
    6/7/2003 (***1/2)
    7/9/2006 (****1/2)
    7/13/2006 (**** )
    4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
    6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
    10/1/2009 LA II (****)
    10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
  • inlet13inlet13 Posts: 1,979
    inlet13 wrote:
    But, my point is... people want an economic argument to cure our ills.

    That argument is not going to be won by the current occupant. He thinks our economic troubles would be solved if he just takes peoples money that know how to make it. I guess he doesn't quite understand these people who know how to make our country grow ain't playin! They already pay most of the way anyway. An unfair amount.

    Newsflash, they can't "afford" it. They have chosen to go cash and wait for someone in the big seat who gets it.

    Rick Perry gets it.

    I'll restate my point. Nothing against Rick, but people don't want to see government praying for a solution to economic problems.

    I'd pull the level for Perry over Obama. Actually, I'd pull the lever for a half-eaten worm over Obama... but, as for Perry himself.... the prayer thing isn't going to help him. People want jobs. They don't want to talk social issues (hate to break it to all the gay rights activists on here), they don't want to talk war ( hate to break it to the war fans here)... they want f'ing jobs! That's it. So, the whole holier than thou thing won't work this go-around.

    I'm very, very pro-market and I'm religious, but even I think the religious appeal is old (now). When we're rich again, and GDP is jumping... then let's go back to talking prayer vs. atheists (I'll jump back in line with you then). Until then, let's focus on getting our economy going so we don't all starve.
    Here's a new demo called "in the fire":

    <object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt; <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    I agree 100%.
    Perry isn't going to waste much time on the smaller issues. He's going to talk work.
  • I agree 100%.
    Perry isn't going to waste much time on the smaller issues. He's going to talk work.

    Well no... he's going to pray a lot, kiss the right asses, hurt the right people and it won't matter. He's a very bad governor. He won't win.
  • CROJAM95CROJAM95 Posts: 9,981
    The whole taking from the rich to give to the poor doesn't fly. Just because Bush, yes Bush experimented with an economy that worked by shifting it even greater(cause the rich are always subsidized) towards the rich...... Doesn't mean we can't go back to the Clinton tax % that seemed to work.

    So if you look at it like that, it's not an increase. They had many years paying a tax rate that left deficits for a country running on surplus. I hope they were able to save some while they were creating all these so called jobs. Bush did stimulus too, big deal I got $600, where I'm from that ain't shit

    And a large chunk of Obamas stimulus was in fact keeping the Bush cuts going.

    The right don't like Dems cause they won't compromise for shit. Obama is a moderate you fools. Healthcare is long overdue, and didn't go far enough.... And will save in the long run. Screw insurance companies and their manipulations. Clinton worked closely with the house to get things done.... Yet they impeached him for political reasons. I heard the ringleader Of that impeachment Newt praise Bill the other night, saying he was a leader(unlike Obama) and worked across party lines. Really Newt?? Now you aren't playing Gotcha politics and this far removed from that stupidity and wasting $$ your finally giving credit. Or it's just a way to knock the current president. 10 years from now Newt will say him and Obama came this close to getting an apartment together in 2011, or taking a vacation.

    If your ultra wealthy, I don't think you would waste a second fighting for a tax break, or keeping the current rates the same. No you feed this crap to the bottom feeders of your party and let them fight on your behalf. Opportunity cost is too great for rich folks to take away from real money making. Let the idiots who will never even sniff 65k/year fight for you. Feed them an unattainable dream

    It's rather sad.... Keep voting against yourselves
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    what are the the opinions of the conservatives here on clinton? ... slick willy of course ...
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,157
    polaris_x wrote:
    what are the the opinions of the conservatives here on clinton? ... slick willy of course ...
    The ultimate politician. Dude brushed off an impeachment.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • JonnyPistachioJonnyPistachio Florida Posts: 10,219
    inlet13 wrote:
    as for Perry himself.... the prayer thing isn't going to help him. People want jobs. They don't want to talk social issues (hate to break it to all the gay rights activists on here), they don't want to talk war ( hate to break it to the war fans here)... they want f'ing jobs! That's it. So, the whole holier than thou thing won't work this go-around.

    I hate to say this, but I think you're right about the war issue. I think its been going on so long and we know so little about an end to either war, that we just have to deal with these ideas of "pull outs" of Afghanistan and Iraq. However, I would never vote for someone who I think might have the same ability to pull the trigger on something as stupid as the war in Iraq (or a potentially similar situation).

    Some people here seem to know a lot about Perry and his success with creating jobs in Texas.. care to elaborate? Was it his vision that accomplished this? What kinds of jobs? Can he use his formula for success as governor of Texas in creating jobs for the whole country? Or would these jobs have been created under anyone?
    Pick up my debut novel here on amazon: Jonny Bails Floatin (in paperback) (also available on Kindle for $2.99)
  • mikepegg44mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    polaris_x wrote:
    what are the the opinions of the conservatives here on clinton? ... slick willy of course ...


    I loved him. thought he was a great president. Would have voted for his wife if i had the chance. Didn't really care for everything he tried to accomplish but thought he was a fantastic politician. He could convince someone he borrowed money from that he did them a favor...
    He had true intelligence...he didn't always make the best choices, but he was extremely smart, and understood when to make a charge for things he wanted, and when to back off and compromise. Ideologically he and I certainly aren't on the same page, but i can respect him for his accomplishments that is for sure.
    Although people so seem to forget that he had a shutdown of the federal government during his presidency...the gridlock we appear to have now is nothing new and it will continue forever...
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • inlet13inlet13 Posts: 1,979
    CROJAM95 wrote:
    The whole taking from the rich to give to the poor doesn't fly. Just because Bush, yes Bush experimented with an economy that worked by shifting it even greater(cause the rich are always subsidized) towards the rich...... Doesn't mean we can't go back to the Clinton tax % that seemed to work.

    So if you look at it like that, it's not an increase. They had many years paying a tax rate that left deficits for a country running on surplus. I hope they were able to save some while they were creating all these so called jobs. Bush did stimulus too, big deal I got $600, where I'm from that ain't shit

    And a large chunk of Obamas stimulus was in fact keeping the Bush cuts going.

    The right don't like Dems cause they won't compromise for shit. Obama is a moderate you fools. Healthcare is long overdue, and didn't go far enough.... And will save in the long run. Screw insurance companies and their manipulations. Clinton worked closely with the house to get things done.... Yet they impeached him for political reasons. I heard the ringleader Of that impeachment Newt praise Bill the other night, saying he was a leader(unlike Obama) and worked across party lines. Really Newt?? Now you aren't playing Gotcha politics and this far removed from that stupidity and wasting $$ your finally giving credit. Or it's just a way to knock the current president. 10 years from now Newt will say him and Obama came this close to getting an apartment together in 2011, or taking a vacation.

    If your ultra wealthy, I don't think you would waste a second fighting for a tax break, or keeping the current rates the same. No you feed this crap to the bottom feeders of your party and let them fight on your behalf. Opportunity cost is too great for rich folks to take away from real money making. Let the idiots who will never even sniff 65k/year fight for you. Feed them an unattainable dream

    It's rather sad.... Keep voting against yourselves

    The bottom 50% of all income tax earners pay less than 2% of all taxes. The the top 1% in terms of income pay %40 of all income taxes. The top 5% pay 60%. Somewhere inbetween those two numbers, is the group Obama wants to raise taxes on. In my opinion, he chose those making over 250K because he knows that will be slightly more than the 50% of all income taxes mark.

    You believe in a "more" progressive tax structure. You want to tax rich more. Some disagree.... and say you shouldn't tax rich more (even if they, themselves aren't rich). These people believe that taxes cripple economic growth, which in turn, hurts tax revenues. The question really is, does raising taxes hurt economic growth (I'd say yes)... and if so how much (I'd say enough to make it not worthwhile). You can disagree, but your disagreement is strictly opinion.

    So, in the end, you're argument that people are voting against themselves has no foundation. Why is the government taking more from your neighbor in your best interest (when may worsen the economy)?

    The fundamental disagreement is between those on the left who want people to suck from a government teet for the rest of their lives, and those on the right who think people should go buy the milk from the grocery store with the money they made from their jobs. ;)
    Here's a new demo called "in the fire":

    <object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt; <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
  • CROJAM95CROJAM95 Posts: 9,981
    ^ there's corporate welfare too, and Bachman should look at her subsidized life before crying foul. I would be all for a flat tax and national sales tax personally. I've always paid taxes(never earned off the books) and believe we should draw from as close to 100% of the population as possible. It hasn't gained steam cause it makes too much god damn sense

    As for people living off others.... It's all perception. Let's talk in specifics rather than this notion that people who feel the richest amongst us should pay a little more are in fact recipients of their tax burden. I can survive on my own two feet, but I'd rather have a stronger country as a whole than save what I think isn't a real savings. If republicans can put real money in my pocket not a gimmick like Bush did I'd be all ears.

    It's just not worth it, to us as a whole IMO

    You can get a whole electorate to sell out their principles for a few $$

    Let's see real reform, and breaks for the majority and a plan that can sustain certain programs we need to have..... I haven't seen it yet, nor will I
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    Jason P wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    what are the the opinions of the conservatives here on clinton? ... slick willy of course ...
    The ultimate politician. Dude brushed off an impeachment.

    it just seems that all many on the right care about is the economy and jobs ... things were most prosperous under clinton were they not? ... and he had more taxes ...
  • inlet13inlet13 Posts: 1,979
    CROJAM95 wrote:
    ^ there's corporate welfare too, and Bachman should look at her subsidized life before crying foul. I would be all for a flat tax and national sales tax personally. I've always paid taxes(never earned off the books) and believe we should draw from as close to 100% of the population as possible. It hasn't gained steam cause it makes too much god damn sense

    As for people living off others.... It's all perception. Let's talk in specifics rather than this notion that people who feel the richest amongst us should pay a little more are in fact recipients of their tax burden. I can survive on my own two feet, but I'd rather have a stronger country as a whole than save what I think isn't a real savings. If republicans can put real money in my pocket not a gimmick like Bush did I'd be all ears.

    It's just not worth it, to us as a whole IMO

    You can get a whole electorate to sell out their principles for a few $$

    Let's see real reform, and breaks for the majority and a plan that can sustain certain programs we need to have..... I haven't seen it yet, nor will I

    In my opinion, the problem (for both sides of the isle) is the underlying truth is, Monetary Policy is just as relevant as Fiscal Policy (but is overlooked). Moreover, business cycles happen.

    So, Bush (or Obama or Clinton), for example, their policies may have worked (or not worked) better than is commonly understood, but other factors came into play.

    In economics, there's the saying "hold all other things equal".... the reality is, that's not possible in the real world... so, in my opinion, it goes back to theory.
    Here's a new demo called "in the fire":

    <object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt; <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,157
    polaris_x wrote:
    Jason P wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    what are the the opinions of the conservatives here on clinton? ... slick willy of course ...
    The ultimate politician. Dude brushed off an impeachment.

    it just seems that all many on the right care about is the economy and jobs ... things were most prosperous under clinton were they not? ... and he had more taxes ...
    As long as the economy is good and people have job security and cash, it's easy to pull the wool over our eyes. For Clinton, the Dot.coms were issuing make-believe stock out, there were no wars or enemies, the Seattle music scene was hitting its peak, and the Slickster was nailing ugly women left and right .... times were good. And times have changed.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    Jason P wrote:
    As long as the economy is good and people have job security and cash, it's easy to pull the wool over our eyes. For Clinton, the Dot.coms were issuing make-believe stock out, there were no wars or enemies, the Seattle music scene was hitting its peak, and the Slickster was nailing ugly women left and right .... times were good. And times have changed.

    right ... but you could be in a time of no-war if it wasn't for the neocon admin ... and if you didn't deregulate everything - maybe the economy would be more stable ... ?? ...
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    inlet13 wrote:
    Bush and Perry religious comments....

    They win with these. They néed to get the people on the far right to vote for them so they need to do this.


    I understand your point, I think. But, my point is... people want an economic argument to cure our ills. Not a for us to get-together and pray for a solution.

    That's why I think Perry's got no shot, if he really will try this super-religious approach.

    You act as if Perry's solutions is ONLY to pray. "Dear God, please fix our problems. We'll just sit here on our hands until you do."

    Perry has been fairly active in trimming/balancing the state's budget (just ask all the state's teachers, assuming you can find many who weren't laid off). I guess my point is, it's fine to think Perry would make a shitty president ... just be sure to think that for the right reasons. And it isn't because he attended a prayer rally.

    As for him "sounding like Bush" ... you people must think all Texans sound alike. ;)
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    polaris_x wrote:
    Jason P wrote:
    As long as the economy is good and people have job security and cash, it's easy to pull the wool over our eyes. For Clinton, the Dot.coms were issuing make-believe stock out, there were no wars or enemies, the Seattle music scene was hitting its peak, and the Slickster was nailing ugly women left and right .... times were good. And times have changed.

    right ... but you could be in a time of no-war if it wasn't for the neocon admin ... and if you didn't deregulate everything - maybe the economy would be more stable ... ?? ...

    I don't think there's a single administration in the history of America, neocon or not, that wouldn't be at war in Afghanistan right now.

    Your point, vis a vis Iraq, is a valid one.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
Sign In or Register to comment.