Biden vs. Palin: Who is the victor?

October 2, 2008 at 9:41 pm 38 comments

As the debate started, I was rooting for Palin. I want to see her succeed, her and McCain to win, and the world to be a better place. I have watched Palin stumble through questions, especially from Katie Couric, so I was hoping for a better performance.

She did better. In fact, she got better as the debate went on. She did look nervous early, and she tried to address questions out of place, but she gradually found a groove. She did the best she could with her experience. She was fighting an extremely difficult battle with a seasoned politician. I say politician because is just that. He doesn’t belong on the Obama ticket. Obama is talking about change, and here is a guy talking about how he has always done it.

I think that if a winner is declared, it would have to be Biden. He was better spoken, addressed the points better, and stayed on task a little better. He had more concrete responses. I hate to even type this, but I think he did a better job.

Does that mean Obama and Biden should win? Absolutely not. Obama screams change, when Biden is nothing but old politics. Obama can’t tell you how is going to feel today, much less a stance on any issue. Any stance we hear from their ticket comes strictly from Biden. Obama is just a front man. The Democrats knew they needed someone that looked nothing like Bush or McCain, and that is what they got in Obama. They couldn’t have put Hillary out there, because she is too similar. Unfortunately, Obama has no substance, so they had to put Mr. Politician, Biden, on the ticket. This is such a game…

The Republicans will win this election. McCain and Palin will convey their beliefs to the American public, and America will understand that their positive livelihood rides on a Republican win.


Entry filed under: Politics. Tags: , , , , , , .

Another proposal: interesting and miscalculated but nice! Obama’s Staff Part Of Economic Problems!

38 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Miss Lola  |  October 2, 2008 at 10:04 pm

    Thank you for being honest-as much as it hurt.
    I disagree with your wishful thinking about a Republican win, though.

    And…it is all such a game. Biden’s selection, Palin’s selection…all for how they could help get the “win.”

    Let’s hope that regardless of who wins in November the country will fare better in the coming years.

  • 2. averagepolitics  |  October 2, 2008 at 10:08 pm

    There will be a republican win. The American people can’t be so stupid to believe that Obama is going to bring change… Has anyone heard how? Biden actually threw down some positions on things, but we all know they are HIS positions, not Obama’s.

    The American public will open their eyes, and those that are following a well-spoken liar: they will be too hung-over or have a party to attend, or have to work late, or some other reason why they didn’t vote… But they want change!

  • 3. kernel panic  |  October 2, 2008 at 10:13 pm

    On the issue of change, yes Biden is old school, but he is only running foe VP. The real change comes with the President. And Obama is change, McCain just isn’t. McCain is even more old school, and even older than Biden. The Maverick tag just won’t stick anymore.

  • 4. Tom  |  October 2, 2008 at 10:15 pm

    Well averagepolitics, sorry to say but it doesn’t appear you’re correct. Check the state polls in swing states and take a look at every analysis of the electoral map. Palin is a joke and disgrace, Obama is the next President of the United States.

  • 5. Chris  |  October 2, 2008 at 10:16 pm

    I agree the voters want change. They’re tired of the same old corporate / party machinery politics. So — why would they vote for McCain / Palin, when they are perfect products of that same old corporate machine?

  • 6. John  |  October 2, 2008 at 10:17 pm

    The American people can’t be so stupid to believe that Obama is going to bring change… Has anyone heard how?

    Millions of Americans heard during Obama’s acceptance speech exactly how he wuld bring about change. Maybe you didn’t watch it?

  • 7. averagepolitics  |  October 2, 2008 at 10:18 pm

    Look at past elections… The early polls always have a democrat out front. The last election: Kerry was supposed to win by a landslide, and we know what happen there. Trust me, at that time, I was for Kerry!

    For the polls to be this close, the Republicans will win. Democrats talk a lot of stuff, even their voters, but never follow through… Except on raising taxes. With that, they always follow through. The only thing is, they end up pushing the tax increase all the way do to the Middle Class. Look at the Income Tax. That was supposed to only be on the rich… Sounds like the Obama plan!

  • 8. averagepolitics  |  October 2, 2008 at 10:20 pm

    Obama has said a lot of we are going to fix schools, we are going to tax the rich, we are going to do this, we are going to do that… HOW??? How are you going to make all of these changes?

    Don’t get me wrong, most of the politicians do what they have to keep their job. How is he going to change that? Why not vote for someone who will work to gradually change a flawed system but make changes where possible?

  • 9. mastergregor  |  October 2, 2008 at 10:45 pm

    Comments #7 and #8 just do not stand. First, Kerry was never in the lead in the past election. Second, look at what Clinton did with taxes and you will see that you position on raising taxes does not stand. Bush senior on the other side did just that: ” Read my lips, no new taxes” – remember??

    Obama did say how, but maybe you did not listen. 300 billion increase in spending will cover schools among other things. It will also cover health care. And the best thing, it will come from people that scratch each others back for all the millions they make.

    All in all, it looks to me like you just rant with no facts. That is not an educated debate, that is just a rant, like you want to persuade yourself all those things are true. Just because you post them does not make them true.

  • 10. averagepolitics  |  October 2, 2008 at 10:56 pm

    Okay… Master Gregor! First, thank you for letting me know I just rant. I like to rant. I have ranted here several times before.

    As far as Kerry leading in polls: Wouldn’t you say CNN and USAToday to be credible sources? They both had Kerry leading the polls before the actual election. There were many other less significant sources that said the same… Look it up for the FACTS!

    Now on to Bush’s no new taxes. He did raise existing taxes, but only after a long battle with a DEMOCRATIC Congress that forced him to raise taxes… God job Dems!

    I like the idea of a $300 Billion increase in spending. It means I get to pay more in taxes to help other people who don’t want to work for themselves. That is what the Democrats are always based on…

    You tell me to use facts. Look at the facts. The Democrats proposed the Income Tax in the early 1900’s as something just for the rich. They conned Republicans into changing the Constitution to do it. If they were only for the rich, why do we ALL pay income taxes? The only way you get around them is to sit on your butt and ask for a govt. check!

    They will pitch tax increases only for the rich, but they get greedy and want more govt. programs. How do you pay for that? Slide the bar down to the middle class. That is how they do it!!! You check the facts. I am ranting, but with something solid to back it up!

  • 11. practical  |  October 2, 2008 at 11:15 pm

    mccain should be banned from contesting the election for making such a lousy VP pick. Palin is dump but after picking her as a VP candidate, Mccain proved that he is the dumbest of all (bush, palin and himself).
    Regarding the debate performance, Palin looked like a school kid who had crammed every damn possible line and she just kept repeating them again and again.

  • 12. Chocolate Cowgirl  |  October 2, 2008 at 11:22 pm

    I am also a republican but the party has of late not provided a ticket that I can conscientiously vote on. I do not believe Ms Palin is fit for the complex and demanding office of the presidency if so called upon. Unless rehearsed I am not sure she could pass the US citizen test. McCain put his candidacy first and the country a distant second when you chose her for the VP. I have never heard Biden speak before and was impressed with his depth and humaneness.

  • 13. averagepolitics  |  October 2, 2008 at 11:35 pm

    When I first saw Palin, I was ecstatic. I thought she was a great choice, and she would help pull some Hillary supporters, but I have to agree with Cowgirl and practical, somewhat…

    I think, now, she may have been a bad choice. She is not experienced at all on the federal level, and it continues to show. I hope she can step it up!

  • 14. mike  |  October 2, 2008 at 11:49 pm

    With all due respect to your wishful thinking, that you would admit that you had low expectations for Governor Palin, and that she “rose” to those low expectations (and even surpassed them, barely) says more about your Party’s ticket, the judgment of your presidential candidate and the utter mediocrity of said candidate’s running mate than it does about the Democrat’s ticket headed by “Mr. Change and seconded by “Mr. Politician”. Sarah Palin is as banal as the faux populism that Republicans have fraudulently promoted, which is actually elitism because the Republicans economic policies favor the rich (Dem or Repub) and shaft the American worker. As for “averagepolitics”, please get your historical facts straight! The income tax was not proposed by the Democrats. It was actually proposed by the Republicans who at that time under Theodore Roosevelt were actually a very progressive and populist party, while the Democrats were seen as conservative and reactionary and very pro-business and status quo. Believe me, no one sits around on their butt, awaiting a govt check! Bill Clinton ended that forever with Republican-sponsored welfare “reform”. Bush agreed to raise taxes (mostly capital gains taxes) after his own party told him that it was a good idea for his reelection campaign soon to come in 1992. in 2004, Kerry WAS leading in the polls (at least up until late September). CNN and USAToday were criticized even though they went out of their way to skewer the poll results in Bush’s favor (so they could appear “fair and balanced”). Bush really was despised “out there”. But, after the election shenanigans perpetrated by the traitorous “swiftboat liars” (who should be tried and then shot for sedition and treason), the “stealth” campaigns conducted in evangelical churches (openly promoting Bush in violation of the U.S. Constitution (time to end tax exemptions for churches)and then the Ohio Republicans (led by the execrable and dishonorable Ken Blackwell), Bush “won” in Ohio and thus, “won” the election. I don’t mind your own faux “history”, but get your facts straight. Oh, and please, learn how to write. That’s one thing about Republicans–their absolute inability to write, speak or think clearly.

  • 15. Honeybee  |  October 2, 2008 at 11:56 pm

    Biden won all the way Polin started the john mcCain preacher debate to answer the next question by her choosing what she wanted to talk about Polin wanted to talk energy so it must get hot up there in the frozed tundra /she talked rehearsed and flakey and went in circles throwing in stupid comments.

    Think of this ??? winking in a vp debate as winking looks stupid in any debate that is for personal behavior she was debating for the vp of USA how stupid can she be ? Is Overloaded with Phucker Bounds lingo…….
    She is 44 years old with her hair hanging over her eyes and caught in Eyelashes I was hoping it continued we were laughing up a storm and it reminded me of the time that old sports announcer was standing in the wind and his hair piece would flip up then lower over and over .
    Phalin is toast /McCain is toaST AND THE TOAST IS GETTING OLD.

  • 16. kb  |  October 2, 2008 at 11:59 pm

    As for being sure the Repubs will win, it doesn’t look that way (judging from the liberal media). In 1992, Richard Nixon said, “If Clinton wins, I’ll know that this country has gone to hell.” Who EVER would have thought we’d have elected him twice. Now we’ve got a man of questionable allegiances, but with a beautiful smile, who says nothing but “Change”. Oh yeah, if we can re-elect an impeached president, we can elect the junior senator.

  • 17. mastergregor  |  October 3, 2008 at 12:06 am

    averagepolitics, I have nothing against educated ranting, far from it. However, opinions that are presented as facts are a different story.

    I would agree that CNN and USAToday are credible enough sources. And I agree that just before the election in 2004 they were giving Kerry a slight edge, about 0.5% to be exact. But your stand was that in early polls Kerry had a big lead, and that is just not true. The turn in Kerry’s favor happened some time in august-september time frame if I remember correctly. But this is not the main issue, taxes are, so I will move on.

    To fill the $300 billion increase Obama is proposing no increase in taxes for people making below $250k, but rather for corporations (think big money, oil and defense industry and their profits) and for people making over $250k a year. I do not know if you belong to this group, but I certainly do not and I am more than happy not to have my taxes increased. On the other side, I am also happy that rich people and corporations will finally put in their fair share into the omnipotent IRS, who has been providing them, through the White House for the past 7 years, with all kinds of loopholes and exceptions, the last being the blatant act by Bush which just legalized all these tax breaks wealthy people were getting.

    Do not get me wrong, I do not have a personal vendetta against the rich, I just want all of Americans to contribute equally, and I do not feel that is the case currently. This is particularly the case with corporate America, and the profits they are raking recently. Again, look at all the CEO’s and oil companies and all the defense industry and you will see that their profit and their stock has quadrupled since 2000 … No wonder, because they put people in Washington that enabled them to do it …

    This is the real change that Obama is talking about. No baggage, not special interests, no paybacks he has to do and then he will have more freedom to work and serve the only boss he needs to have – American people.

  • 18. averagepolitics  |  October 3, 2008 at 12:08 am


    First of all, if I need to learn to write, I think you need to join the class. Your one big paragraph is amazing!

    Second, you really have your facts wrong. I have studied many sources that have put the Dems to blame for proposing the Income Tax. The idoitic Republicans of the time thought they would push for it only if the Constitution was amended, thinking that would never happen. Well it did, we all pay taxes, and we owe a big thanks to the Dems.

    And when you tell me that no one sits on their butt and waits for a government check, you have never been to Memphis. A child is seen as a $400/month paycheck. New rims, gold chains, and a variety of unnecessary items are purchased with the government money! These people do sit on their ass. In fact, it is taught in the churches how to work the system.

  • 19. averagepolitics  |  October 3, 2008 at 12:21 am


    That makes sense the way you put it. Let’s tax the rich especially those making over $250,000 (which I am not currently a part of) since they are not contributing their fair share of taxes.

    Let’s look at the fairness. The wealthiest 1% earn 19% percent of all income, but pay 37% in taxes. Let’s tax them more.

    The top 10% pay 68% of all taxes. Let’s tax them more.

    The government took in an additional $780 Billion after the Bush tax cuts…

    Following the Bush tax cuts, a Treasury Department analysis estimated that the top 1% would pay 31% of all taxes had the tax cuts not gone into effect, but instead paid 37%.

    Now, I love for other people to pay my bills. In fact, since Democrats think we should redistribute wealth and tax the rich, everyone that makes more money than I do, should give me a $1.

    Seriously, taxing corporations and people making over $250,000 is just reducing their ability to create jobs for those that want a cushy secure (or so they think) middle-class job. The more taxes they pay, the less money they have to pay employees.

    Also, the more taxes a corporation pays, the less dividends they can distribute to stockholders. That means all of your 401Ks that are investing in these corporations are losing money. Also, when they pay more tax, they raise their price. If a company works on a 3% profit margin, as many commodity-goods companies do, a tax increase can put them in the hole, so they raise the price. This costs middle-class America more money.

    Go ahead tax the rich, we don’t know that it really affects us.

  • 20. Todd  |  October 3, 2008 at 1:04 am

    — This is a race of pure tokenism. —

    On the Left, we have Mr. Token Black Man.
    On the Right, we have Mrs. Token Apple Pie “Hockey” Mom.

    We need to clean house in Washington. None of these people are doing their job. If they say they are, they’re doing crappy jobs and need to be fired.

    I’m not going to be hit by the $250k+ tax hike, but I understand those are the people who create jobs. Most small businesses fit into this niche.

    I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen people who make very little money do stupid things over…and over…and over. (Like my neighbor with the $18k car who put $12K of upgrades when he could have picked up something for the total which had more horsepower or better gas mileage.)

    Also, California needs a good earthquake and split into two states: We have too damn many electoral votes.

    …of course, the fault line is in the wrong place for that.

  • 21. mastergregor  |  October 3, 2008 at 1:05 am

    Well, do not take my words out of context, first of all. I never said let’s tax wealthy more, but I did say let’s tax them like everyone else. They do live in US (hopefully), so they should contribute equal percentage.

    Now, if they are so filthy rich (and primarily I think of corporations here) that their percentage amounts to a lot of money, then their share amounts to a lot of money and that is just it. Equality, the way I see it, is not monetary equality per se, but rather contributing equality, which means we all contribute the same share.

    Based on this you can accuse me of being a socialist, and I will say I just might be. However, I do recognize that, as any other system, this “distribution” can and will be abused … Just like those $2000 cards in New Orleans were misused. So there will always be a local Memphis bum who will take advantage of it, regardless of current government system.

    When you talk about creating jobs, in the past 5 years, how many jobs did the big corporations create? How many did they ship overseas to increase their profits? If big businesses were creating jobs with the tax breaks they got, I would be all for them keeping it. But the fact is that they have shipped most of them outside the US, in order to increase the profit, on which in return, they do not get taxed … Just look at Michigan as a state since 2000, or any other working-class rich state like PA or Ohio, and numbers speak for themselves.

    At the same time, small business is creating local jobs and is starting to grow. However, since big guys have all the extra cash, they squash a small competition and take over already developed customer base. Just think what Wal-Mart and alike are doing to rural US. Urban areas are still resisting, but they too are seeing local mama’s and papa’s shops failing and being taken over by big guys. Think of local gas stations, restaurants, convenience stores, even newspapers …

    I do agree that Obama’s taxation will somewhat hurt a certain number of small business owners. I do not know how many, but it might be as high as 50% even. Nevertheless, I think that in the long run, this will actually increase their profits, and they will be able to better compete on a local level, for the same reasons big guys will not be able to just bully their way into communities.

    So yes, I do say tax the rich, they should not be exempt just for being rich.

  • 22. moonwort  |  October 3, 2008 at 1:07 am

    If you know anything about people who make above $250,000/year, you should know their access to personal accountants, tax preparers, and information from those with knowledge of legal loopholes, is greatly accelerated compared to someone who makes $25,000/year.

    At least 3 times I’ve heard “Sh*t, I have to make time to go out and buy a new car before Friday…unless I want to pay $50,000 in taxes…yeah, new car please!”

    Rich people can hide money better. Of the 5 people I know who make more than $250,000+ each year, most of them “on paper” make negative income each year due to the great loopholes created by the GOP. Is there something wrong with that? No…I don’t support any income taxes, but I do think the reality should be addressed.

  • 23. Todd  |  October 3, 2008 at 1:08 am

    …and another thing: Bottom 50% of taxpayers contribute 4%.

    Four freaking percent.

    96% of taxes are paid by the top 50%.

    The top % have enough money to move their assets overseas or hide it with loopholes. Yup, small business is going to take it on the chin because we are apparently converting to Socialism.

  • 24. obamasprayer  |  October 3, 2008 at 1:27 am

    I have a link to a poll at my blog
    I want to add that I believe Gov. Palin, did much better than the media had us believe she would do. However, Sen. Biden won the debate format and provided factual data to back up his arguments.
    I believe Gov. Palin was her worst enemy. She lost when she admitted to Sen. Biden that she “may not answer the questions the way you or the moderator want…” when she was asked about the sub prime lending crisis, Palin decided to avoid the question and discuss her energy policy. Also a big point with me was that she could not answer how her ticket differs with Bush. Very disappointing if you are a Palin fan and if you believed in her call for change. By her actions in tonight’s debate, she does not represent a change in direction from the Bush Administration.

  • 25. Sarah Beebe  |  October 3, 2008 at 2:26 am

    I am PRO Republican. I do agree that Obama did better than McCain and Biden did better than Palin, SO!!!
    I am sure Republicans would win. Obama camp is trying to make people think about issues which are serious BUT Republicans are good at hitting emotions of voters such as Gay Marriage, Abortion and Religion, which more necessary to winning. Thats why Republicans are GOOD at Business and WINNING elections, Democrats are good at GOVERNING the country IF again if they ever WIN.

  • 26. John McCain  |  October 3, 2008 at 2:52 am

    Sarah was doing unexpectedly well, everybody says.
    So I am the clear winner.
    There’s still 4 weeks to go. A lot of things can happen.
    A war can be started.
    Support me, vote for me.

  • 27. Mario Henry  |  October 3, 2008 at 7:08 am

    I see the moderator of this blog is a racist! Gold Chains? Obviously you are an idiot! Know your facts the majority of welfare recipients are white people living in the midwest and around the
    Appalachian states. I am well over the 250k figure that will pay higher taxes with an Obam adminstration. I cannot believe how stupid people are weather or not they are Republican or Democrat to support a candidate that has an exact voting record as the current administration.

    Race will be the only factor if Obama does not win by 8-10 points! McCain went from fundamentals of the economy is sound, to we are in a crisis, we need to get a commission to investigate what happened on Wall St, I am suspending my campaign. What an idiot!

  • 28. Krazy Kooter  |  October 3, 2008 at 8:49 am

    You’re an idiot. Seriously. Just keep dreaming on about November. NOT going to happen for McCain.

  • 29. Paul  |  October 3, 2008 at 9:07 am

    Maverick, Schmaverick!

  • 30. CA  |  October 3, 2008 at 9:50 am

    Master Debaters – one of the Top Swing Voter Demographics in 2008.

    The Top 50 Swing Voters

    #50 – Hockey Moms
    #47 – People with STDs
    #40 – Anonymous Sperm Donors
    #37 – Wall Street Pinkos
    #36 – ??

  • 31. kermittheagnostic  |  October 3, 2008 at 10:55 am

    I am not sure if I could even consider voting for someone that refers to some of her constituents as “Joe Six Pack!” I mean who in the audience goes, “Ya! Ya! THAT’s me THAT’s me!! You go Palin! Screw everyone else! Give the big companies breaks so that it trickles down to me and I can buy more beer! And I want more guns damn it! MORE GUNS! Yeeee ha!”

    I don’t think I we the views of “Joe Six Pack” represented in government!

    The Republicans have always appealed to 2 types: The Rich and the stupid. The rich because they get less regulation of their companies and the stupid because they don’t really understand that the best way to get what you want is not with a gun but rather through careful diplomacy and toleration of differing opinions.

    Oh and one more thing about “Mavericks” – They can be dangerous! Ask Val Kilmer

    And, hey, what about Gwen Iffel slanting it for Obama now Republicans????? Let’s hear how she helped her book!! WOW did she make Palin look bad or what??

  • 32. Mary Russell  |  October 3, 2008 at 1:15 pm

    Many people think being an organizer is nothing. Believe me, the only way we are going to fix this country is if the whole country is organized. Senator Obama has already organized small groups in most cities. After the election these small groups will become volunteers to make America better. I am already working in El Paso, TX and will continue with my committment to work with the Obama for President organization. We can’t expect other people to do our job for us. Let’s get busy and each one can do what he or she is best at doing.

  • 33. drslogan  |  October 3, 2008 at 1:33 pm

    The debate was certainly interesting in many aspects, particularly in demonstrating that we’ve entered the gloves-off territory. Sen. Biden lied throughout the debate without blinking. The single claim that his new boss has never said he’d sit down with Ahmadinejad with no preconditions was an astonishing lie, given the broad availability of the video that shows Obama making that very promise.
    Biden was serving Kool-Aid ’08 all night and has proven that he was a good pick for Obama. The only hope is that more people will start asking themselves the real Is America Ready? question and get the facts straight before they vote.

  • 34. averagepolitics  |  October 3, 2008 at 2:10 pm

    Dr. Slogan,

    It is good to see someone post some more facts instead of constant Democratic rhetoric. Keep it up!

  • 36. jakoye23  |  October 8, 2008 at 6:51 pm

    It was mostly a tie, with a small nod to Palin since she came in with such low expectations. Palin may have not strayed far from the talking points, but Biden recited his own list of talking points as well.

    The problem came when Biden left the reservation and got off his talking points. “US kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon”? Uh, no. Biden and Obama warned that democracy in the Palestinian territories would lead to Hamas rule? Um, no. Biden’s vote for the Iraq War resolution wasn’t a vote for war? Um….

    And on and on and on. Biden loses because he lied or at least flubbed. If Palin had made similar errors, she would’ve been flayed alive.

    That’s why the SNL Debate skit went back to ol’ tried and true Palinisms: she shoots wolves from helicopters. Her teenage daughter is pregnant and being forced to get married. She thinks the end of days is nigh. They didn’t have anything new to throw at her, just those old, tired, debunked rumors.

    And that’s because Palin performed well. Not bad for the lady’s first major debate.

  • 37. noamgr  |  October 8, 2008 at 9:31 pm

    Palin as president. How this doesn’t scare the living crap out of somebody, I will never be able to fathom. I’d sooner vote for 4 more years of Bush.

    My main problem with Obama, is he just doesn’t seem ready. I’m sorry, while he does come off as a mastermind of the English tongue when compared to Bush or Palin, he’s not particularly charismatic either. I’m not feeling the Obama fire… maybe a light simmer. Clinton had charisma, Obama only looks good when compared to the qwacks against whom he’s running.

    He is the lesser of two evils though. Well, not evils, idiots; the lesser of two idiots.

    Elitist? He’s not elite *enough.* I’m sorry, but as much as I love my best buddy and enjoy having a beer with him, I wouldn’t want him or anyone like him to run the U.S!

    A president is NOT supposed to be a “regular joe;” a president IS supposed to be the elite, the best of the best, a natural leader, someone with a clearer understanding of the way the world works than most people, somebody who can make a quick decision at a time when everyone else is running around like beheaded chickens. A president IS supposed to think he’s better than most, because he IS supposed to be better than most.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
October 2008
« Sep    

%d bloggers like this: