View Poll Results: Democract Primary

Voters
53. You may not vote on this poll
  • Barack Obama

    37 69.81%
  • Hillary Clinton

    13 24.53%
  • Another Democrat Candidate (and share below who)

    3 5.66%
Page 4 of 15 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 285
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    That must have been the first half of the story I missed. It seems then that all the GOP did was make the Dems actually vote (putting accountability on record) on their own proposal that they liked to begin with.
    the definitive explanation was given Faux newts Sunday by a Florida congresswoman -- I think her name is Shultz ??

    She described rhe sequence of gop mechinations that lead to the vote -- despite brit hume attempting to shut her up

    i'll get back w/ more info later tonight
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  2.    #62  
    I have never heard this on Fox. I have now only heard it 3 times on CNN. The information I shared above and was added to by griffith above is what CNN is reporting.
  3. #63  
    Change of subject - I predict.

    1. I predict that African Americans will vote in droves for John McCain if the DNC foolishly lets Michigan and Florida back into the delegate race. They'll feel betrayed by the Dems for making sure the first African American Presidential nominee is still a fleeting idea at best.

    2. I predict that African Americans will vote in droves for John McCain even if Michigan and Florida remain blocked - yet, the super delegates overide the will of the people and nominate HRC anyway.
  4. #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    I have never heard this on Fox. I have now only heard it 3 times on CNN. The information I shared above and was added to by griffith above is what CNN is reporting.
    Hobbes -- The following exchange took on Faux newts Sunday -- my primary source of Fair and Balanced news:


    BRIT HUME: The Democratic presidential nominee could be decided not in the remaining primaries but in the outcome of the bitter fight over what to do about Michigan and Florida.

    Both states lost all their convention delegates when they were penalized by the Democratic National Committee for moving up their primary dates earlier this year in violation of party rules.

    For more on this, we turn to Debbie Dingell, a DNC committee member and a superdelegate from Michigan, and, from Florida, Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, who is also a convention superdelegate.

    Thanks to both of you for being with us.
    First let me start with you, Congresswoman. What do you think is the fairest way to settle this question?

    WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Well, I think when you're talking about fairness, we have to remember that this was started by the Republican- led legislature here that actually set the date of our primary

    So the victims here in all of — in the decision by the DNC to strip us of our delegates are Democratic voters in the state of Florida.

    HUME: Can I stop you there? Just let me stop you there for a second, if I can.

    WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Sure.

    HUME: In the Florida state senate, who introduced the bill to move the primary forward?

    WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: The bill was introduced by a Democratic member, a new Democratic member of the state senate.

    HUME: And in the legislature, senate and house as well, how many Democrats voted against it?

    WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Well, that's an inappropriate line of questioning, Brit, because that bill ultimately...

    HUME: Well, wait a minute. Well, inappropriate or not...

    WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Excuse me, Brit.

    HUME: ... could you just answer the question?

    WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Can I answer your question?

    HUME: Yes. How many?

    WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: I would like to answer your question without you asking me another one, if you don't mind.

    The legislation that was originally sponsored was amended into an overall election package that included the major provision to ensure that we could have manual recount and a paper trail. So this is a major election package that the change of a date in our primary was included in.

    So the vote total was unanimous, but that was because there's no one in the Florida legislature that was going to vote against changing our voting system so that you could have a paper trail and make sure that every vote can be counted, unlike our touchscreen voting system right now which doesn't allow for that.

    So to try to hang a unanimous vote on the fact that Democrats supported that — that's misleading, because they supported it because they certainly weren't going to vote against making sure there was a paper trail in Florida.


    HUME: I see. Well, all right. Then what's the fair way to settle it, in your judgment?

    WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Anything that is decided upon, Brit, has to be fair to Florida voters and make sure that Florida Democratic voters have their vote counted.

    The nerves are very raw here still from the recount fiasco in 2000. We've got to make sure that whatever — however our delegation gets seated, that it is seated reflecting votes cast by voters in Florida.

    HUME: So does that mean...

    WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: There are a variety of ways to do that. What's being talked about in terms of that variety is possibly a re- vote, which I think would not be the right way to go, and also a combination of weighted formulas so that you would count the election on the 29th in some way, and then other factors like the possible outcome of the rest of the primaries and weight that as well.

    There are a number of different formulas that are being talked about that would reflect the actual votes cast by the voters, but not necessarily entirely.

    HUME: But you would resist a re-vote.

    WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: I would resist a re-vote for a couple of major reasons. Number one, the re-vote that's being talked about right now would be a mail-in ballot. And we have never conducted a mail-in ballot in Florida. And in an election that is this important, an experiment like that is — now is not the time to test that.

    We had 1.75 million Democratic voters cast ballots on January 29th. It was a record turnout. And the likelihood of getting that many people to mail a ballot back in is very small.

    The other problem with a mail-in ballot is that you have transient populations. Poorer communities would really be disenfranchised in a scenario like that because their addresses are not consistent, and so the odds of them getting a ballot and even knowing about the election are much smaller than middle class and upper middle class populations.

    So any potential scenario right now that requires a re-vote would be experimental, would disenfranchise people, and we've got to make sure, again, at the end of the day that whatever delegation we have seated at the convention, which — we must have one, and there's no question in my mind about that — has to reflect the popular vote of Florida Democratic voters.
    Last edited by BARYE; 03/15/2008 at 08:10 AM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  5.    #65  
    I noticed that she never did address, or was it asked, if she supported the move prior to the move being included in the bill or even after it was in the bill and prior to the vote.

    Several questions comes to mind if we take your theory that the GOP is 100% responsible for Florida moving the Dem primary date and that the Dems are 100% innocent and 100% helpless and hapless victims in this situation.

    • Is CNN lying when they have repeatedly reported that the head of the Florida state DNC party approved of the date to be moved even before and after it was included in the bigger bill?
      .
    • WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ is saying they HAD to vote for the bill that included the date. That may be absolutely true, but did they raise any concerns about that PRIOR to the vote that the date change was included in it....or just trying to complain it after they got nailed for the date change? (even when I heard about the date change being reported and prior to the DNC deciding not to count their delegates, I never heard of any Florida DNC member complaining they were against the date change. I never heard that they being duped by the GOP in a master plot to undermined the Florida State DNC. This is a major enough issue...especially with Florida's recent election history still fresh in the mind of any pure Dem....I would have thought they would want to wipe their hands of it then....instead of only after they got penalized and had to place blame on someone)
      .
    • Is this just an example of a divide within the Florida state DNC?
      .
    • Or is this backtracking and spinning after they, the Florida DNC, initially supporting a move that after so much national Dem party attention has been focused on it are looking for someone else to blame for a move they approved of from the beginning?

    ....Again, I am not in anyway saying the GOP is innocent in this matter, though I don't know if they knew the DNC would decide to not include their state's delegate at the time, but the you would have to have political blinders on to not see the heavy responsibility of the Florida DNC as well.

    Basically this is how I see it........If they were helpless victims then this is another example of the incompetency of the members of the Florida Dem party for the simple reason of doing nothing in an election situation that has huge consequences. Even if there was nothing they could do to stop the move from being voted on, then they should have at the very least brought the fact that they are 100% against this move to light and explaining this to the public and to their very own National Dem Committee in a timely fashion.....i.e. when it was happening and not after they get nailed for it and becomes yet again a deciding factor in the Presidential election process. They did not do any of this. On the flip side, if they supported the date to be moved, then they hold all responsibility for not trying to fight the date change at the time because they did support it (and according to you let the GOP walk all over them because of their own support for this move).
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 03/15/2008 at 12:09 PM.
  6. #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    ...If they were helpless victims then this is another example of the incompetency of the members of the Florida Dem party for the simple reason of doing nothing in an election situation that has huge consequences. Even if there was nothing they could do to stop the move from being voted on, then they should have at the very least brought the fact that they are 100% against this move to light and explaining this to the public and to their very own National Dem Committee in a timely fashion.....i.e. when it was happening and not after they get nailed for it and becomes yet again a deciding factor in the Presidential election process. They did not do any of this. On the flip side, if they supported the date to be moved, then they hold all responsibility for not trying to fight the date change at the time because they did support it (and according to you let the GOP walk all over them because of their own support for this move).
    my extrapolation of what transpired is that Gov Crist and the gop for their own reasons wanted VERY much to move up their primary. They wanted to do it so much that they were indifferent about alienating either the national gop or democratic parties.

    Florida democrats REALLY cared about reforming Florida's corrupted voting system. They wanted more than anything to ensure that in Florida elections in the future that the votes would be counted fairly and accurately. That there would be at least a paper record to document the accuracy of the ballot process.

    Crist made it clear that he would ONLY support those reforms if the legislation included moving up the primary.

    The compromise gave each side that which it cared most about.

    The side that most cared about moving the primary's date was the gop.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  7.    #67  
    Barye, you keep on making accusations with no foundation or sourcing to support it beyond the convenience of what you would like to believe.....That the Florida Dems are helpless and victims by the Evil Florida GOP.

    Again what documentation do you at the time this originally happened to support your GOP conspiracy theory? It is just that everything that I am seeing on CNN now is saying that the DEMs wanted to move the date as well. They supported it. They did not mind voting for it. They did not complain about the GOP forcing them to vote for it....at least not until they time came they had to be accountable for their decisions.

    They have to take accountability as well. Barye, is there any documentation that you can show at the time this was actually happening that shows that the GOP strong armed the Dems against their will with moving date? Because it appears from what I have seen so far that they were upset about moving the date only after they got punished by their own party for doing it.

    Here what I see (with providing documentation for my views) of what really happened and is the reality of what is happening now:

    According to CNN Crist is apparently sticking up for the Dems in his state:
    Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, a Republican, and Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, a Democrat, called on the DNC last week to seat their state's delegations instead of silencing "the votes of 5,163,271 Americans" who voted in their primaries.

    "It's unconscionable to me that some party boss in Washington is not going to permit the people to be heard," Crist said. "That's not what America is all about, and it's wrong."

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/...rida.michigan/
    Going contrary to your GOP did this with the sole intention of a move against the Dems.....you seem to have very conveniently failed to have mentioned that glaring fact that the Reps were in just as much danger of having all of their delegates ignored as well as the GOP also punished the Rep voters in Florida for moving the date by ultimately refusing half of their delegates to be counted:
    Florida Republicans were stripped of half their 114 delegates by their national party.......But the Democratic National Committee ruled that no delegates could be awarded based on the January vote.

    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/loc...,7389847.story
    This Chicago Tribune article is exactly what I have been talking about and expresses many of the reports seen on CNN:

    Those rogue states defied the rules of both parties by butting ahead of other states on the calendar of primaries and caucuses nationwide.

    ------

    State leaders in Michigan and Florida now are in a tizzy for fear that their bad choices could have bad consequences. They've had enough mood swings to qualify for therapy:

    • Those leaders were smug and puffy-chested when they flouted the parties' rules and moved their primaries into January.
    • They were pouty and disbelieving when Democratic officials responded by stripping them of delegates to this August's national convention. Republicans stripped those states of half their delegates.
    • Now Democrats complain that if they truly are excluded -- if, that is, the Democratic National Committee does what its rules say it must do -- then millions of Michigan and Florida Democrats will be disenfranchised.


    That's true. But we don't recall much public protest in Michigan and Florida back when lawmakers were boasting that early primaries would give voters in those states more clout in the nominating process.

    Nor, for that matter, can we find evidence that representatives of Michigan and Florida did anything but support the strict calendar rules when they were approved in 2006 by the Democratic National Committee.

    Having made their bed, though, Democrats in the two states don't want to sleep in it. (Florida Democrats complain that their legislature is Republican-controlled and thus they shouldn't be punished; they conveniently forget that Democratic legislators went along with their GOP colleagues in advancing Florida's primary date.)

    Adding injury to insult: Democrats in both states who flouted national party rules now want their national party to pay for new primaries or other selection protocols.

    -------------

    National Republicans might be having the same conniptions if they hadn't settled on a candidate. They stripped half of the two states' convention delegates, just as their rules dictate.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...,7906548.story
    Barye....Again, in light all the reports being contrary to what you are trying to claim, that the GOP with a conspiracy against the helpless and victimized Florida Dem Party....what documentation do you have that was published prior to the DNC's stripping of them of the delegates that the Dem Party Leaders were being strong armed by the GOP who were putting themselves at the same risk you are accusing of forcing the Dems into.
  8. #68  
    Screw Florida and Michigan. Their state party is at fault. Tough titty said the kitty when the milk ran dry.

    This whole debacle could taint the whole election... which I am sure the GOP is loving.
  9.    #69  
    I am not sure about the status of Mich...but Florida is now officially NOT going to do a re-vote and is not going to have the original primary count. So now what? Do they just toss those Primary Delegates in the dumpster out back behind the DNC headquarters? Do they dole out their Primary Delegates with some formula? If they do that then both campaigns will have to agree to it.....and I don't see that happening.


    There is also talk about how to handle the pending Super Delegate War that is going to be unavoidable at the Dem convention. It was proposed that they hold a Super Delegate Primary prior to the convention, but that is against the Dem Party rules that says that Super Delegates do not have to cast their vote until the convention which is the place that is designed to debate in situations just like this.

    Interesting to see how this is all going to roll out indeed.....
  10. #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    I am not sure about the status of Mich...but Florida is now officially NOT going to do a re-vote and is not going to have the original primary count. So now what? Do they just toss those Primary Delegates in the dumpster out back behind the DNC headquarters? Do they dole out their Primary Delegates with some formula? If they do that then both campaigns will have to agree to it.....and I don't see that happening.


    There is also talk about how to handle the pending Super Delegate War that is going to be unavoidable at the Dem convention. It was proposed that they hold a Super Delegate Primary prior to the convention, but that is against the Dem Party rules that says that Super Delegates do not have to cast their vote until the convention which is the place that is designed to debate in situations just like this.

    Interesting to see how this is all going to roll out indeed.....

    Arguably we stand ready to see something not witnessed in several decades: A real-live convention fight. Gather the youngsters round that they can tell their kids about the time they had a front row seat to history in the making.

    Heaven forbid there be a platfom debate at a political convention!
  11. #71  
    Now that we have seen proof of the extent of Barack Obama's exceedingly close ties to the extreme elements of the left and various hate mongers, is he really the one to bring this country together? You cannot sit through 20 plus years of hate with his buddies and not be affected. His choice to be married in the church, to have his daughters baptised in the church, well frankly, it means he supported the church to the fullest extent possible. What really bothers me is his choice to subject his daughters to the teachings of Wright.

    Obama has yet to answer any questions of substance, he constantly avoids answering questions put to him, changing the subject, talks about slavery when slavery never was the issue. Inserts race in such a manner as to put the stick on the other side without addressing his real position. Placing his grandmother in the position he did, she was afraid...he zaps her, but still fails to address the other side.

    This man, should he be elected to office, will he chose the guidance and hatred of Wright, Faracot? If so, the healing he proposes to do, just will not happen. Do you really need someone like him constantly telling you the individual is incapable of self-improvement?

    Ben
  12. #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Now that we have seen proof of the extent of Barack Obama's exceedingly close ties to the extreme elements of the left and various hate mongers, is he really the one to bring this country together? You cannot sit through 20 plus years of hate with his buddies and not be affected. His choice to be married in the church, to have his daughters baptised in the church, well frankly, it means he supported the church to the fullest extent possible. What really bothers me is his choice to subject his daughters to the teachings of Wright.

    Obama has yet to answer any questions of substance, he constantly avoids answering questions put to him, changing the subject, talks about slavery when slavery never was the issue. Inserts race in such a manner as to put the stick on the other side without addressing his real position. Placing his grandmother in the position he did, she was afraid...he zaps her, but still fails to address the other side.

    This man, should he be elected to office, will he chose the guidance and hatred of Wright, Faracot? If so, the healing he proposes to do, just will not happen. Do you really need someone like him constantly telling you the individual is incapable of self-improvement?

    Ben
    though I don't myself share those views, I am realistic and cynical enough to recognize that they are more widely shared than it seems on the surface.

    If Obama is the nominee (there's still some chance for Hillary), it will be as I said before NH --a tough fight with him narrowly defeating McCain.

    McCain has too much against him -- support for economic policies that have brought the worst economy since the depression, support for a war and its endless continuance, and the embrace of a gop that's been lathered with corruption and hypocrisy. And he's old and a poor debater.

    Obama narrowly wins -- but I forsee an unsuccessful presidency. (Hillary would do much better)...
    Last edited by BARYE; 03/20/2008 at 02:36 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  13.    #73  
    It looks like Mich re-votes is dead as well:

  14. #74  
    Too much against him? Heck, he is more of a democrat than a republican. At least he does not change is stance as often as the other guys do. At least he stands up and is counted, does not avoid the issues, does not change the topic as the other 2 do. Ask him a question, he at least answers it without throwing the subject to another totally different topic. Not a great orator? Maybe that is good, at least he gets to the point. Obama has yet to get to the point in any debate, in any speech. He speaks in generalities. How do I know? I have taken the time to read two of his speeches.

    Heck of a man. His background says one thing, his public stance is something else and he really works hard trying to keep people from knowing the truth. Has he yet provided dates that he attended church in order to allow investigators to compare those dates to the tapes released by the church. How do you feel about a person that supports the Black Panther party? You do know a link to that party was on his site until he was forced to take it down. With support like that, what makes you think he has this country in his interest? From everything presented to date, his agenda does not speak well for the majority. His support is from the FAR left, not those that represent the "left" on this forum, but the far left and I sincerely doubt you agree with those views.
    In addition, it speaks well for the Democrat party and the way it has handled the Florida and Michigan election. A simple matter blown way out of proportion. The leadership involved stated on thing at first and then change their positions at least twice. What makes one think they can really make a decision when one is drastically needed in a real life situation. This, that, oh gosh, now they are complaining, let's change our position to meet our supporters. Now that is real leadership - the leadership shown to an extreme by both Obama and Hilary. No one on this forum is capable of tracking accurately the number of changes in stance and the number of times either candidate has said nothing. The only thing Obama is doing is alienating those people he so desperately needs to get elected president - people of middle America. The far left will not get him where he wants to be.

    Ben

    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    though I don't myself share those views, I am realistic and cynical enough to recognize that they are more widely shared than it seems on the surface.

    If Obama is the nominee (there's still some chance for Hillary), it will be as I said before NH --a tough fight with him narrowly defeating McCain.

    McCain has too much against him -- support for economic policies that have brought the worst economy since the depression, support for a war and its endless continuance, and the embrace of a gop that's been lathered with corruption and hypocrisy. And he's old and a poor debater.

    Obama narrowly wins -- but I forsee an unsuccessful presidency. (Hillary would do much better)...
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Now that we have seen proof of the extent of Barack Obama's exceedingly close ties to the extreme elements of the left and various hate mongers, is he really the one to bring this country together? You cannot sit through 20 plus years of hate with his buddies and not be affected. His choice to be married in the church, to have his daughters baptised in the church, well frankly, it means he supported the church to the fullest extent possible. What really bothers me is his choice to subject his daughters to the teachings of Wright.

    Obama has yet to answer any questions of substance, he constantly avoids answering questions put to him, changing the subject, talks about slavery when slavery never was the issue. Inserts race in such a manner as to put the stick on the other side without addressing his real position. Placing his grandmother in the position he did, she was afraid...he zaps her, but still fails to address the other side.

    This man, should he be elected to office, will he chose the guidance and hatred of Wright, Faracot? If so, the healing he proposes to do, just will not happen. Do you really need someone like him constantly telling you the individual is incapable of self-improvement?

    Ben
    Speaking of hate....you seem so filled with it you must have missed the numerous times he has outright rejected some of the comments made. Honestly Ben, do you live with Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity or do they just stop by for tea and crumpets from time to time?

    I think the Obamagave one of the greatest speeches in the last two decades and because of it, I'm voting for him. Well if I have that chance....because if the right-wing hate mongers don't take him down it seems the Clinton's just might.
  16. #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Heck of a man. Ben
    You really need a new quote Ben. This one is getting as old as your right-wing tirades and rhetoric.

    If you could show even a sliver of balance in your posts it might be interesting to debate you.
  17. #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    It looks like Mich re-votes is dead as well:


    Good. They made their bed....
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    though I don't myself share those views, I am realistic and cynical enough to recognize that they are more widely shared than it seems on the surface.

    If Obama is the nominee (there's still some chance for Hillary), it will be as I said before NH --a tough fight with him narrowly defeating McCain.

    McCain has too much against him -- support for economic policies that have brought the worst economy since the depression, support for a war and its endless continuance, and the embrace of a gop that's been lathered with corruption and hypocrisy. And he's old and a poor debater.

    Obama narrowly wins -- but I forsee an unsuccessful presidency. (Hillary would do much better)...
    I'm somewhat surprised at this sentiment that he could not be as successful as HRC. I think just the opposite - I think HRC would bring yet another 4 years of a very divided nation. Obama is half white - half black. He is a christian but has other religions in his family tree. He grew up living abroad and would help our country restore some of our tattered image. All in all I don't know that I've ever seen a candidate like him nor will I ever see one again in my lifetime. He seems to literally be a walking icon for what America is supposed to be all about - a melting pot whereby anyone can live the American dream. Can anybody think of any other candidate that embodies this better than him?

    Obama is not a perfect candidate nor a perfect man. But I am starting to believe that he will be historically significant for more than just his skin color. In a perfect world, I'd like to see him win the Presidency and the house of reps go back to the GOP - the senate remain with the Dems - and insert some semblence of balance back into our system. And yes, his speech was that moving to me - a call to arms for me personally that we must elect this man.
  19. #79  
    What did I say that indicates I am guilty of it? He has not given any indication why he has stayed with the church or the minister for 20 years. During that time, he married and had 2 children, both under the minister - his family and children brought up listening to the sermons filled with hate for this country, non-whites, et cetera. At no time did he attempt to get away from the church or denouce/correct the minister - that is until he was in such a position he had to do something.

    Now why am I being hateful bringing this up? Do I hate the man? No. He just is not being honest with anyone.

    Ben
  20. #80  
    He grew up living abroad? Heck no! He grew up here in Hawaii, the abroad time was insignificant. He grew up here in Hawaii going to school at one of the best private schools on the island. You speak of a living icon - his statements boil down to his stating that "black people need him to get anywhere" - he got somewhere...his wife got somewhere...

    No one needs him to get anywhere in this country. His melting pot requires him to be in charge.

    Listen closer.

    Ben

    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    I'm somewhat surprised at this sentiment that he could not be as successful as HRC. I think just the opposite - I think HRC would bring yet another 4 years of a very divided nation. Obama is half white - half black. He is a christian but has other religions in his family tree. He grew up living abroad and would help our country restore some of our tattered image. All in all I don't know that I've ever seen a candidate like him nor will I ever see one again in my lifetime. He seems to literally be a walking icon for what America is supposed to be all about - a melting pot whereby anyone can live the American dream. Can anybody think of any other candidate that embodies this better than him?

    Obama is not a perfect candidate nor a perfect man. But I am starting to believe that he will be historically significant for more than just his skin color. In a perfect world, I'd like to see him win the Presidency and the house of reps go back to the GOP - the senate remain with the Dems - and insert some semblence of balance back into our system. And yes, his speech was that moving to me - a call to arms for me personally that we must elect this man.
Page 4 of 15 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions