A Relevant Republican Debate

The Republicans had a debate on Sunday on Fox News. Despite the fact that it was overwhelmingly light on foreign policy, and did not deal with the War on Terror, it showed republicans could talk about other subjects with insight. Also, since it was on Fox News, it was actually watched.

I own multiple televisions, and one of them had the Steelers-Broncos game. I even condescended to put the baseball game on with no sound on the small tv. The big screen was prime time for the debate, and the quality of this debate was improved by giving a healthy block of time to the candidates that actually belonged on the stage. The lower tier canddiates were given less time, especially early on, to waste our time.

Despite the moderators’ best attempts to turn the debate into fratricide, the candidates refused to take cheap shots at each other. They were respectful, got their digs in, but praised each other when praise was due. The debate would have been better if it was 100% on the War on Terror, but I understand other Americans do not agree with me on this point. It was a substantive debate with four substantive men and some other kids.

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/10/21/gop-debate-claws-out-for-each-otherand-hillary/

http://tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/10/voting-irregularities-at-the-bloggers-choice-awards/ (other news)

Giuliani was asked about Thompson claiming Giuliani was soft on conservatism. He refused to take the bait and attack Thompson, again emphasizing his own record of accomplishment.

Romney also refused to take the bait. He spoke about Reagan, and got in a good line about republicans “being unable to defeat Hillary Clinton by acting like Hillary Clinton.”

Thompson got in a great dig at Ted Kennedy, and reaffirmed his own credentials, including his 100% pro-life record and his support of strict constructionist judges. He mentioned Rudy’s support of Mario Cuomo, but was very respectful in his dig.

Rudy pointed out that Fred was an obstacle to tort reform, in terms of fighting loser pays provisions. Fred responded that he helped pass anti-sanctuary city laws, which Rudy fought for. Rudy reaffirmed his crime fighting credentials, and pointed out that Fred never had executive responsibility.

John McCain, when asked if he was more conservative than Romney, again reaffirmed his own credentials, and stated that he has “been involved with every national crisis since Beirut.” He said that he “did not manage for profit, he led for patriotism.”

Romney complimented McCain for his heroism, but pointed out that he had the toughest Governorship for a republican in America.

McCain pointed out that during a crisis, that is the last time to call in the lawyers, which is what Romney mentioned in the previous debate. He reaffirmed his qualifications. Romney clarified his position on consulting with Congress and the lawyers, and mentioned that President Bush did go to Congress, which Hillary disputes.

This debate was very serious for the first 15 minutes because only the top tier candidates were speaking. Then it was Rupaul time. He was asked about gay marriage, and he answered calmly for once, stating that we do not need to amend the Constitution for it. He actually was totally normal in his answer.

Romney, the only one to support the Constitutional ban on gay marriage, reiterated his position a such.

Giuliani, who opposes the ban, says it is not necessary at this time. If several states allow it, the issue can be revisited, but right now it is not needed. Marriage is a civil institution, not a religious one.

When asked about Giuliani’s abortion position, Mike Huckabee ducked.

Fred Thompson, when asked about his lobbying for pro-choice groups, stated again that his private law practice differed from his public service., which was pro-life.

McCain was asked about his fence mending with the Religious Right. He stated that he has never changed. He said he reconciled with former enemies, such as the Vietnamese, and that he could reconcile with Jerry Falwell. He reaffirmed that they should all support who the nominee turns out to be.

Tom Tancredo was brought in after 25 minutes. When asked about the conservatism of the other candidates, cited the American Taxpayers Union and National Right to Life organizations, which give him A ratings.

Duncan Hunter went after Carl Cameron, accusing him of dividing the party. He then mentioned the Cuban Freedom Fighters, and mentioned Reagan helping the people of El Salvador.

The debate then turned to health care.

McCain mentioned Hillarycare and higher taxes. He also stated that Medicaid grew 10% last year, which is unsustainable. He said the democrats want to destroy health care.

Rupaul, a doctor himself, said after 35 years, managed care is not working. He then said we have to stop trying to expand our world empire. I was worried he would not go off the rails, but he finally fell back into wack job mode.

Romney pointed out that health care is not a democrat issue, it is a republican issue. He ducked the question in terms of if his plan would be applied at the Federal level. He again reinforced his version versus Hillary’s version.

Hunter pointed out that Romney’s plan had mandates, which drives up costs. 90 year olds have fertility coverage, which is not needed. We need to be able to buy health care across state lines. Romney rebutted that the democrats in the Massachusetts legislature left some mandates in, but he got many mandates out.

Huckabee pointed out that we do not have a health care crisis, but a health crisis. We spend too much money on disease, and not enough on prevention. He mentioned the that when “the old hippies find out they get free drugs, wait till that problem happens.”

Tancredo was asked about illegal immigration, allowing him to go bonkers again. However, he turned it back to health care. He mentioned that Michael Moore went to Cuba, but that he came back. He mentioned health savings accounts, but said the Federal government should not be involved with health care.

On education, Thompson said his vote on No Child Left Behind was perhaps a mistake. He stated that the Federal government should turn more power to the states, and give them maximum flexibility. He also mentioned we had a societal breakdown, and we need more fathers to raise their kids.

When asked about the school system in New York, and that it should be “blown up,” he stated that he cared a lot more about the kids than the teachers. He emphasized school choice, and refused to back down about his prior comments. He aid parents should decide school issues, not the government. He called it he “single biggest civil rights issue in the 21st century.”

The candidates were asked why they are currently losing to Hillary.

Mitt Romney had compared Hillary to Karl Marx in the past. When asked about her qualifications to be Commander in Chief, he pointed out that, “She has never run a corner store, never run a business. The Presidency is not an internship.” He said she is not fit to be Commander in Chief.

Rudy Giuliani, when compared to Hillary, said, “You’ve got to be kidding.” He quoted Hillary when she said, “I have a million ideas, America can’t afford them all.” Rudy stated, “America can’t afford you, Hillary.” He then disputed the polls, and mentioned the same polls showed Al Gore and John Kerry winning handily.

John McCain was asked about his differences on the war with Hillary. He stated he respected Hillary, but that Hillary tried to spend one million dollars on the Woodstock Museum. He stated, “I am sure it was a cultural event and a pharmaceutical event, but I was tied up at the time.” The crowd went ballistic with applause, and stated “No one can be President that supports these types of programs.” He stated that she is a liberal and he is a reliable conservative.

Huckabee stated that republicans should have gone to the minority debates, and mentioned Aerosmith. He stated that “there is nothing funny about Hillary being President.” He mentioned Islamofacism. It was the first time it was meant all night, and the first time I recall him mentioning it.

Thompson stated again that we have to worry about ourselves as republicans. He then mentioned her being wrong about repealing the tax cuts, and attacking Generals that get tried in the newspapers. He again emphasized that “laws come from God, not Government.” He also mentioned the “comfortable mediocrity” of the democrats.

Rupaul, when asked how he differed from Hillary, said that she would expand the war, and he would not. So Hillary is to the right of him on the war apparently.

Thompson was asked a laundry list of issues dealing with social security and Medicare. The question by Brit Hume last what seemed like forever, and I credit Thompson for remembering it. He said in principle with the question, and mentioned the indexing of benefits to inflation.

Giuliani was asked that attempting to reform benefits of Medicare and social security would be seen as democrats as a “cut,” he said that the first thing we needed was a consensus about private accounts. He again pointed out that allowing individuals to buy private health insurance would benefit everyone, and that those who are not covered are not poor people, since poor people have Medicaid. Private solutions are necessary.

Romney stated he would be bold, but not cut benefits for poor people. He stated that no changes would happen for current seniors. He said he would not raise taxes, but that indexing it to inflation was a bad idea. He stated these problems could be solved, but did not say how. When asked how he could bring people together on the issue when President Bush could not, he said he learned from that experience, and his own. He invoked Reagan again, and talked of common ground, but did not say how.

Huckabee pointed out that privatization should be replaced with personalization, since privatization makes people think of Enron and Worldcom. He did offer an intelligent explanation involving actuarial tables showing that “people just are not saying anymore.”

Rupaul was actually right about the fact that unless you protect the dollar, the rest is irrelevant. He pointed out a dollar is worth four cents. He was actually sounding very bright until he again related this all to the war.

John McCain got a laugh when he said he is glad Americans are not dying at 67 (since he is over 70). He bluntly stated that Medicare and social security are going broke. He stated the solution has to be bipartisan, since neither side has 60 votes. He said the American people respond when they see a crisis.

Duncan Hunter was still on stage, which I had forgotten. He stated the problem was China and the outsourcing of jobs. So therefore, China is responsible for our health care crisis. Brit Hume was incredulous, rightly so.

Tom Tancredo stated that entire structural changes were needed, and again brought up illegal immigration, because he is a broken record.

75 minutes in, and finally, foreign policy was brought up. It was a question about Russia, not the Middle East.

McCain said “I looked into Putin’s eyes, and I saw 3 letters…K…G…B.” McCain called Putin a “dangerous person.” McCain then recommended a missile defense system in Czechoslovakia, regardless of who objects.

Hunter said that Putin offered to work with us on sea-based missile defenses, and that we should work with him on issues involving a partnership in the Black Sea. Hunter was in command on this issue.

Giuliani said that we should engage Russia, expand NATO, and look to Australia and Japan. He said Ukraine would be a good hedge but they “are not quite there yet” in terms of democracy. He said that Reagan believed rightly that increasing military spending would send a message to Russia and China, and we should so again.

Thompson asked if the Turks had a right to go into the Kurdish areas. Thompson called the PKK terrorists, but said the Turks and the Kurds are both our friends, but that people have a right to defend themselves. He pointed out that Turkey is a NATO ally, and that Nancy Pelosi’s Armenian resolution “injected partisan politics into a national security issue.”

Tancredo seemed sad that Thompson stole his thunder on this issue, but said that Nancy Pelosi “was a lousy speaker, but a lousier Secretary of State.”

Huckabee agreed that the PKK was a terrorist organization, but that Turkey had nothing to gain by crossing the Kurdish border. Nobody needs or wants the grief from that situation.

Rupaul wailed and railed. America is looking for trouble. We should talk to people. Rupaul was booed roundly.

Romney brought up the “peace dividend” of the Clinton years. “We got the dividend, not the peace.” He also said, “The UN is failing in its mission to protect against genocide.” He also cited uber-genius Charles Krauthammer.

The stage then shifted to random questions.

Rupaul was asked if the other candidates left the republican party. He attacked the Neocons, and cited Eisenhower in 1952 as an example of taking over from warmongering democrats. He forgot that Ike was a military general.

Giuliani was asked if a nuclear Iran was worse than war with Iran, and he unequivocally said yes. He reaffirmed that credibility on the seriousness of going to war would make the sanctions stronger, and that China would see we mean business on Iran. He contrasted Reagan with Carter, with regards to Iran.

Thompson was asked about campaign stumbles and laziness involving Terry Schaivo and the Everglades. Thompson mentioned being a husband and father at 17, a prosecutor at 28, a Watergate Counsel at 30, and a landslide winner in two senate races. He also mentioned shepherding John Roberts through the Senate and ontp the Supreme Court. “If a man can do all that and be lazy, I recommend it to them.”

The focus group had some embarrassments. Some said Hillary would destroy America. This is nonsense. However, more sane people in the room said she would raise their taxes, and is wrong on the issues. This is true. The consensus on the candidates, even if for differing reasons, was on point.

Fred Thompson was sharp, Rudy Giuliani nailed the education question, and the crowd loved any anti-Hillary red meat. McCain is a fine man, but just does not sell himself well. Romney spoke in generalities and did not offer specifics. Huckabee did not help or hurt himself. The other candidates offer so little that I almost turned on the baseball game. I then remembered it was baseball, and at least Rupaul is entertaining.

Thompson and Giuliani won this debate.

eric

53 Responses to “A Relevant Republican Debate”

  1. Stormwarning says:

    Duncan Hunter took a very cheap shot at John Fitzgerald Kennedy and has forever lost my respect and any possibility of my voting for any Republican ticket that he’s on. I simply won’t vote for President if that unlikely eventuality occurs.

  2. mike volpe says:

    Well, Stormwarning. With all due respect, if that is all it takes for you to stop voting Republican then you really were never going to in the first place.

    My dad proclaimed that he was debating between Hillary and Rudy for a while. (He is a fairly staunch liberal though he is sensible enough to know the GWOT is serious and wants a serious candidate to deal with it). Then, he heard that Rudy went to the NRA and he felt that Rudy pandered to them. He said he was now certainly voting for Hillary. My dad is the same way as you. He was never seriously going to vote for Rudy. He decided not to vote for Rudy because he pandered and is now voting for the ultimate panderer.

    Tell me how many cheap shots the Democrats have taken at Reagan. How come that is all right. I am always amused by people like you. Duncan Hunter served several tours in Vietnam and served honorably in the House for twenty some years, and now because of one comment he said, he has forever lost your respect. I guess the multiple years of putting his life in harm’s way, and twenty plus years of public service pales in comparison with one comment one person says in one debate. Get a grip. You are of course a Dem in wool’s clothing if you really believe as you do.

  3. David B. says:

    I practically fell asleep 4 or 5 times while it was on. It just seemed like self-congratulatory verbal diarrhea. I didn’t feel like most of the questions posed were answered directly and a couple of ’em seemed overly enamored with their ability to pontificate toward a prepared answer they wanted to give.

    Ho hum.

    http://www.thekskinofmyteeth.com

    David B.

  4. micky2 says:

    Mike,,
    This decision making on the left seems to apply in more than just one area.
    Its Ok for them to call Bush every name in the book, and accuse him of horrific things.
    But at the same time they insist we give all these PC and verbal amenities to our enemies and those that are less than friendly to us.
    It blows my mind also.

  5. mike volpe says:

    Mickey,

    there is plenty of hypocrisy on both sides. That is not the issue. I know that when someone gets a little too mad at a candidate for what is a minor thing, that person is not really ever much of a supporter. My dad’s story is an example.

    To David,

    I must disagree. I thought the debate was very lively. It touched a lot of topics that haven’t been delved into much yet: social security, Russia, gay marriage. I thought that everyone went after each other and after Hillary. I thought we got a lot of different perspectives to many different problems, which is in stark contrast to the Dems that essentially say the same thing on every issue.

  6. Gayle says:

    People with Stormwarning’s mindset will be responsible if we wind up with Hillary as our next president, Eric, a scenerio I hate even contemplating! If we Republicans are seriously repulsed by the thought of a socialized government and eventually a socialized country and don’t vote in 2008 because the candidate doesn’t agree with us on every issue, or offends our precious sensibilities, then we’ll deserve what we get! Real Republicans understand that the concept of “cutting our noses off to spite our faces” will result in a face without a nose and nothing else will come of it other than a lot of bleeding. Sheesh!

    I haven’t decided on a candidate yet. I like Huckabee and think he made points in this debate. I also like Romney. I am not all that happy with Giuliani, although he has a record of getting things done, and I will vote for him if he ends up being the frontrunner. He probably will because there are so many Republicans who believe he’s the only one who has a chance against Hillary. If that is so, then so be it. I have no intention of cutting off my nose to spite my face. I think Ron Paul is a waste of air time.

  7. mike volpe says:

    Gayle,

    Rarely, do you vote for someone that agrees with you on every single issue. First, Rudy will get lots of voters that only agree with him from time to time. Do not discount the leadership, experience, and star power factors with Rudy. There are tons of moderates and liberals that will end up voting with Rudy even though they may very well be pro union, for liberal judges, etc.

    Rudy is not winning simply because he offers the best chance for Republicans to win. That is just nonsensical. The fact is that he was one of the greatest mayors of all time, and before that, he was one of the greatest prosecutors of all time, and frankly, that is why I support him and that is why a lot of people support him

    Ultimately, leadership is the most important trait in being President. He has it more than anyone else on either side and it frankly isn’t even close. I have been calling Rudy a paradigm for a while now. Here is how I see him…
    http://proprietornation.blogspot.com/2007/10/paradigm-that-is-rudy-giuliani.html

  8. Jersey McJones says:

    I tried to sit through it, but I ended up switching to the football game. This debate was utterly pointless.

    I made a few suggestions yesterday morning for questions I thought Fox should ask, but they didn’t take my advise. I wonder why…

    1) On the “Death Tax” – will it be retroactive and if so, how would you inform the dead taxpayers of their refunds?

    2) On “The Surge” – will the surge be over and “victory” declared in Iraq by October, 2008?

    3) On “The Fairness Doctrine” – can you beat this thing, or will you have to wait for it to actually come up on the Hill?

    4) On “Family Values” – will you now promise that no pregnant ten year old will be allowed to have an abortion without her parents’ consent?

    5) On “The War on Terror” – if the Musharraf government topples to an Islamist theocracy, will you now pledge to bomb Iran in retaliation?

    6) On the “Nuclear Option” – should the Nuclear Option remain on the table in our dealings with Fiji?

    7) On “Activists Judges” – will you now promise to appoint truly constructionist judges, that is to say judges who adhere only to the real Constitution and not any of those crazy, liberal Amendments?

    8) On “Guantanamo” – should the “terrorist enemy combatants” remain at Gitmo, or be released on the streets of Colonial Williamsburg?

    9) On “fiscal conservatism” – will you swear not to raise taxes no matter what happens ever, no matter what, here and now, under the auspices of God, even if the deficit spirals completely out of control, even if the war in Iraq worsens and expands, even if the value of the dollar sinks below the valuation of the Fijian currency, even if your wife threatens to leave you (well, not you, Giuliani), even if Jack Bauer himself threatens to kill you and your entire extended family… ?

    10) On “evolution” – with this new “superbug” threatening to kill millions, will you now pledge to eliminate funding for the scientific investigation of the bacterial evolutionary development and instead look at ways to treat the disease with adult stem cells?

    Bonus question: On NFL Week 7 – Steelers v Broncos, great timing for a “debate” – huh?

    JMJ

  9. mike volpe says:

    JMJ,

    I remember you now. Yeah, you have what I refer to as a lot of hubris. First of all, with this many debates there is always a lot of repetition. So what. If you get bored don’t watch all of them, however there is only so much difference between debates that one can have. Second, it appears that since someone had the audacity to not follow your specific advice and ask the questions you sent in then of course you got bored. Like I said, you have a lot of hubris. I found the debate quite lively. There was a lot of discussion about topics that hadn’t gotten as much publicity and that was a good thing. Your questions are goofy and only half serious.

    If you are bored by the debates don’t watch them, however your condescension is only annoying, not charming, or illuminating.

  10. Jersey McJones says:

    Eric, you said, “The debate would have been better if it was 100% on the War on Terror,…”

    Really? Why?

    “It was a substantive debate…”

    Again, really?

    “Romney… got in a good line about republicans “being unable to defeat Hillary Clinton by acting like Hillary Clinton.””

    “Thompson got in a great dig at Ted Kennedy,…”

    “Duncan Hunter… mentioned Reagan helping the people of El Salvador.”

    Now, that’s rich!

    “McCain… said the democrats want to destroy health care.”

    “Romney… again reinforced his version (of healthcare reform) versus Hillary’s version.”

    Which is pretty much the same.

    “Huckabee pointed out… “the old hippies find out they get free drugs, wait till that problem happens.””

    LOL!

    “Thompson… stated that he cared a lot more about the kids than the teachers.”

    The stupidest thing I heard this week.

    “Mitt Romney had compared Hillary to Karl Marx in the past…. He said she is not fit to be Commander in Chief.”

    LOL!

    “Rudy Giuliani, stated, “America can’t afford you, Hillary.””

    John McCain… stated, “I am sure (Woodstock) was a cultural event and a pharmaceutical event, but I was tied up at the time.”

    “Thompson stated… “laws come from God, not Government.””

    God represents the 3rd District of Jesusland.

    Giuliani… pointed out that allowing individuals to buy private health insurance would benefit everyone,…”

    LOL!

    “Rupaul was actually right about the fact that unless you protect the dollar, the rest is irrelevant. He pointed out a dollar is worth four cents. He was actually sounding very bright until he again related this all to the war.”

    Oh, that’s right. Lord knows a 2 1/2 trillion dollar war shouldn’t have any negative affect on the dollar at all! LOL!

    “McCain said “I looked into Putin’s eyes, and I saw 3 letters…K…G…B.””

    He says that a lot lately.

    “Tancredo… said that Nancy Pelosi “was a lousy speaker, but a lousier Secretary of State.””

    “Rupaul… attacked the Neocons, and cited Eisenhower in 1952 as an example of taking over from warmongering democrats. He forgot that Ike was a military general.”

    No, he remembered that Ike was smart enough to see what happens when the MIC runs wild. Ron and Ike were right.

    This was a very silly debate. Not a relevency on the room.

    JMJ

  11. Jersey McJones says:

    Mike? I remember you too.

    This debate was a display of vacuus soundbytes, cheap digs, and chest thumping stupidity. It was pathetic. I read the trans today. Dumb questions and dumber answers – and an audience that sounded more like a drunken honky tonk party.

    I was being facitious in that former post, of course. Can’t quite tell if you missed that.

    I want a real debate. Four or five candidates, tops – more time to answer more probative questions – and please, a real moderator, not these jokers from Fox. I’ve seen better journalism in MAD magazine.

    JMJ

  12. micky2 says:

    Mike,
    The rep. candidates and the hill have there differences with Bush also, and they dont carry the trademark venom that the left carrys. There is no comparison.
    Although there is a level of hypocrisy on both sides no doubt.
    But its another thing to wnat to give concessions to our enemy

  13. Rockyspoon says:

    Answers to Jersey’s 10:
    1) yes; to the estate of the deceased
    2) yes and yes
    3) yes and no
    4) yes
    5) maybe (never show your hand)
    6) yes (it remains all the time)
    7) moot question because it’s contradictory.
    8) yes (unless they want to make Colonial Williamsburg a REAL sanctuary city by vote of the city council (or it’s equivalent))
    9) Swear (all those eventalities can pretty much be discounted if taxes are never raised)
    10) no (an ounce of prevention is worth a pound (or a ton) of cure)
    That was so easy I should be a presidential candidate.

  14. micky2 says:

    Jersey said;
    “This was a very silly debate. Not a relevency on the room.”

    I cant help it, really I cant when its so evident.

    Please look above that statement in that post and tell me of anything you said that has any substancial relevance either ?

  15. mike volpe says:

    Jersey,

    the problem is you are a Democrat. Thus, if you disliked the Debate, that is all the more reason to say it was excellent. All debates have canned lines. They gave their platforms on education, health care, social security, Iran, Russia, gay marriage, tort reform, etc. There was plenty of policy debates and plenty of applause lines. You didn’t like the chest thumping because you disagree with it, because it is directed at a candidate you probably support. Big deal.

    My buddy once told me that a debate was weak because Huckabee attacked John Edwards, by invoking the $400 haircuts. So what, my buddy is a dem as well. He emailed me today and told me that we all need to support John McCain because he is the only true conservative. Nothing could be a worse endorsement than the approval of someone from the opposite party. I really could care less if you hated the debate. Guess what I would feel the same way watching a Democratic debate which is why I rarely do.

    You watch it just to snicker at everyone involved and then to troll where Conservatives are and bad mouth it. Get over yourself.

  16. micky2 says:

    Right on mike.
    I’m half way through watching the debate now, I TVod it.
    Even 45 minutes into it I agree with you. For me its alraedy starting to prove to be a very productive debate,
    In the beggining what a lot of pissy libs are calling chest thumping is actually a mandatory excercise so the candidates can define themselves and their positions.

    As expected reactions likes jerseys are more than predictable because everything he listed in post # 8 was listed on his blog more than a couple days ago, all he did was cut and paste it to this blog.
    Its like he planned on being unhappy with this debate days ahead of time.

  17. micky2 says:

    http://jerseymcjones.blogspot.com/

    Sunday, October 21, 2007
    Fox – GOP Debate Questions
    Well, Fox is hosting yet another pointless GOP debate tonight. I think I’d rather watch the Steelers/Broncos game. The 2-3 Broncos are coming in hungry, but the 4-1 Steelers are not no breadline. Should be pretty good – or boring.

    Speaking of boring, I wonder what sort of inane questions Fox is going dream up for the GOP candidates.

    Here’s ten suggestions…

    1) On the “Death Tax” – will it be retroactive and if so, how would you inform the dead taxpayers of their refunds?

    2) On “The Surge” – will the surge be over and “victory” declared in Iraq by October, 2008?

    3) On “The Fairness Doctrine” – can you beat this thing, or will you have to wait for it to actually come up on the Hill?

    Jersey said;
    “Well, Fox is hosting yet another pointless GOP debate tonight. I think I’d rather watch the Steelers/Broncos game.”

    So let me ask you jersey.
    You watched antways, right /
    no matter how much you already knew what was going to happen, you watched it anyway!
    You new it was going to be pointless before it even happened, so please explain to me, what was the point?

  18. greg says:

    Did McCain really say he could reconcile with Jerry Falwell? Doesn’t he know that Falwell died back in May?

  19. […] The Tygrrrr Express gave a great rundown on the whole debate, calling it a “Relevant Republican Debate and ended with this: Fred Thompson was sharp, Rudy Giuliani nailed the education question, and the crowd loved any anti-Hillary red meat. McCain is a fine man, but just does not sell himself well. Romney spoke in generalities and did not offer specifics. Huckabee did not help or hurt himself. The other candidates offer so little that I almost turned on the baseball game. I then remembered it was baseball, and at least Rupaul is entertaining. […]

  20. micky2 says:

    GREG !
    Rev. Falwell came to McCains office to offer a reconciliation and McCain accepted.
    Get with it pleae, McCain”DID” reconcile with Falwell.

  21. mike volpe says:

    Re: Ron Paul,

    I don’t know where people get that he was booed two times. I lost count of how many times he was booed. Everytime he opened his mout vis a vis foreign policy he was booed. He was booed when he opened his mouth about the weak dollar being the answer to the social security crisis. He was booed so much I started to actually feel bad.

  22. micky2 says:

    Ron Paul said that nobody was happy with managed health care.
    I didnt know that.
    He lost me when he said we cant afford proper health care because of Americas imperialistic endeavors. Basically he’s blaming it on the war.
    How imaginative.

    It amazes me still that anyone seriously considers him a viable candidate.
    he is tempermental, always looks nervous as hell.
    Even if he had the best ideas in the world he just doesnt look like he could handle any more stress than choosing his tie in the morning.

  23. Sandra says:

    Ron Paul reminds me of why I didn’t leave the Libertarian Party a forwarding address.
    Tom Tancredo rants whereas Duncan Hunter actually put up an effective two tier fence between his San Diego district and Tiajuana which lowered crime and drugs 80%.
    Tancredo? Hook!

    Huckabee is a hick and I cringe at the idea of a Gomer lookalike on the world stage. He also should go because he hasn’t raised money which means no real support.

    As a Goldwater, Ayn Rand, Reagan Republican, I can’t begin to convey my disgust with hypocritical religionists who define life as beginning at the moment of conception, proving their ignorance of logic and Aristotle’s identification of the difference between POTENTIAL life vs. ACTUAL life. Of course, this definition by the ignorant religionists thus makes the morning after pill solution illegal. Despicable!!!! I’ve defended Christians when attacked but they now join “devout” Islamicists and Israeli settlers and pedophile/alcoholic/ priests on my s***t list. My Iranian neighbor is a “lapsed” Muslim, as my parents were “lapsed” Catholics. “Lapsed” is good.

    I have a lazy metabolism, so does Thompson. Reagan told his aides his goals (defeat the Soviet Union) and then took a long nap. Bush is ultra-fit physically but rhetorically challenged.

    Also, Thompson has THE great line on immigration which he should use in the debates: “It’s our house and we should be able to decide who enters it.” Take that Vicente!

  24. Jersey McJones says:

    Rockyspoon, (that’s an odd moniker!)

    1) yes; to the estate of the deceased

    You want the Estate Tax to be refunded to the estate – perfectly reasonable, and I bet it happens quite often – but the point is that the estate IS an unearned windfall INCOME to the inheritor. Given that we do have an income tax in America (which I’m sure you’d like to be rid – but it’s a current fact of life), should we not tax unearned windfall income just as much or more than earned income or income in return for investment? The entire “Anti-Death Tax” thing is unAmerican, aristocratic, regressive, a matter for only a handful of payers (like Paris Hilton), and wrong. There is no such a thing as a Death Tax, just a tax on windfall inheritances of estates.

    2) yes and yes

    LOL!

    3) yes and no

    Exactly.

    4) yes

    LOL! (Can that even happen?)

    5) maybe (never show your hand)

    That’s a scary answer. I assume you got the joke…

    6) yes (it remains all the time)

    The Nuclear option for Fiji?

    7) moot question because it’s contradictory.
    yes (unless they want to make Colonial Williamsburg a REAL sanctuary city by vote of the city council (or it’s equivalent))

    So you would let terrorists loose on an American city? (I think you might want to clarify that point)

    9) Swear (all those eventalities can pretty much be discounted if taxes are never raised)

    LOL!

    10) no (an ounce of prevention is worth a pound (or a ton) of cure)

    Hey, you got one right!

    That was so easy I should be a presidential candidate.

    Yeah well, you probably could. Your positions are right in the mainstream, apparently.

    JMJ

  25. Jersey McJones says:

    Mike,

    I’m not a Democrat. There are a few Democrats I really like these days, and there aren’t many Republicans I care for anymore, but that a Democrat does not make. If they showed some real cajones and brought universal healthcare, a retraction of our worldwide military industrial complex, and progressive taxation and trade law – then maybe I’d be a Democrat. But they aren’t anywhere near there. You conservatives are just so attached to the GOP that you’ve lost any reasonable understanding of the Democrats, let alone Liberals. You people actually think the Democrats are Socialists! No wonder conservatives so easily blundered into Iraq without a clue of what would happen. They realy think that they understand people that they neither know nor have studied.

    JMJ

  26. Sandra says:

    Oops. I forgot Romney. I had fairy godfathers when I lived in Spain but became distant from gays in recent years. Let me thank the Log Cabin Republicans for a superb commercial showing a young Romney saying the exact opposite about Reagan, the Contract With America et al of what he says today. Love you guys! I want you back at the table and if the religionists don’t like it. Tough!

    I supported McCain in 2000 and wondered why a POW/MIA wife hated him. Is there footage of him making them cry when he and “his best friend in the Senate, John Kerry” closed down the search for MIAs. There’s the humble, almost feminine McCain of the Sunday morning talk shows and the arrogant Chairman of the Commerce committee.
    And Squadron leader? That wasn’t in his bios. He IS a great party giver, always.
    There’s a photo of him in dellrious embrace with Vietnam’s communist leader. Was that after he and his best friend in the Senate signed a billion dollar exclusive port deal that went to Kerry’s cousin?

  27. Jersey McJones says:

    Sandra, where are the links on that story about Kerry and McCain? I’ve seen some ‘worldnet’ sort of dribble, but I have never seen any credible substantiation. Don’t ge me wrong. I’d love to see it if it’s there. Dems and Reps pull sleazy hijinks like this all the time. They should be exposed if true – and ground down to powder if just some sleazy lie.

    JMJ

  28. micky2 says:

    Jersey said;

    They realy think that they understand people that they neither know nor have studied.

    God ! Are you talking about yourself ?
    That is as laughable as you have ever gotten.
    Now I know you just like to hear the sound of your own lips banging together.
    You have presented more crap than I have ever seen that only God could know.

    Bringing on universal health care means they would have balls?
    .Quite the opposite on both ends really.
    Having hard working Joe America pay your bills takes no balls.
    And taxing America to death is the whimpiest way to get anything done.

    Jersey said
    “a retraction of our worldwide military industrial complex,”

    Big fancy shmancy words that just mean bailing out. (oh but it sounds so like I know what I’m saying)

    Jersey said
    You conservatives are just so attached to the GOP that you’ve lost any reasonable understanding of the Democrats, let alone Liberals.

    What is it with you and no one ever being able to actually indentify what you are ?
    If anyone find it easy to figure you out its anyone.
    The left, libs democrats, are not such a rare breed that only a genius like you can figure them out.
    So please stop this crap that your identity is so elite that non of us dunces can figure out what you are.

  29. micky2 says:

    Sandra said;
    beginning at the moment of conception, proving their ignorance of logic and Aristotle’s identification of the difference between POTENTIAL life vs. ACTUAL life.

    Ignorance of logic ?
    How about ignorance of life ?
    Life may or may not be at conception, no science yet can even determine that yet.
    But what is fact and determined is that at 8 weeks there is a heart beat and brain activity. And s far as potential goes, I find it incredibly ignorant for anyone to think that they are grand enough to determine what is and is not potential for life.
    After two months that child has all the potential in the world to be just like you or me.

    I dont think Aristotle had too many run ins with pro life or baby killers in his time.

    Since i last checked sandra , alcoholism was not a crime.

    And talk about ignorance ! Since when did a candidates looks determine his capabilities ?

    Now, what was your point ?

  30. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, your mastery of spin is is amazing. You should write for Bill O’Reilly.

    I’ve known and read and saw a whole lotta “conservative” thought in action. It wasn’t all that great back then, and it’s gotten a lot worse.

    A true “conservative,” just a generation ago, would turn his nose up to Fox news. Now they’re holding up Ann Coulter as a thinker. Before the post-WWII batch, conservatives used to be people who weren’t stupid enough to try to control the entire friggin’ world.

    JMJ

  31. micky2 says:

    I thought is was so far the most substantial debate amongst both parties so far.

    The first thing tht struck me was Romneys hair in the first 3 minutes. Did anyone notice he had that bad boy James Dean spike coming down on his forehead ?
    Looked like he got lucky in the broom closet, at least it wasnt the oval office.

    Most of these BDSers are saying it was boring and whatever lameness they could think of to attach to it but these guys actually were confronting each other on issues. very refreshing after seeing the Dems run around on stage and hug each other.

    Finally the top tier is starting to come after Hillary.
    This is one of the most important things that needs to be done that has been neglected so far.
    I’m so glad Romney told the world what really needed to be said for a while now , and that is that Hillary along with congress “supported” Bush on the war.
    She keeps getting away with dodging that one by turning the question into a diatribe of how Bush screwed up and mislead us and bla bla bla. Rudy, McCain all took their shots at her, On top of Romney mentioning what a joke the UN is. I loved it.
    Ron Paul;
    ” Any association that is voluntary should be permissable in a free society”
    What ? This guy cant be for real.
    Without any imagination that line could carry all kinds of stupid implications.
    I almost feel pity for him by now. He doesnt realize just what a laughing stock he is.
    Turkey is not our business ? Come on Ron, if that situatuion goes any further it not only will be our business, it will be our nightmare.

    And why are libs getting their pantys in a ruffle over Hunters statement on Kennedy and the freedom fighters ? It was accurate and true. As was Reagan and his success with El Salvador.

    McCain said some things that made sense as do alot of things he says but the guy lacks salesmanship. I think we need a guy in office that can convey his ideas with conviction. Hes a little too soft spoken. But by no means “almost feminine” as Sandra spitefully said.
    I would like to see if anyone presumably that feminine could put up with 1% of what that man has been through.

    Huckabee got it right on the nose when he said that every old hippie would be lining up for free drugs if we ended up with “Hillary Care” I can see it now. The the taxpayer would have to fork out millions more for additional rehabs.
    And our basic rights do come from God, but why would any athiest moonbat agree with that anyway, so whats new ?
    And there was humor, honest spontaneous humor. Which made these guys look human, and not as rehearsed as the Dems have appeard in all their debates so far.

  32. micky2 says:

    Yea well jersey I guess you’re still some eloquent enigma.

    But who really knows, all you ever do is spout opinion as if yours is the final word.
    You present nothing to back it up and leave it all up to us to embrace your perspective.

    Saying that they hold up Ann as a thinker is about as good as me saying that you’re leading the DNC.

    If I spin, I make my point.
    If I debate, I prove my point.

    At least I dont come off to the whole world as if I’m some kind of authority on things that no one could possibly know.

    You said;
    I’ve known and read and saw a whole lotta “conservative” thought in action. It wasn’t all that great back then, and it’s gotten a lot worse.”

    I say;
    I’ve known and read and saw a whole lotta “conservative” thought in action. It was great back then, and its getting a lot better.

    I hope you can see that my statement was just as useless and pathetic as yours.
    It really carries nothing that anyone can grab on too and say ” REALLY ! WOW ! I didnt know that ? Honestly?
    OK I’ll take your word for it and follow you from now on.

    Why on earth would I want to listen to or agree with a man whos way of thinking has lead him to be what looks like one of the unhappiest most miserable vindictive souls on earth?

  33. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky,

    “And why are libs getting their pantys in a ruffle over Hunters statement on Kennedy and the freedom fighters ? It was accurate and true. As was Reagan and his success with El Salvador.”

    Have you ever met a Salvadoran? How about some of our “military advisors” who were down tere at the time? Do you have any idea what happened down there and why and who, etc? I have.

    “Accurate and true,” huh? If you consider massacring peasants and mursering nuns a “success,” then perhaps you have a point. Otherwise, our intervention there was about the sleaziest and most murderous of our Central American interventions.

    Talk about unhappy and vindictive! What kind of “soul” would call what we did in El Salvador a “success”??? Jeffry Dahmer, maybe?

    JMJ

  34. micky2 says:

    Salvadorians are fighting next to us in Iraq, this is the deal today as opposed to the deal in Cuba, that was the point Huckabee was making. Wenow have an allie.
    Had Salvador gone unchecked as you libs and commies would of liked it to, God only knows what kind of characters would be cruising up through our border now.
    Yea it was ugly and full of controversy as is any war or intervention. And I wasnt crazy about how it went down, but lets put blame everywhere it belongs.
    Reagan didnt start this crap actually and he had to deal the mess that Carter and the media downplayed during Carters administration. Carter was actually the one who started pumping money into El Salvador before Reagan They didnt want that story about the American nuns to get out.
    One thing that libs always fail to mention is that almost all the atrocities were not being performed by our guys, which were very few.
    I have read so many stories and renditions of what happened down there that it makes me dizzy, honestly. And you have to take into consideration that any honest media in that part of the worlds was almost absolete.

    As it stands today holmes, Cuba is not a success because Kennedy whom I think was great overall blew that one. He screwed up in Cuba a couple times actually.
    Had Kennedy supplied the freedom fighters in Cuba it more than likely would of gotten nasty. But I believe if Kennedy pushed a little harder we wouldnt have that oppresive commie hole just to the south of us.
    And El Salvador is looking a lot better than Cuba today, period.
    As far as your Dahlmer remark goes, that was just plain stupid.
    The true application of what your trying to say should be more along the lines of “misinformed” or ” distorted perception”
    That would accurately describe I think how someone like you should be trying to portray me (if it were true).
    “Vindictive” means to seek revenge or settle a score, to lash out and scorn a percieved injustice to yourself.
    God help me but I cant see how that applies to my view of El Salvador.

    As far as the debates go , my point would be that of course I’m not crazy about libs.
    But at least I gave the libs and their debates a rolling start before I disected them and put them down.
    You had alredy peed on the republicans before they came out of the gate.
    Sure, both you and I have our preconceptions, but I think it would still only be fair to shut our yaps untill they say what they are going to say.
    It takes hatred to do what you do.
    In my case I have serious doubts and a lot of contempt, but not hatred and totall intolerence.
    This can only be true in your case as reflected in your constant vindictive and unhappy demeanor displayed in your comments.
    Absolute sarchasim and cynicism blended with only opinion is almost all you do.
    Find another approach, anything by now will work better for you.

  35. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky,

    There’s too much history to go into here with you. Suffice to say, we certainly didn’t make El Salvador any better, and had we gone into Cuba in Kennedy’s day, it would have been a huge bloodbath. To say that El Salvador is “looking better than Cuba today” by almost any measure is just plain ludicrous.

    JMJ

  36. micky2 says:

    Sure Jones.
    And radical islam is no threat.

    You said;
    There’s too much history to go into here with you.”

    I got a case of red bull next to me and all day to kill.

  37. Lily says:

    When the wheat is finally separated from the chaff, the only man standing with any credibility will be Mitt Romney. All this ballyhoo — who said what; who faltered; who goofed, etc., etc. — will turn to ashes soon. Conservatives have to concentrate on the man who is fully qualified to be President – not what a lame candidate might have said during one of the debates. Choose a candidate and support him. Period.

  38. micky2 says:

    Rudy and Romney both have my attention, Thompson might get it later, he needs more definition seing how he came in late.

  39. Jersey McJones says:

    Red Bull. lol! Unfortunately, I don’t have that kind of time. Too bad, though. I’d rather get into all this. Radical religious extremism is always a threat to civilization. Always has been, and will continue to be so until people find something else to be radical about. But threats have to be measured. Not every threat poses the same type of level danger. This new Islamist terrorism is particularly dangerous in that they are willing to attack soft targets for maximum bloodshed. So we have to keep a very close eye on these guys. But going to war in the Middle East is not the answer. It makes more terrorists and shifts our resources to the wrong gateways. El Salvadoran was a very tiny threat to America, if a treat at all (I go with the latter).

    JMJ

  40. Jersey McJones says:

    oops – meant to say “El Salvadoran communism…”

    JMJ

  41. Jersey McJones says:

    Lily, from what do you derive percieved credibilty of Romney? I see a slick, pandering, used-car-salesman – the Bill Clinton of the GOP.

    JMJ

  42. micky2 says:

    Jersey said;

    “El Salvadoran(communism) was a very tiny threat to America”

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/elsalvador2.htm
    The Reagan administration initially appeared to stress the need to shore up El Salvador as a barrier against communist expansion in Central America. The United States Department of State issued a special report on February 23, 1981, entitled Communist Interference in El Salvador, which emphasized Nicaraguan, Cuban, and Soviet support for the FMLN. The report was widely criticized in the American media and the United States Congress. Nevertheless, the administration succeeded in increasing substantially the levels of United States military and economic aid to El Salvador, first by executive order, then by legislative appropriation. Although Reagan downplayed the importance of human rights considerations, Congress voted in January 1982 to require certification by the executive every six months of Salvadoran progress in such areas as the curbing of abuses by the armed forces, the implementation of economic and political reforms (particularly agrarian reform), and the demonstration of a commitment to hold free elections with the participation of all political factions (all those that would renounce further military or paramilitary activity). The administration accepted the certification requirement, albeit reluctantly, and proceeded with a policy that emphasized economic maintenance in the face of guerrilla attacks on the country’s infrastructure, military buildup to contain the insurgency, and low-key efforts in the human rights area.

    Thats your perception, but in a majority of views it was not a good idea to lert another ommie institution take a strong hold of a country. As many as five commie countrys were involved in this effort which only made its potential for growth and strength that much more scary, but not if you’re a commie.

    I’m willing to bet that the only reason you think of Romney the way you do is because he reminds you of the guy who sold you your last piece of crap car.
    I’ve listened to the man closley. Although I poked fun at him in the beggining of my post I hear alot of truth and conviction in his voice. I also hear a guy who will pull no punches when dealing with national security, and the same goes for Rudy.
    Speaking of voices, Hillary squeels and sqwaks like my granma did before she got ready to spank me. I would walk away laughing.
    Then again, we could probably flush out Bin Laden by driving a PA system around N Pakistan blaring Hillarys voice at all hours of the day.

  43. laree says:

    They all the Republican Canidates need to show up and talk to this man.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGiQtR25Kcc

  44. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, the last car I bought was a Taurus with only 30K for $5000 cash. Remember, I worked in the auto industry – I’m too smart to get a bad deal on a car. It’s still running great. You’d have to be completely uninformed to buy a new car, unless it’s a well-priced Toyota or Honda.

    My logic is both superficially and historically based. Romney is a serious flipper, and his demeanor is quite slick. He’s certainly no everyman, and he plays plays the role poorly. But, he tells you guys what you want to hear, so I guess you’re blind to what seems obvious to me. I thought the same thing about Clinton back in ’92.

    JMJ

  45. micky2 says:

    Hey ! since when do any of them”NOT “tell you what you want to hear?
    Thats like accusing them of breathing.
    Thats par for the course.
    I think on more than one dimension, and have already dealt with that aspect, and looked at the other mitigating factors.
    I’m pretty smart myself, and sold used and new cars for JN chevrolet for 3 years.

    A Taurus ? I guess you looked good in it.

  46. Jersey McJones says:

    No, I got the Taurus because of the condition, the mileage, and that it just plain fell out of the sky into my hands (actually, my employer at the time set up the deal. It was a mint fleet car.). Yeah, it’s a Ford, so as usual it has a fantastic engine and a alousy everything else. But I always keep a good mechanic around.

    Sorry ro the “ysed car dealer” crack. But you must be pretty thick skinned about that by now. Lawyers, used car dealers, tax collectors, the ACLU – all very easy targets of our ire, but in the end, we couldn’t live without them.

    As for whether they “ALL” say what we want to hear, well, yes, “they” being the only serious contenders. Those who do tell it straight, regardless of what we want to hear, tend to get booed off the stage. It’s a shame. Romney just strikes me as an extreme panderer, but I could be wrong. He’s a little hard to read.

    JMJ

  47. micky2 says:

    Jersey said;
    all very easy targets of our ire, but in the end, we couldn’t live without them.

    That depends on how you define “living”

    You said;
    He’s a little hard to read.

    Then dont be so sure of what you think.

    The ones who get booed of the stage are usually the idiots.
    The public knows how campaigning works and how all candidates pander, some more than others.
    Ron Paul may speak the truth from his own little perspective, which is why he gets booed.
    The majority knows hes a fool.

  48. Jersey McJones says:

    By “living” I meant in a free and civil nation.

    Jesus was booed off the stage more than once, Micky.

    The majority IS a fool. It’s that old expression – any one perons is usually pretty, and one group is usually pretty stupid.

    JMJ

  49. micky2 says:

    Call it what you want jersey.
    But the majority wins the vote in what you call a ” a free and civil nation.”
    Dont even compare Jesus to Ron Paul, talk about dumb things to say.
    Jesus did more for man in a day than Ron Paul would or could in his whole life.

    J said
    The majority IS a fool. It’s that old expression – any one perons is usually pretty, and one group is usually pretty stupid.

    OH! That will put it in perspective for me , jeeez, you think that works ?

  50. Jersey McJones says:

    No, the majority does not “win the vote.” The Electoral College does that job.

    And no, Jesus probably did no such thing. Jesus, the Biblical character, is a creation of latter bishops. The real Jesus was probably just a popular apoplectic Jew at a time when there were many such folks. His reputation eventually inspired a new faith. Such if the fickle fate of history.

    I meant “usually pretty smart.” Oops.

    Yeah, it’s a fact. Studies on “groupthink” and “mob mentality” have well established it. You just haven’t read up on the subject. Most educated people are well aware of this reality. That’s why we live in a republic instead of a pure democracy. The Founders were educated people.

    JMJ

  51. micky2 says:

    You know what jersey , you can put this together any way that suits your wishs.
    When the majority chooses chocolate ice cream over green tea ice cream that doesnt make them idiots.
    That just means they know what they like, and that doesnt make them idiots either.
    Unfortunatly with the left , they think we need them to tell us what we like and what is right and wrong.
    You would like to paint a picture of our citizens as complete bumbling fools because the majority dont hate there country like you do.
    We have a judicial that operates on a majority vote as does our congress, in that case the majority does not require a 51% vote at all times , but it does require a substantial majority.
    Jurys render their verdicts by majority vote. As do major corporate boards.
    As far as jesus goes. When an athiest thinks his opinion on jesus is compelling , he needs his head checked.
    You say you respect peoples faith even though you are athiest.
    The statement you made proves that not to be the case.
    I hardly think that Ron Paul will be a household word in 2000 years, never mind one of the greatest inspirations and teachers man has ever had.
    The best you can say about Jesus is that he “probably” did no such thing.
    Untill you know, its best not to act like you do.

    And I find it funny how you put down group mentallity when thats exactly what the left is all about, the collective, the community, the people as plural.
    Its ok when they buy your crap? And they’re idiots when they dont?. Thats just plain childish

    You said;
    it’s a fact. Studies on “groupthink” and “mob mentality” have well established it. You just haven’t read up on the subject.
    Most educated people are well aware of this reality. That’s why we live in a republic instead of a pure democracy

    So let me get this straight. These studies ? were they done by groups ?
    Its not mob mentallity or groupthink when people boo because they dony agree with you. You might be able to apply this in a commercial atmosphere and a trendy atmosphere. But whether you like it or not people are not as stupid as you would like to think they are.
    This is why you constantly piss people off , because its actually the independant thinkers like me that take offense to your generalization of the public as idiots.
    I have more faith in man than you do, consequently I am happier more of the time than you are. I spew less condecending remarks and doubt than you.
    But if we all turned around and followed your advice we would be geniuses.
    This is what you call “me think” mentallity, and gives no credit to what “they think”

    You can apply group think to reflexive issues such as panic and instataneous decision making etc…
    But those that have been watching a candidate for almost a year have had more than enough time to do their own thinking. But the voters in America are hardly considered a mob.
    And the founders were just that, but they dont “rule today”
    The majority in states and zones determine the worthiness of our electoral.
    The fathers found fairness in letting both the majority and the electoral have its place.
    So obiously the majority is not the curse you would like us all to belive it is.

    Studies also show that 4 out of 5 dentists recomend brushing with Crest every day.

    Get it ?

  52. […] Also, since it was on Fox News, it was actually watched. I own multiple televisions, source: A Relevant Republican Debate, THE TYGRRRR […]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.