« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Why My Family Dislikes Obama
My Republican/Right-Leaning Independent family members weighed in, last weekend, with their opinions.
Here is what I gleaned:
1. He talks down to us. We don't want to hear that we should lose weight and drive smaller cars. (My counter: *rolls eyes* and plans to buy a Prius and start exercising more).
2. He's smug. Arrogant. (My counter: So are you, sometimes).
3. He falters when he doesn't have a teleprompter in front of him. (My counter: McCain falters when he DOES).
4. He planned this since after he wrote his first book. Maybe before then. (My counter: McCain has been planning to be President even longer....and hey, he wrote a book too!)
5. We don't like big government. (My counter: I don't like small-minded people running and owning everything while the rest of us get diddley-squat.)
As you can see, I had a fun weekend with my Republican family. Truth be told, though, I still love them. And they still love me. And they admit that they think Obama's gonna win this thing. And they admit that they can put up with that.
They also admit that they don't do ONE QUARTER OF A THIRD of what I do for their candidate, like I do for Obama.
Republicans.....they are so silly.
Comments (50)
You mean, they would NOT acknowledge that they don't want a black President?
August 1, 2008 11:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, Mandy, it's not the black thing. My family has no problem with that.
It's the rest of it: "Entitlement". "Big Government". "Why should I help some other people when I have my own bills to pay?". That sort of thing.
August 1, 2008 11:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would be a better country, better world if we realized we are the "other people".
August 2, 2008 1:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's pretend that anyone who criticizes Obama is a fat, Republican tax rebel, and forget that Barack Obama is a totally unprincipled con-man.
He promised to filibuster the FISA bill when he was campaigning in Wisconsin, but who really cares about preserving the Constitution compared to the transcendent importance of electing Barack Obama?
He attacked Hillary Clinton about NAFTA again and again and again, and as soon as she dropped out of the race, NAFTA didn't look so bad.
Obama has voted to fund the on-going genocide in Iraq again and again, and now he wants to expand the unwinnable war in Afghanistan. Obama's weak little environmental policy is like half a glass of water when what we really need is a full-scale fire brigade to keep the planet from burning down.
But let's pretend that the only possible objections to Barack Obama are feeble-minded trivia from Republican hoodoos in the boonies, because we have to vote for anything that calls itself a Democrat, even a totally unprincipled con-man like Barack Obama.
The Democrats could have nominated a decent person with real principles like Chris Dodd or Wes Clark or Dennis Kucinich, but instead they chose a hypocrite with a hate-America entourage.
But don't progressives absolutely have to vote for the Democrat Obama, no matter how much of the progressive agenda he betrays?
No!
August 2, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
My Republican relatives in Ohio don't like Obama (and pretty much every Democrat) mostly because they think he will raise their taxes.
August 2, 2008 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Why should I help others when I have my own bills to pay?"
This is an example of not being able to see that their success, whether they be college-educated professionals or right-wing radio talk show hosts, is owed in large part to the climate of opportunity afforded by the American culture and its support of a middle class. Pillars of that support, which have been under attack for some time now, are public education, environmental and safety regulations, access to legal representation, wage and benefit laws, law enforcement, emergency responders, and hundreds of other things. These tenets foster a climate where it is possible to rise on your own achievements to a higher standard of living. Too many people see only their own part in their success and fail to acknowledge the support of the entire American system and populace, without which their success would be impossible. When they refuse to support the system that fostered their rise, the system suffers as does the culture, reducing the standard of living for the entire American populace.
August 2, 2008 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know where you live, but in general, the irony about the anti-big government folks is that they are largely hypocrites.
Ted Stevens for instance was the biggest ear marker around, and Alaskans got tons of federal subsidies. Red states by and large take in much more govt money than they send. The anti big govt folks should put their money where their mouth is: end ALL farm subsidies and all oil subsidies.
The GOP welfare state is fine with them, as long as corporate execs get rich off it. If any money goes to help the poor or minorities, then they have a problem.
August 2, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great point, Observer. This is the thing that really gets me. I am from a blue state, Illinois. We generate more federal taxes than Indiana, next store. Same with Kentucky, right below us. Yet, from what I understand, they get much more in return than they give in terms of "big government spending". Somehow they have been convinced that their economic interests lie with the Republican party. And no matter how you slice it for these people, they wont budge on their opinion. Stupidly stubborn.
August 2, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
These are die-hard republicans, right? They are not giving you reasons for why they just can;t vote for Barack, they are giving you justifications and rationalizations. They have decided long ago what they are going to do.
Frankly I would stop trying to convince them that their vision of Obama is wrong and instead paint in great detail the way John is in fact nothing like what he wants you to think he is. He is the poster child of affirmative action, taking a coveted place at the Naval Academy from someone who deserved it more, because of who is family was. He actually has never written a book. they are all ghost written by Mark Salter. Just go negative. He wears $500 dollar Italian "moccasins". Tell them all the stories of how he supported democratic idea after Democratic idea. All the things die-hard republicans HATE about McCain. Make sure you don't lie. But be sure to make them feel like crap for standing up for him.
August 1, 2008 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish it was that easy, Econo, but my family would just laugh themselves silly if I was to mention the $500 "moccasins".
My mom has voted Repub since birth. I swear, she put her hand on the down-ticket ticker in the voting booth while in her stroller.
It's their fear of change, and their fear of being lied to. They really think Obama is lying, and that McCain is not.
How do I counter-attack THAT???
August 2, 2008 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
. . . their fear of being lied to.
Very insightful.
"Never trust city hall" -- the defensive, self-protective cynicism of the lower middle-class (la petite bourgeoisie).
August 2, 2008 5:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, One-Eyed Ellen....go get yourself lied to, again, and then tell me how lower class my family is.
August 2, 2008 5:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't be so sensitive, LisB -- salt of the earth, you know.
And anyhoo, it's not your fault. None of us gets to choose the family we're born into.
August 2, 2008 6:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Like I said, you cannot counter it, just be trying to tell them Obama is not who they think he is. They are not voting based on who they think he is, they are pulling the arguments out of the air that fit their world view. Insert any cnadidates name. Maybe they are trying to make it easier on you by pretneding to have real reasons for their vote.
"He stammers when he doesn't use a teleprompter"
Think about that. It's not only not true, it's hard to imagine how anyone could be so trivial as to mention it, unless they were just fishing.
So my strategy is not to change their mind. It's just to punish them for it. make them confront the cognitive dissonance. McCain almost became a democrat.
August 2, 2008 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry I should be clearer. This is a voter suppression strategy, not a conversion strategy.
The alternative is pure reverse psychology. Send the the worst over the top garbage about Obama. If they have any sense of shame they will realize it all comes from the same source. they are cherry picking the mild stuff because it more palatable. make them eat the whole crap sandwich.
August 2, 2008 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
What do they think Obama is lying about? Do they think that McCain always tells the truth?
August 2, 2008 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you ask them if they minded when Bush lied to them?
August 2, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't knock $500 moccasins 'til you've tried them. Supple deerskin. I'd rather go hungry than give mine up.
August 2, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi Lis,
I had the same experience. When my brother complains about the whole "big government" thing, I remind him that this is the anniversary of the MN bridge collapse and that 1/2 of US bridges are categorized in the same poor condition as that one.
America's infrastructure is going to hell, but hey Shell/BP and the oil gang are getting record profits.
I tell them we need a decently run government with oversight. Hey the repubs did decrease the government (especially in the regulation area)...and left no one minding the store.
That shuts him up...if only for a moment :)
August 2, 2008 12:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't mean t be rude or disparage your family but . . . to deny that we need to lose weight and drive smaller cars is what got us into this pickle in the first place and is just a bit arrogant. Oil use all you want we'll just drill more, not to mention that we are probably one of the most obese and unhealthy populations on the planet.
If you don't like big government please forgo you SS check, you can do that, roads are off limits, and fly at your own peril.
Again I don't mean to insult, but, I bet you that Jim Jones' true believers didn't think he was lying either.
August 2, 2008 1:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not disparaging to me in the least bit, luv.
Are you available for Thanksgiving dinner this year, as my date?
August 2, 2008 5:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
The one that gets me the most, Lis is: "he planned this since he wrote his first book."
Do they think you decide to run for the presidency at the last second? I mean - that's really odd that that is a criticism.
The rest I can understand where they are coming from - sort of. But they fault him for wanting to run for the presidency for a long time?
'
That is weird. No offense.
August 2, 2008 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Considering that McCain's circle has been prepping him for political ascension since he got back from his radio announcer's job at the Hanoi Hilton, these Republicans in LisB's family are exposing their overt and ingrained hypocrisy when they say with such wide-eyed concer that Obama's always had political ambitions... (wasn't it Garrison Keillor who said :the Republicans made their peace with hypocrisy long ago?)
As one who was raised in an Iowa Republican family headed by one of Nixon's own CREEPS, I can verify that hypocrisy IS something they are all very comfortable with, so it is unlikely they can see past their cultural and political prejudice to admit that McCain's history of unchecked ambition for outstrips Obama's.
Political ambition is probably one of the few factors where McCain actually outweighs Obama.
keep in mind, Obama started on the street, armed with a magna cum laude Harvard diploma, while McCain started in Congress, with a near-last-place naval academy diploma.
The reality of this contrast is as truly graphic as it is ignored by the MSM. They have actually managed to turn that quality difference into a red herring for Obama, calling him an elitist while calling Johnny "Songbird" McCain a war hero and a "man of the people."
The RICH people, certainly.
Maybe not the Hiltons any more, but the rich people none-the-less.
August 2, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not surprised at all LisB. Your faimily is saying what I'm hearing out there on sites that are generally conservative.
"We don't like big government."
Under Bush, the country has seen the BIGGEST spending ever, to the point of untenable debt. This is the most salient point
As for the other points, they are so trivia to the point of meaninglessness. They are not about the horrendous state the country's in.
They've got to wake up to the nightmare we're in, Iraq is still a bloody quagmire, banks running, unemployment skyrocketing, hyper-inflation, the dollar debased to 50% of what it was worth 8 yrs ago, the Bread & Butter issues.
Under McCain, things will get worse. He's one of the richest men in America and his Keating Five history should send warning signals.
I do wish there's a way to get to your family, as that'll be the way to win this election.
August 2, 2008 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I dunno. I wouldn't waste my energy trying to convert them to Obama. Spend it elsewhere registering new Democratic voters, telephoning, etc.
OTOH, maybe you can convince your "small government" family to pull the lever for Bob Barr. That's a better outcome than their voting for McCain.
August 2, 2008 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I attended a family reunion last week with family from Texas and Oklahoma. These are the two reasons they gave for not supporting Obama: He is not patriotic because he didn't put his hand on his heart during the Star Spangled Banner, and they don't know what his policies are.
In other words, he's black...and possibly a Muslim.
Luckily, I don't think Obama is counting on Texas or Oklahoma to go blue. I'm really getting tired of living in a red state...and because of Bush and his cronies I'm embarrassed to be from Texas.
August 2, 2008 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well no offense, but Texas has more people in it than just your family and I happen to think Obama could actually carry Texas.
And I'm not basing that on a personal anecdote - I'm basing it on the trends and the numbers in Texas over the last two elections.
Texas has rednecks, just like every other state in this nation does. Texas is not wall to wall rednecks any more than Massachusetts is.
August 2, 2008 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
I find it to be pretty funny that these republicans won't join the millions of happy Obamacians (such as myself) who are already supporting Barack.
Sound like what is really needed is an effort to take back the republican party, which includes a new breed of GOP politicians who are willing to take on the work of changing that party from the inside out.
Like what is happening with the democrats this year. Like it or not, Barack is the first progressive democrat since Carter to get within spitting distance of the presidency, plus do it with a governing majority that includes at least some of the "other side" of the political spectrum.
I wouldn't even debate topics with family like that, as they don't seem to be at the expand your mind moment that others in the party are already come to. The Obamicans need to change the conversation in their own party, demand that representatives work toward progressive goals, even if they use "conservative" means to get there.
The democrats are cleaning up their house. Time for the republicans to do the same.
August 2, 2008 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have conservative associates also (but not my family-we're all democrats since Roosevelt) and their objections to Obama are similarly atmospheric as LisB's family's.
"It's their fear of change, and their fear of being lied to. They really think Obama is lying, and that McCain is not." --LisB
I would say the nebulousness of the objections of my conservative associates and Lis's family is really not so inchoate as would first appear.
But they are MARKEDLY disinclined to get into policy arguments.
They are like end-users in a computer network. They don't really want to be bothered with issues of shells, classes, trees, servers, etc. They just want the thing to work in a minimally acceptable fashion for their own life style.
We democrats are not afraid to get into the architecture and indeed that's where all the fun is.
So I would hazard a broad generalization and say LisB's family is typical of republican voters, they have an end-user mentality and are looking for the effect of the system just on their own workstation. The system is fine, don't mess with system.
Democrats work from the idea of ALL the user's experience and the possibility of optimization by architecture changes. Republicans don't even want to think in those terms, so its wasted effort to bring up either micro policies or macro issues like poverty.
August 2, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think LizB's family is a "typical republican" at all. Whatever that means. There are democratic voters willing to believe the same inane things. There are incurious people of every political persuasion.
As an atypical republican I can tell you that I hear a lot of common sense changing coming from the republican grassroots. Not the vocal minority who dominates "right wing" thought, but those many millions of republicans who voted for Barack in the primary.
Now, they may be a small percentage of the party right now, but if enough of us start digging into the not so distant past to revisit the legacy of Teddie Roosevelt and Abe Lincoln, then the GOP just might suffer an epiphany after all.
I am still trying to figure out how to turn the trickle of Obamicans into a flood that remakes the party from the inside out. As I said above, the democrats have already begun to clean house of the corporate stooges and hypocrites. Time for the republicans to do the same.
Time for the Bull Moose to go on parade.
August 2, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Love the architecture analogy, Lux.
Symbolically, the current Republican encumbent is the bankrupt occupant of a white elephant house -- a house to which he did not have the exclusive title, but which one, instead, he knew from the beginning he shared with a tenant-in-common. But he ignored his partner’s wishes, and acted as if he owned the place. Over the past eight years, he borrowed insane amounts of money to make only two out-dated “improvements”: because he’s the kind of guy who likes gated communities, he built an expensive but useless fence (on only one portion, of one side, of his property) as a poorly designed, flawed security system; and, to feed his monstrous furnace and the cars in his garage, he invested unwisely in a particular source of foreign oil that, so far, hasn’t shipped him a single barrel. So that, now, he has no money left to make long-deferred structural repairs to the house itself, much less to convert its power and heating sources to energy-efficient, environmentally-friendly alternatives.
Now there's another Republican who agrees with the occupant's home improvement philosophy; he differs with the occupant only in that he thinks the current residnet just didn't do enough.
In the meantime, the aforementioned tenant-in-common has been gathering influence. He's been to the management company and proposed a better deal from everyone's point of view. Management is leaning in his direction. So that when the current lease is almost up, the tenant in common plans to sign a new lease that will not only evict the current occupant when his lease is up, but which will also preclude the wannabe occupant from taking possession.
At least that is the plan. Let's hope the management company uses good sense this time.
August 2, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Lis, I thank God that you were/are able to see through the crap that your family appears to ingest daily.
Sounds like they wouldn't back Obama or any Dem, even if Jesus Christ told them to vote Obama.
August 2, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Smart Family...too bad it didn't seep down to the youngsters. Barry H. Obama = empty suit, THE ONE, Loser.
August 2, 2008 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh my, what rock has overturned that let this demon out.
The problem with is that people are not see that they are essentially letting the Republicans that ran our country down in the ground for 8 years that they are letting the party off the hook by electing Bush's successor McCain.
August 2, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey John boy,
Love the neck lift and upper eye lift. Hopefully the work is not in line with $400- haircuts. Also, how's that love child and mistress doing? Youo're all class John Edwards... all class right out of the trailer park.
August 2, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
$520 Ferragamo Loafers. Cream Puff.
August 2, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please don't feed the trolls.
August 2, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
According to the WSJ, Barack's being such a skinny arugula eater (who avoids cheesesteaks and doughnuts on the trail) is hurting him with voters, 60% of whom are overweight (with half of those obese). Barack needs to put on some weight for gravitas.
August 2, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Democrats have FAILED on Point #5. Howard Dean and whoever else drives the big message should have been HAMMERING Republicans as the Big Government types for the past 8 years. Democrats are soft on hitting GOPer's even when they're criminals, and I can't stand it. LisB's family seems to believe the negative campaigning. Once this $hit takes hold, you're DOOMED.
Which brings me to.... Barack Obama. WAKE UP KID! Hit hard, hit fast, and hit now! Here's some catch phrases for the negative ads you MUST run now:
1. McCain is Pessimistic. This is NOT good for bringing the economy back.
2. McCain is GW Bush's CHIEF "enabler". Argue that McCain used his political capital to further the Bush agenda that has brought the country to its knees. BO may get some flack for using the term ENABLER given that Cindy had some problems, but it's a stretch if they claim that he's referencing Cindy's problem.
3. McCain is angry all the time.
4. Republicans are going to jail. Run endless tape of the perp walks from the last 8 years and up to and including Rove and the Incredible Hulk, Ted Stevens. If he can't hit McCain the man, OBLITERATE the nasty Republicans.
STOKE THEIR NEGATIVES!!! THERE IS NO PROBLEM WITH STATING THE TRUTH!!!
WAKE UP BARACK OBAMA, AXELROD, AND PLOUFFE!!
August 2, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry for all the CAPS. I'm a little hyped up right now because I really think Obama has just taken some serious punches to his glass jaw.
August 2, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
LisB, with respect, I think your counters are not the best possible ones. Not that I am the uncrowned king of persuasion personally, but hopefully these give you a different perspective:
I do not think that is "talking down." We do need to do those things as a nation and I think that he is telling us what we need to hear as opposed what we want to hear is taking challenges head-on. I think that always trying to please everyone is more "talking down." I have not noticed this to be the case; he is very accomplished but seems down-to-earth to me but we all have our moments, you and I too. Can you give me a specific example what gave you this impression? [ed. note: this is pure FNC propaganda, they will not actually remember any cases themselves.] He certainly speaks more measuredly if he does not have a prepared speech but so do most people. He seems to have the habit of first considering what he is going to say, and then reviewing it which does cause some pausing, not that I think that is a bad thing. He also does not use "you know" or other filler terms every other word like most other pols which may make him sound different from the others. [ed. note: ask them to listen for it specifically, he uses way fewer fillers--as a plus they might actually unsuspectingly listen to what he is saying] Sure, he probably saw somewhere in his Senate campaign that people were really responding to his message and his style of politics. I am not sure if he actually thought he would be running for President--particularly so soon--but I do think he realized he had the potential to actually get all those people to participate. I would like to point out that the GOP has increased the size of the government and reduced people's privacy more in the last 8 years than any time since the New Deal. I think we can all agree that we do not like an intrusive government. The kind that sticks its nose everywhere it does not belong, right? You and Obama may have different ideas on economy, for example, but both of you agree on people's privacy. Privacy on the internet, telephone surveillance--do you know that the GOP actually floated an idea of permits to leave the country and other travel permits just like the Soviet Union.How do those sound? More importantly, though, I think you should emphasise the good points about Obama. Maybe try to find points of common interest (like the G.I. Bill that McCain shamefully opposed--lead them in by talking about how important taking care of the troops is etc. and then bang that on the table)
August 2, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for this, LisB. That was quite entertaining.
Why don't they have any beef with his policies? So... their issues with Obama really come down to vague, really indefinable characteristics that only certain people within a certain realm of the political spectrum have applied to him? ...Sounds typical Republican to me. ;D
August 2, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
1. He's black. 2. We're illiterate.
August 2, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I always find it amusing that they specifically say "He falters when he doesn't have a teleprompter in front of him", when in fact most of the long, major speeches I've seen Obama give have been without a teleprompter, using notes on paper. Of course that's even aside from the fact that I haven't seen him stumbling without a speech, especially in comparison to the incoherent ramblings of McCain and Bush.
August 2, 2008 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
the "talks down to us" thing makes me crazy... people have a strange idea of what a leader is supposed to be. If I want a guy I can talk down to then let me be president and let him be the regular citizen.
August 2, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
The "he talks down to us" argument surprised me since I've always heard people say he talks to us like grown-ups.
Have we have been talked down to for so long that, that has become the norm?
There is a difference between being confident and intelligent and smug and arrogant.
The GOP wants voters to believe intelligence is arrogance. I would rather our President be much smarter than the rest of us. And I'd rather our President have confidence otherwise how could we feel confident in his/her decisions?
Insofar as reading from a teleprompter a lot of people who have attended his rallies say he does not use a teleprompter.
While many will not vote for Obama under any circumstances there are that many more who are still persuadable. And those voters are the ones who will decide this election.
August 2, 2008 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
First, thanks Liz -- that's the kind of candid oppo research we could use more of.
And then, about the "talks down to us" thing -- if we spent some time thinking about that, I think we could get at some of the fundamental problems the Democratic party has had over the last thirty-forty-odd years.
Democratic leaders are consistently perceived as moralistic. This was a problem for Gore and for Carter as well. Clinton escaped preacherliness by being an obvious bon vivant -- in that way, his sexual peccadilloes sometimes seemed to work to his advantage.
At root, I think it has to do with two things. 1) The way the Republican party is organized around a gospel of unrestrained self-aggrandizement, but also 2) the way educational attainment correlates with Democratic party ID.
August 2, 2008 9:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said, roo_P.
August 2, 2008 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you can't help but discuss politics with family. My oldest sister Mary was the black sheep of our Republican family for so many years. She's on the far left of the Democratic party and my mom always insisted "Oh she just says that to get a charge of us, I bet she secretly voted for Dole." Nobody was ever prouder when I became a Democrat than she was. It drives my parents crazy, but they're still great people.
I hate to agree with trolls, but there are non-racist reasons people are scared of Obama. He has limited experience, he is supposedly the most liberal senator (just as John Kerry mysteriously was when he became the party's nominee after being a moderate most of his career), he's been demonized and gullible people bought into it. Maybe you can convince them, maybe you can't. They're still your family and that definitely still makes it worth trying.
August 9, 2008 8:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
You all talk about Obama and his looks. First and foremost McCain with those short arms, he looks like a t-rex!!! Second, you all put your trust in that old idiot if you want, he is old and has no future. He has one foot in the grave, if you all would stop looking at the color of Obama skin and his good looks........then you would shut up and listen, actually listen to what he is saying it would either shut you up, or maky you shake your head and agree. And someone said that he has limited experience, he has enough, and it is more than palin. Say McCain kicks the bucket anyday, do you really hink that palin is ready? no, hell she is so stuck on alaska that is al she knows. Hell Bush does not even care for McCain and Palin with her limited knowledge and background would not be ready to run anything other than alaska, because she can't even get past her joking, and keeps coming with the same damn facts and beats around the questions asked most of the time.
October 7, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment