America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 10 years ago by HockeyDad. 43 replies replies.
Obama Applauds Reid
Burner02 Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
Fox News: "President Obama, openly expressing his frustration with Senate Republicans, applauded Majority Leader Harry Reid's success Thursday at invoking the so-called "nuclear option" as Democrats voted to strip the minority party of its primary power to block nominations -- the filibuster."

"Obama, even invoking former President Bush, said it's critical to "change the way that Washington is doing business."

"But Republicans and even some Democrats warned that the Senate may have just opened a Pandora's box -- and with little debate, approved a change that could haunt the chamber for years to come."

"This was nothing more than a power grab," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said.



Reid, what a ******!
cacman Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 07-03-2010
Posts: 12,216
The Dems will do ANYTHING to get their way - even if involves shredding the constitution a little.
They are after all doing it all for our own good.
ZRX1200 Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,617
Back off guys.

Democrats will line up to bash this move just like when the repubs threatened to do this........










Just wait.













Hold your breath................






















Um....
Buckwheat Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 04-15-2004
Posts: 12,251
Big mistake by all involved on both sides of the aisle. Mitch is a relic that just needs to retire.
Gene363 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,821

At one time or another all members of the Parliament of Whores have said this is a really bad idea.

Just one more reason to wish Reid, the child toucher voiced prick, to pay his due to Old Scratch sooner than later.
ZRX1200 Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,617
No Bush blame McConnell?


Ok.
CelticBomber Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
Republicans forced this. They refuse to do their jobs which is legislate, not block every single thing Obama tries to get done and shut down the government when they don't get their way. You can thank the Tea Party for this.
Gene363 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,821
CelticBomber wrote:
Republicans forced this. They refuse to do their jobs which is legislate, not block every single thing Obama tries to get done and shut down the government when they don't get their way. You can thank the Tea Party for this.


For your information, they are doing their job, just like Obama, they were elected. They are supposed to be the representatives, for their constituents, not obamatrons.

The democrats pulled the same thing blocking Bush appointments. When the republicans threatened to make the same change the democrats went on and on about the evils of the 'nuclear option.' This change screwed things, when the republicans are in control the democrats will regret this change.
ZRX1200 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,617
Stephen.


They've comfirmed 259 nominations this year and rejected 2.

He's taking his ball like a little bitch and running home crying. And YOU ARE BUYING IT.
edin508 Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 06-19-2012
Posts: 4,647
He drank the Obuma Kool aid. Probably posting from his Obuma phone too.
rfenst Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,336


Filibuster, to a large extent, is b.s. for poor sports on both sides. I am withholding judgment until there is a Republican majority to see if they overturn the vote. If not, they will be equally culpable.
CelticBomber Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
In the history of the United States, 168 presidential nominees have been filibustered, 82 blocked under President Obama, 86 blocked under all the other presidents combined. No one see's anything wrong with this? These were not filibusters of substance where they had a problem with the nominee, republicans have publicly stated they are going to block everything until the issue's they want to talk about brought before the house and passed.
stogiemonger Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 06-25-2009
Posts: 4,185
rfenst wrote:
Filibuster, to a large extent, is b.s. for poor sports on both sides. I am withholding judgment until there is a Republican majority to see if they overturn the vote. If not, they will be equally culpable.


House Republican Senators one day overturning this vote would be a fair response how?... and it won't happen, anyway. You know it as well as I.

If the nuclear option is further expanded the next time Republicans get control of the Senate (experts predict this will happen, and Senate Republicans have indicated this would be the plan if they (Democrats)passed these rule changes), why, then, would you not hold accountable the folks (Harry Reid and Senate Democrats in 2013)who changed the rules, and opened up this can of worms in the first place?

This is an unprecedented power grab by Democrats in the Senate. They will regret this, because it changes everything, forever. That is the cold hard reality, here. There's no turning back once we head down this slippery slope.
ZRX1200 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,617
Stephen these three nominees are for a court that BOTH SIDES AGREE IS OVERSTAFFED..........wake up!!
TMCTLT Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
CelticBomber wrote:
In the history of the United States, 168 presidential nominees have been filibustered, 82 blocked under President Obama, 86 blocked under all the other presidents combined. No one see's anything wrong with this? These were not filibusters of substance where they had a problem with the nominee, republicans have publicly stated they are going to block everything until the issue's they want to talk about brought before the house and passed.



While your filling us up with historical figures Stephen why don't you tell Us how many POTUS had appointments " step down " because they were TOO corrupt to hold their appointed position? I do NOT for the life of me know how you can continue to support this corrupt administration.....just because you voted for the man doesn't mean you have to keep supporting his failed Presidency and his corrupt cabinet of F*ck- ups....Tea Party's fault my AZZ. Leave it to your liberal **** for brains and you WON'T enjoy the freedom to air your opinion much longer....let alone other " Rights " given you under The Constitution of The United States!!!
calavera Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 01-26-2002
Posts: 1,868
CelticBomber wrote:
In the history of the United States, 168 presidential nominees have been filibustered, 82 blocked under President Obama, 86 blocked under all the other presidents combined. No one see's anything wrong with this? These were not filibusters of substance where they had a problem with the nominee, republicans have publicly stated they are going to block everything until the issue's they want to talk about brought before the house and passed.



No. This is the worst excuse of a president that the country has ever had. The only way to keep the Union even kind of put together and to have anything to salvage later is to minimize any further effects of the Kenyan King. By blocking anything he does, they are trying to minimize his impact. Lets hope that there is a candidate that can do something to reverse his damage later.

Libertarian in 2016.




J
CelticBomber Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
calavera wrote:
No. This is the worst excuse of a president that the country has ever had. The only way to keep the Union even kind of put together and to have anything to salvage later is to minimize any further effects of the Kenyan King. By blocking anything he does, they are trying to minimize his impact. Lets hope that there is a candidate that can do something to reverse his damage later.

Libertarian in 2016.




J


And there you have it. The reason they did what they did. I love how republicans have convinced the middle and lower classes that they are for them. When all they really do is vote to keep the rich rich and everyone else right where they are. Welcome to the crab bucket mentality. You don't have to put a lid on a bucket of crabs because the crabs themselves will make sure no one escapes. How dare someone who needs help get helped with our tax dollars. Don't people know that our tax dollars are for the rich corporations?
TMCTLT Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
CelticBomber wrote:
And there you have it. The reason they did what they did. I love how republicans have convinced the middle and lower classes that they are for them. When all they really do is vote to keep the rich rich and everyone else right where they are. Welcome to the crab bucket mentality. You don't have to put a lid on a bucket of crabs because the crabs themselves will make sure no one escapes. How dare someone who needs help get helped with our tax dollars. Don't people know that our tax dollars are for the rich corporations?



What a **** bleeding heart pile of steamy excrement.....please take yourself and all like you to ANY Socialist State that already exists and leave the rest of us alone. Seems to me that even with the damage the Bush Admin. did in eight years time....it PALES in comparison to this Admin.....take your own poll and let's see how MOST Americans are doing NOW compared to then, even IF you wait till the END of Bush's term. People ARE hurting worse than ever and will continue to do so under the Dems. And YOU are sadly mistaken as to which party is supposedly for the working class of America.....cause NEITHER are!!! Brick wall
Abrignac Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
CelticBomber wrote:
And there you have it. The reason they did what they did. I love how republicans have convinced the middle and lower classes that they are for them. When all they really do is vote to keep the rich rich and everyone else right where they are. Welcome to the crab bucket mentality. You don't have to put a lid on a bucket of crabs because the crabs themselves will make sure no one escapes. How dare someone who needs help get helped with our tax dollars. Don't people know that our tax dollars are for the rich corporations?


Count me in the group against corporate hand outs.

But, explain to me how guaranteeing income to someone gives them any incentive to go out and find a job instead of having more children?

Explain to me how giving away multiple phones to someone instead of telling them to find a job helps them?

Explain to me how guaranteeing unemployment benefits to someone for 2 years or more provides incentive to go find a job.

Explain how the Democratic Party is helping these people out of poverty.


bloody spaniard Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
Rfenst , the Republicans once had the opportunity to do same to the Democrats when they were the majority but opted to go the milquetoast, er, "honorable" way. (as usual).

Oh, and why isn't anyone mad at the McConnells, McCains, Lindseys, & Boehners who are ALWAYS taken by surprise before they roll over like queers in heat for their Democrat buddies a la Jimmy Carter when the Russians invaded Afghaniland and the persians overran the US embassy?

Gonna give the Tea Party a final parting shot. Don't know why I bother. Maryland is lost anyway, but they seem to be the only ones that give a damn anymore & have the groundroots support.


Oh, who am I kidding? I don't really give a damn anymore. Gimmee my Obamacare and SSI and leave me alone.
Screw the young'uns to come. They've lost their country anyway. I'll give 'em the finger when it's time to euthanize me & shove me in the oven. Beer
Gene363 Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,821
CelticBomber wrote:
In the history of the United States, 168 presidential nominees have been filibustered, 82 blocked under President Obama, 86 blocked under all the other presidents combined. No one see's anything wrong with this? These were not filibusters of substance where they had a problem with the nominee, republicans have publicly stated they are going to block everything until the issue's they want to talk about brought before the house and passed.


TMCTLT wrote:
What a **** bleeding heart pile of steamy excrement.....please take yourself and all like you to ANY Socialist State that already exists and leave the rest of us alone. Seems to me that even with the damage the Bush Admin. did in eight years time....it PALES in comparison to this Admin.....take your own poll and let's see how MOST Americans are doing NOW compared to then, even IF you wait till the END of Bush's term. People ARE hurting worse than ever and will continue to do so under the Dems. And YOU are sadly mistaken as to which party is supposedly for the working class of America.....cause NEITHER are!!! Brick wall


Abrignac wrote:
Count me in the group against corporate hand outs.

But, explain to me how guaranteeing income to someone gives them any incentive to go out and find a job instead of having more children?

Explain to me how giving away multiple phones to someone instead of telling them to find a job helps them?

Explain to me how guaranteeing unemployment benefits to someone for 2 years or more provides incentive to go find a job.

Explain how the Democratic Party is helping these people out of poverty.



+1 And the democrats have been in total charge in the past, i.e., Obama's first term, and never delivered, yet the fools keep lining up to vote for them. Same thing for the republicans, the two parties are as the two cheeks of one ass.
bloody spaniard Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
Say what you will about Reid, Schumer, Pelosi, and the Baraks, they are unrelenting in their fight unlike most Republican sellouts except for Cruz, Lee, and Rand Paul.
teedubbya Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
bloody spaniard wrote:
Say what you will about Reid, Schumer, Pelosi, and the Baraks, they are unrelenting in their fight unlike most Republican sellouts except for Cruz, Lee, and Rand Paul.



All involved were unrelenting and closed minded including all those mentined above. That is the issue.

The D's caved when the Rs threatened this, the R's didn't cave when the D's threatened this.
bloody spaniard Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
Yeah, but you have to admit, right or wrong the D's rock and the R's roll.

I think the only solution will be term limits for politicians AND their staffs- these crusty policy wonks just maintain the status quo seamlessly after elections. Clear 'em out of DC completely. No law practice, no lobbying allowed.
teedubbya Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
bloody spaniard wrote:
Yeah, but you have to admit, right or wrong the D's rock and the R's roll.

I think the only solution will be term limits for politicians AND their staffs- these crusty policy wonks just maintain the status quo seamlessly after elections. Clear 'em out of DC completely. No law practice, no lobbying allowed.



LOL on the rock and roll.

I'm paraphrasing an idea from someone not well liked in here but none hte less I like it.

How about an Amendment that says every congressman in any given congress in which the conress does not pass a balanced budget can not run for reelection?

If balanced is too hard at first try something close.
bloody spaniard Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
Applause Applause Applause

On that note, I gotta go...
CelticBomber Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
Abrignac wrote:
Count me in the group against corporate hand outs.

But, explain to me how guaranteeing income to someone gives them any incentive to go out and find a job instead of having more children?

Explain to me how giving away multiple phones to someone instead of telling them to find a job helps them?

Explain to me how guaranteeing unemployment benefits to someone for 2 years or more provides incentive to go find a job.

Explain how the Democratic Party is helping these people out of poverty.





Everyone always reverts to the lowest common denominator when making these arguments. Yes there are ALWAYS going to be people that game the system. That's all any news channel will ever show. What you won't see are the thousands of people who use these programs like food stamps etc to give them a leg up while they work hard to pull themselves out of poverty and go on to become productive members of society. Even people with jobs who get up every day and work hard aren't making ends meet. Look at the story of the Walmart employee's donating food for other employee's so that they can have a decent Thanksgiving. I will always be on the side of using our tax dollars to help other people who aren't as fortunate as others rather than see it go to corporations where the bosses give themselves huge bonuses and golden parachute's while they barely or in some cases like Walmart don't pay a living wage to their employee's. I'm not arguing that the Democrats have all the answer's. I'm just saying they are the lesser of two evils. No president in the history of the Republic has ever inherited a mess like the one that was dropped into Obama's lap. No president has ever been treated with more disrespect or outright open hostility from the very beginning.
teedubbya Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Here is the exact quote Blood.

"You just pass a law that says that any time there's a deficit of more than three percent of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election."
Abrignac Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
CelticBomber wrote:
Everyone always reverts to the lowest common denominator when making these arguments. Yes there are ALWAYS going to be people that game the system. That's all any news channel will ever show. What you won't see are the thousands of people who use these programs like food stamps etc to give them a leg up while they work hard to pull themselves out of poverty and go on to become productive members of society. Even people with jobs who get up every day and work hard aren't making ends meet. Look at the story of the Walmart employee's donating food for other employee's so that they can have a decent Thanksgiving. I will always be on the side of using our tax dollars to help other people who aren't as fortunate as others rather than see it go to corporations where the bosses give themselves huge bonuses and golden parachute's while they barely or in some cases like Walmart don't pay a living wage to their employee's. I'm not arguing that the Democrats have all the answer's. I'm just saying they are the lesser of two evils. No president in the history of the Republic has ever inherited a mess like the one that was dropped into Obama's lap. No president has ever been treated with more disrespect or outright open hostility from the very beginning.



So you feel it's ok to create and perpetuate a system that ties a persons hand to the government trough?

A living wage? Where does the constitution guarantee a living wage? Perhaps these downtrodden you speak of could pull themselves up and improve their marketability instead of relying on a handout to keep them afloat.

As far as inheriting a mess. Bush did leave the country with about an 8 Trillion dollar debt that began accumulating a long time ago. In fact, it took 50-60 years to get to that point. Obama has doubled it in 5 years.
Gene363 Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,821
CelticBomber wrote:
Everyone always reverts to the lowest common denominator when making these arguments. Yes there are ALWAYS going to be people that game the system. That's all any news channel will ever show. What you won't see are the thousands of people who use these programs like food stamps etc to give them a leg up while they work hard to pull themselves out of poverty and go on to become productive members of society. Even people with jobs who get up every day and work hard aren't making ends meet. Look at the story of the Walmart employee's donating food for other employee's so that they can have a decent Thanksgiving. I will always be on the side of using our tax dollars to help other people who aren't as fortunate as others rather than see it go to corporations where the bosses give themselves huge bonuses and golden parachute's while they barely or in some cases like Walmart don't pay a living wage to their employee's. I'm not arguing that the Democrats have all the answer's. I'm just saying they are the lesser of two evils. No president in the history of the Republic has ever inherited a mess like the one that was dropped into Obama's lap. No president has ever been treated with more disrespect or outright open hostility from the very beginning.



I'm calling Bravo Sierra, the hate for GWB was visceral from the get go and got worse over time.

The rest of your post is enabling bad behavior using the old, "There is no limit to what I can do with other people's money." nonsense. Even Clinton got folks off welfare, by making it more difficult to get not easier.

A large part of the debt Obama inherited was the war he said he would end, instead, he doubled down on GWB policies and is ready to commit (kill) our service men and women in Afghanistan for another ten years.
MACS Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,796
Abrignac wrote:
Count me in the group against corporate hand outs.

But, explain to me how guaranteeing income to someone gives them any incentive to go out and find a job instead of having more children?

Explain to me how giving away multiple phones to someone instead of telling them to find a job helps them?

Explain to me how guaranteeing unemployment benefits to someone for 2 years or more provides incentive to go find a job.

Explain how the Democratic Party is helping these people out of poverty.




Yessir... I'd like an answer to these questions as well. Those people (receiving the handouts) are going to vote for the person providing them... democrats are buying their votes with the taxpayers money. Sad, but true.

Giving them just enough to barely survive, but enough to suck the will to improve themselves right out of them. Keeping them right under the thumb of "the man".
MACS Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,796
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/best-worst-run-states-america-030403958.html

Yahoo article about the best and worst run states.

The top 5 are all red states with the exception of Iowa. The bottom 5 are ALL blue.

Just an observation.
Abrignac Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
CelticBomber wrote:
Everyone always reverts to the lowest common denominator when making these arguments.

Clarify please. This should be interesting.


CelticBomber wrote:
Yes there are ALWAYS going to be people that game the system.

There is an entire culture which games the system.


CelticBomber wrote:
That's all any news channel will ever show.

What channel? This is that 800 lb gorilla in the room that everyone sees, but refuses to address.

CelticBomber wrote:
What you won't see are the thousands of people who use these programs like food stamps etc to give them a leg up while they work hard to pull themselves out of poverty and go on to become productive members of society.

So we give to millions to help thousands. The program you speak of hasn't been close to being marginally effective at pulling anyone from the jaws of poverty. But, it's a great way to bankrupt a nation.

CelticBomber wrote:
Even people with jobs who get up every day and work hard aren't making ends meet.

Oh well. It's not government's job to make everyone prosperous. Prosperity is a function of hard work and innovation.

CelticBomber wrote:
Look at the story of the Walmart employee's donating food for other employee's so that they can have a decent Thanksgiving.

Charity starts at home. As not what your country can do for you....

CelticBomber wrote:
I will always be on the side of using our tax dollars to help other people who aren't as fortunate as others rather than see it go to corporations where the bosses give themselves huge bonuses and golden parachute's while they barely or in some cases like Walmart don't pay a living wage to their employee's.

With very, very, very rare exception would I ever be in favor of corporate welfare. But with all due respect, Walmart's money is there's to spend, not yours to dictate. If someone doesn't want to work for what ever you consider a non-living wage, then they should prepare themselves with a great education. Entry level jobs should NEVER be considered as security with which to raise a family or provide retirement security.

CelticBomber wrote:
I'm not arguing that the Democrats have all the answer's.

Sure you are. Do I need to drag up previous quotes?

CelticBomber wrote:
I'm just saying they are the lesser of two evils. No president in the history of the Republic has ever inherited a mess like the one that was dropped into Obama's lap.

And he has done absolutely nothing at all that will lead us to the promised land. He has done nothing but expand the government teet since he was elected.


CelticBomber wrote:
No president has ever been treated with more disrespect or outright open hostility from the very beginning.

Hope and Change. One rubs another's face in crap and you expect them to smile and ask for more.
bloody spaniard Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
Note to self, NEVER ever get into a posting argument with brother Abri.
Added name to Victor's on list.Anxious
Abrignac Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
bloody spaniard wrote:
Note to self, NEVER ever get into a posting argument with brother Abri.
Added name to Victor's on list.Anxious



Is it a good or bad thing to be on that list?


I'm just get tired of hearing people apologize for others prosperity or lack thereof. I'm not anywhere near the 1%. But, I'm COMPLETELY responsible for my own quality of life. About 30 years ago I signed up for unemployment. When they told me how much my benefits were I told them to shred the application. A few days later I had a better paying job than the one I was FIRED from.

Nowadays you've got a whole culture that lives on the dole. Why go out and get a job when you can get $2-3k a month in handouts while living in a house that's paid for while your un-married baby's daddy lives with you and has a decent paying job?
mikey1597 Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 05-18-2007
Posts: 14,162
CelticBomber wrote:
No president in the history of the Republic has ever inherited a mess like the one that was dropped into Obama's lap. No president has ever been treated with more disrespect or outright open hostility from the very beginning.



Are you Fu@KIN KIDDIN? You need to break out the history books out and do a little reading.

It will take several years after the bummer leaves off to find out just how deep a hole he has dug for this nation. For being a transparent pontiff he sure has mucked up the water.
cacman Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 07-03-2010
Posts: 12,216
CelticBomber wrote:
No president has ever been treated with more disrespect or outright open hostility from the very beginning.

Something tells me he has brought this on himself.
He lied about Obamacare, Benghazi, NSA Wiretapping, etc. And he doesn't even know what his own administration is doing.
Transparency…LMMFAO!!! He sealed his own records. There has been nothing transparent about the 'O', what he has or has not done. A black sheet has been draped over all of it to keep as much away from the American people as possible.

The truth shall set you free.
teedubbya Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
mikey1597 wrote:
Are you Fu@KIN KIDDIN? You need to break out the history books out and do a little reading.

It will take several years after the bummer leaves off to find out just how deep a hole he has dug for this nation. For being a transparent pontiff he sure has mucked up the water.



Normally I would agree with you but things have changed. After Bush left office a reset button was set in that he was no longer responsible for the effects of his action and it was all on Obama. I assume the same button is still on the wall of the white house for the big O to hit on the way out.

At least that works with the partisan hacks that will always support whatever he does/did just like it did for the Bush hacks.
HockeyDad Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,135
teedubbya wrote:
Normally I would agree with you but things have changed. After Bush left office a reset button was set in that he was no longer responsible for the effects of his action and it was all on Obama. I assume the same button is still on the wall of the white house for the big O to hit on the way out.

At least that works with the partisan hacks that will always support whatever he does/did just like it did for the Bush hacks.



Hillary is gonna blame everything on Obama?!
mikey1597 Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 05-18-2007
Posts: 14,162
HockeyDad wrote:
Hillary is gonna blame everything on Obama?!


That's a good point. If the dems get back in the "It's Bush's fault" excuse wont float anymore.
DrafterX Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
they should get one of those easy buttons.. Mellow
teedubbya Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
mikey1597 wrote:
That's a good point. If the dems get back in the "It's Bush's fault" excuse wont float anymore.



Thank you for making my point.
HockeyDad Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,135
mikey1597 wrote:
If the dems get back in


Oh you are so adorable with your optimism for the Republicans!
Users browsing this topic
Guest