Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I Got This E-mail This A.M. From A Repug Friend - Need Help In My Response To Him.......

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
global1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 01:02 PM
Original message
I Got This E-mail This A.M. From A Repug Friend - Need Help In My Response To Him.......
This is the text of the e-mail:

"Be forewarned on what is happening . A friend went to hear Charles Krauthammer. He listened with 25 others in a closed room. What he says here, is NOT 2nd-hand but 1st. You would do well to read and pass this along to EVERYBODY that loves his country. This is VERY serious for the direction of our country. The ramifications are staggering for us & our children. To my Friends & Associates: Last Monday was a profound evening, hearing Dr. Charles Krauthammer speak to the Center for the American Experiment. He is brilliant intellectual, seasoned & articulate. He is forthright and careful in his analysis, and never resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fear monger nor an extremist in his comments and views. He is a fiscal conservative, and has a Pulitzer prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox News and writes weekly for the Washington Post. The entire room was held spellbound during his talk. I have shared this with many of you and several have asked me to summarize his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically and internationally. Even 2 Dems at my table agreed with everything he said! If you feel like forwarding this to those who are open minded and have not ‘drunk the Kool-Aid’, feel free.

Here is his resume from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Krauthammer

A summary of his comments:

1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming individual. He is not to be underestimated. He is a ‘cool customer’ who doesn't show his emotions. It's very hard to know what's ‘behind the mask’. Taking down the Clinton dynasty from a political neophyte was an amazing accomplishment. The Clintons still do not understand what hit them. Obama was in the perfect place at the perfect time.

2. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan and Clinton. He has a way of making you think he's on your side, agreeing with your position, while doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch what he DOES!

3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. He did not come to Washington to make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including dismantling capitalism. He can’t be straightforward on his ambitions, as the public would not go along. He has a heavy hand, and wants to ‘level the playing field’ with income redistribution and punishment to the achievers of society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain or Canada.

4. His three main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, & NATIONAL HEALTHCARE by the Federal government. He doesn't care about the auto or financial services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap and trade will add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE college education is his goal. Most scary is his healthcare program, because if you make it FREE and add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type single-payer system, the costs will go through the roof. The only way to control costs is with massive RATIONING of services, like in Canada. God forbid.

5. He’s surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types. No one around him has ever even run a candy store. But they’re going to try and run the auto, financial, banking and other industries. This obviously can’t work in the long run. Obama’s not a socialist; rather he's a far-left secular progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a moderate, but will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not what he says.

6. Obama doesn’t really see himself as President of the United States, but more as a ruler over the world. He sees himself above it all, trying to orchestrate & coordinate various countries and their agendas. He sees moral equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in Germany and England was a prime example of how he sees America, as an imperialist nation that has been arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made errors. This is the first President ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies!

7.. He’s now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) will not ‘come due’ until after he’s reelected in 2012. He’d like to blame all problems on Bush from the past, and hopefully his successor in the future. He has a huge ego, and Mr. Krauthammer believes he is a narcissist.

8. Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge strong. We’re ‘pining’ for another Reagan, but there’ll never be another like him. Krauthammer believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty & Bobby Jindahl (except for his terrible speech in February) are the future o f the party. Newt Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and intelligent, but needs to really be seriously boning up on facts and info if she’s to be a serious candidate in the future. We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong national defense, and states’ rights.

9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous.. We’re spending trillions that we don’t have. This could lead to hyper inflation, depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. The media is giving Obama, Reid and Pelosi a pass because they love their agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the huge bailouts didn’t work, nor will the stimulus package. These were trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama’s allies, unions and the Congress to placate the left, so he can get support for #4 above.

10. The election was over in mid-September when Lehman brothers failed.. fear and panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was grinding on indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people are in pain, and the mantra of ‘change’ caused people to act emotionally. Any Dem would have won this election; it was surprising is was as close as it was.

11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans=2 0will be swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dems continue to roll. If it's between 8-10%, it’ll be a dogfight. It’ll all be about the economy.

I hope this gets you really thinking about what's happening in Washington and Congress. There’s a left-wing revolution going on, according to Krauthammer, and he encourages us to keep the faith and join the loyal resistance. The work will be hard, but we’re right on most issues and can reclaim our country, before it's far too late."

As soon as I saw Fox News and the Washington Post mentioned this e-mail lost all credibility for me. So now I'm looking for some choice comments to put in my response to this. Any help would be appreciated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
canadianbeaver Donating Member (929 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
1. #4 - there is no Rationing in the Canadian Health Care.....
Lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stopbush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. Consider the source: Krauthammer.
'Nuff said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonAnn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
20. I call "Bulls--t"! Several things here . . .
Edited on Thu Jul-23-09 09:37 PM by SharonAnn
Krauthhammer is a jerk and it's not true that "He is forthright and careful in his analysis, and never resorts to emotions or personal insults. ". It's just NOT true!

People who send things like this cannot be convinced of anything. Depending on how you feel about the friend, either A) delete the email and don't respond, B) respond and ask your friend to take you off their email list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T Wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. It is really not possible to respond to someone who is so deluded as your "friend." They are
Edited on Thu Jul-23-09 01:25 PM by T Wolf
fact-aversive and prefer to deal in opinions they hear on Fuck Noise and regurgitate without actually understanding what was said.

Don't waste your time - better to simply hit yourself in the head with a hammer. You will get as far with the idiot and it will hurt less.

addition - IF you want to try, send them this Flying Squirrel post - 10 Myths About Canadian Health Care, Busted

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x336431

from this original source...

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19299.htm





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. Projection
Most of this is what they wanted to see in Dubya.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CBHagman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
5. Sorry, but e-mails that come with the order that you must...
Edited on Thu Jul-23-09 01:33 PM by CBHagman
...forward it to EVERYONE in your address book are, generally speaking, complete bollocks, to say nothing of a nuisance.

Google any phrase in that e-mail and you'll find it hundreds of places on the web.

But for argument's sake, any variation on "This must be true because A) a friend forwarded it to me or B) someone who said he/she was in the room forwarded it" is not sufficient.

On edit: This is the Snopes (i.e., urban legend-debunking website) link on said e-mail:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/krauthammer.asp

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wryter2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. Here's my problem with answering these things
You can't possibly address it all, and if you only go after a few points that appears to validate the rest of them. About all I can suggest is...

"We tried it their way for 8 years. Where did it get us?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. Concise and powerful...
That covers it all right there. If they argue, you can add: We cannot afford to continue following failed policies. Doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result, is a sign of insanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
19. I like it , good response
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
droidamus2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
7. Nothing new here
Edited on Thu Jul-23-09 01:34 PM by droidamus2
This is basically a list of old, tried-true and very moldy Republican talking points. If Krauthammer was supposed to be so great you would think he could at least come up with something original. Is it possible that your friend is just using the Krauthammer speech as a cover for pushing talking points?

1. Yes Obama is smart, he worked hard and put himself in the right position to win the election. Isn't that what somebody running for office is supposed to do?

2. I will probably get repetitive with this but this is typical Republican projection. They love to tell the electorate what they think they want to hear and then just do whatever they want to so they figure everybody else works that way too.

3. So reining in crony capitalism is a bad idea? I thought he said Krauthammer wasn't using fearmongering this is classic use of fear.

4. This is an interesting intellectual twist. A politician, in this case Obama, announces his main goals are to have our country become less dependent on foreign oil be developing renewable energy and conservation, making sure everybody has an opportunity at higher education and that everybody has access to healthcare. So the twist is he doesn't just want the government to assist in the solution to these problems but 'he wants to control them'. Again use of fear. Be afraid be very afraid.

5. Conservative presidents surround themselves with rightwing thinkers and presidents to the left surround themselves with progressive thinkers gee big surprise there.

6. Outright bullshit no other way to put it. Obama sees that he has responsibility to the people at home but that the USA as 'the superpower' has responsibilities to the rest of the world and he's not afraid to admit when he or his predecessors have screwed up. Sounds like somebody that knows what it means to act like an adult.

7. Again projection of course Republicans never do anything wrong so of course it was either the most recent Democratic president, the Democratic Congress or somebody else that caused something bad to happen. Personally I think Obama just wants to try and help fix the problems if his programs work he gets reelected if they don't he's a 1 termer. Surprise, surprise a man that runs for the highest elected position for the strongest country in the world has an ego imagine that. Narcissist is just hyperbole.

8. If those are their up and comers good luck to them. Palin intelligent not from what I've seen and heard.

9. Other ways to say 'tax and spend' and 'liberal press' nothing new there.

10. Projection. The Republicans rely primarily on the 'emotional vote' so again they figure that's how everybody else wins. It couldn't be because the voters looked at the last 8 years and knew they sucked and saw somebody offering what sounds like a good alternative. The change mantra worked because that's what the people wanted.

11. I agree it will be the economy but I don't think 'employment' will be the do all and end all how about housing values as just one of many indicators that people will be watching.

My points are a little on the ranty side so I don't know if they will help you but again what your friend sent you was just warmed over Republican talking points that we have heard for 30+ years now. Personally I would point that out and just tell him when they have some new ideas to get back to you.

8.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
8. Why waste the time and energy posting this BS?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
livetohike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
9. Whoever sent you this isn't going to be interested in your reply
However, if you feel you have to reply - Hit the "reply all" button so it goes to everyone they sent it to :-).

The comment "we're right on most issues" would elicit a comment from me that says "the majority of voters didn't think so in 2008. So go ahead and keep believing in that and you will lose elections for a long, long time."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
10. Not one state is more likely to vote for a Republican over Obama
although several have gone the other way.


Romney - that's their best option fine.


Mr. Romney what do you think of the birthers claim?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whosinpower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
11. Response to points
1.Having a president who is a smart intellectual is a valuable asset to the nation of America. A lesser person would be much more easily influenced by those who have their own agenda's that do not necessarily benefit ALL of what America is. A lesser person would rush into war under false pretenses, send the military into a no-win situation, with no exit strategy. A lesser person would spend countless trillions of dollars on that no-win war, bankrupt the nation, send the financial components of the American economy into turmoil, and lay the blame....on someone else. All of this is so easy to do when a lesser person is so easily manipulated by those powerbrokers who do not have the best interests of ALL of what America is, and instead focus on their own small worlds.

2. Sure - same thing could and should be said of each and every president - focus on what they do....not what they say. Buyers remorse abounded with Bush too.

3. Going to Washington to change how things are done, instead of making something out of oneself is a laudable goal - wish there were more in Congress and in the Senate that had those same ambitions. Those who are elected - are supposed to SERVE THE PEOPLE. They are not there to "make something of themselves".

4. Energy, Public Education and Healthcare - are the triad of every successful nation on the planet. These issues are ones of national security and prosperity for the very future of America. If not government to take an active and direct role in these important issues - then who??? Talk of cost was never an issue when it came to the Iraq war. Why is it so easy to spend taxpayer dollars for a war of choice, but when it comes to investing in the American public - cost is always too high? Healthcare is an investment in taxpayers. Healthy workers make better workers - a healthy work environment is more productive. Lower costs of healthcare makes it more profitable for companies to operate. Taking out the middleman of insurance lowers costs. The Canadian model, the UK model, the Norwegian model all point to lower cost/service ratio. Rationing occurs right now within the private insurance model of the American system. Rationing is not the issue. The issue is whether the private insurance companies are doing a good enough job of providing healthcare services to those who subcribe to their policies, for the cost of those policies. The answer to that question is a resounding NO. Unless government forces them to take account for their abysmal record - no one else will. They HAD their chance. They HAD their freedom to choose - and they chose profits over services.

7. History will show that the harsh recession began in the ebbing days of the Bush administration - this is fact. The harsh recession was the direct cause of Bush policies, of overspending on....THE WARS, on deregulation of financial service industry.

8. Republicans are out in the wilderness - because their leadership, their policies, their ideology has broken the bank, has undermined the status of America worldwide, and has bankrupted millions. It will take a generation for people to forget how utterly badly the republicans did....a generation. They can blame no one but themselves, for their selfish, self absorbed policies that caused division, economic turmoil, and a stark erosion of the middle class of America. If they had done such a great job - there would not of been a recession of epic proportions. If they had done such a great job - the Iraq War would be over, and would not of cost trillions of taxpayer dollars. If they had done such a great job......they would still be in power. This is not about Obama - this is about a total rejection of their ideology, their leadership and their policies. Go ahead and blame Obama for being a great orator, and a great intellectual, and a warm inviting kind of guy....but the truth is - America rejected the republicans because they lied to the nation to go to war, they instituted torture as policy and they bankrupted the nation. They did this - Obama is left to pick up the pieces.

9. You said it yourself Mr. Krauthammer- The situation in the ebb of the Bush administration was SO BAD - people wanted CHANGE in a profound and fundamental way - because the republican way - was utterly FAILING. If it had been successful - Obama would not be in power today - but that is not the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
12. A real simple, response ---
for #1-7 -- "Sounds good to me!" :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
13. THere is not a single fact on that list.. nothing but opinions from a guy
who is wrong 99% of the time. Geeze I hope people didn't pay to hear that blather.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipi_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
15. Charles Krauthammer, mind reader extraordinaire
I mean, he's got to be, if he's running around presuming to "know" what Obama thinks, feels, or wants.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
16. #6 - ruler over the world. That was King George, thank you very much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mwooldri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
17. Answers to those points, in a semi-legal fashion:
1. The defence concurs with the prosecution on this point.

2. The defence also concurs with the prosecution on this point.

3. The defence agrees with the prosecution that Mr. Obama did go to Washington to change everything, but the defense disputes that Mr. Obama wants to dismantle capitalism, and disputes that Mr. Obama is on a "ruthless quest for power". The defence concurs with the prosecution that Mr. Obama does want to "level the playing field" because it is exactly that: not level. The defence disputes also that Mr. Obama wants to model the USA after Canada or Great Britain, because Mr. Obama has not made any references to restoring the monarchy which exists in Canada and Great Britain.

4. The defence disputes the prosecutions entire assertations in this statement. Whilst it is clear Mr. Obama wants to influence energy, healthcare and education, control is not what Mr. Obama has stated. Mr. Obama has stated clearly he does not want government health care. He has not made any statements on a National Curriculum for all schools and universities to follow. He has also not made fossil fuels illegal, which would be effective control of energy. Furthermore the goal of free college education is a good goal to achieve because it ensures the intellectual security of the country and ensures we can compete in the global marketplace with a high tech workforce. Other countries comprehensive health care systems manage to contain their costs, and where rationing is an issue it is generally for non-emergency care. Furthermore rationing also exists in the present system - financial rationing, as well as shortage of certain medical facilities in certain places. Coupled with a free college education, we can train more nurses and doctors to combat the shortage.

5. The defence disputes the prosecutions statement on the basis that Warren Buffet, arguably one of the world's richest men who oversees a multi-billion dollar corporation, and various alumni of Goldman Sachs have been appointed as official and unofficial advisors to President Obama. Furthermore, Mr. Obama has made statements that he has no interest in the government being involved in the operations of General Motors, of which the US Government is now a major shareholder. Also his actions to date have not been "hard left" in action, since "hard left" would involve wholescale nationalization of major industries - something Mr. Obama has never expressed interest in and re: General Motors has revealed to the contrary.

6. The defense disputes this statement. Mr. Obama has stated the previous administration has done things incorrectly and has started to make amends for the errors of the previous administration. Furthermore he demonstrates that he is a leader of the United States rather than the whole world because he has not initiated war against any country, something the previous administration has performed on two previous occasions.

7. The defense disputes this statement. Mr. Obama has no power to "hand out goodies", that rests with Congress. Mr. Obama does not blame all of America's problems on the past administration, but has pinpointed major flaws.

8. The defense concurs with this statement.

9. The defense concurs with the statement that the current level of spending is outrageous, however Mr. Obama inherited the record deficits from the previous administration. Furthermore the previous administration actually inherited a surplus from that prior administration - the Clinton administration and squandered it in an irresponsible fashion on unnecessary tax cuts and at least one unnecessary war. Wholescale spending reform is needed urgently, Mr. Obama realises this, and his administration is working with Congress to develop surplus-generating budgets.

10. The defence concurs with this statement.

11. The defence does not concur with this statement, because unemployment in Reagan's first four years increased and was higher in his re-election year than when he first took office. Furthermore the "freebies" that the prosecution alleges Mr. Obama is giving away have not been completely distributed, in fact distribution has barely begun. This has not had any impact on employment statistics as of yet. The defence states that unemployment is not the only factor that would cause a change of power. If in point 8 the prosecution believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty and Bobby Jindhal are the future of the Republican party then the defence would state that Mr. Obama barring any major circumstances would be highly likely to win re-election in 2012.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hansel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-23-09 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
18. Try: "There’s a left-wing revolution going on? Where can I sign up? Seriously, where?" nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
csziggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-24-09 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
21. Always check Snopes.com
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/krauthammer.asp

They list the parts of this email and discuss it then cite this statement:

Dr. Charles Krauthammer is a political commentator and syndicated newspaper columnist whose work earned a Pulitzer Prize for distinguished commentary in 1987. The article quoted above supposedly provides a second-hand accounting of the substance of remarks Dr. Krauthammer made regarding President Obama during a 1 June 2009 talk at the Annual Dinner of the Center of the American Experiment.

No transcript or recording of Dr. Krauthammer's remarks on that occasion is available to compare against the above-quoted summary, as Dr. Krauthammer "does not disseminate comments made at private events," so it's difficult to objectively determine how much of the e-mailed account conforms to what Krauthammer actually said and how much of the account reflects the subjective viewpoint of its anonymous author. Dr. Krauthammer himself said, in a statement posted to the Center of the American Experiment's web site (http://www.americanexperiment.org/events/2009/2009-06-26.php), that:

This account is neither accurate nor authoritative. My views on Obama are well known. I've explained them in a series of five columns.

This email is somebody putting his own ideological stamp and spin on my views.

One giveaway of the superimposition of someone else's views on mine is the rather amusing use of phrases that I never use. To take just a few examples randomly: "God forbid," "far left secular progressive," "this is the first president ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies!" "no country had ever spent themselves into prosperity," and, the real doozy, "states rights."

My views are clearly spelled out in that series of columns and subsequent writings. Anyone who wants to know my views should consult those and not this email.

Articles by Charles Krauthammer that directly explicate his views on President Obama are listed below:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Naturyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-24-09 01:54 AM
Response to Original message
22. Best possible respose:
"Please remove me from your contacts list."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 01:46 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

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

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC