Awesomely awesome: Top Clinton advisors tell CNN they’re outraged by how she was treated; Update: Place her name in nomination for VP, urges Kristol
posted at 4:47 pm on August 23, 2008 by Allahpundit
The only way this could be more awesomely awesome is if it involved robots. As it is, I’m downright woozy at the thought of what’s in store on Tuesday night.
A top Clinton advisor also told CNN they were “outraged,” over how the process was conducted.
“You can’t put [Obama VP vetters] Eric Holder and Carolyn Kennedy on an hour plane ride to Chappaqua just to check the box? They should have done it just for the optics,” this person said. “Barack never even said to her, ‘Here’s how I envision the job’– not one discussion with her about [the position].”
“They thought her supporters were mad before? They are really mad now,” this person also said. We knew it was never going to happen but you would have thought they might at least make a show of it.”
Former Clinton strategist Paul Begala echoed similar frustrations on CNN Friday night.
“I think there are a lot of Hillary voters who are going to say, ‘Hey, wait a minute, man. You said you were going to put her on the short list. You know, you didn’t even vet her. You didn’t call her. You didn’t seek her advice,’” Begala said. “By the way, he didn’t seek President Clinton’s advice either. He’s actually the guy who I think picked the best vice president in American history. You would think maybe you would sort of check in with him.”
Says another Hillary insider to the New York Post of picking Greasy Joe, “Maybe it was a death wish.” Team Barry’s defense to CNN is that, between 16 months of oppo research on her and another 16 years of media scrutiny, she’s already been vetted as thoroughly as anyone could be. Which is sheer nonsense: They’d surely want inside details on Bill’s relationships with Ron Burkle and Frank Giustra, not to mention any extracurriculars on the trail over the past six months. There’s always more you can learn by asking, unless they’d seriously have us believe that the Clintons — the Clintons — have no secrets left to tell. Your unanswerable exit question, per CNN’s source: Why, oh why, oh why, didn’t Barry O simply have her in for an interview and check the box?
Update: Devilishly clever. It’ll never happen, of course, but the very thought of it fills my heart with malicious glee.
So Hillary Clinton gets about 18 million votes in 2008, and isn’t even considered for–she apparently isn’t even given the courtesy of being consulted–the vice presidential pick. Joe Biden manages to persuade a few thousand (if that) Iowans to support him. And Barack Obama selects Biden? Normally, if the VP pick came from that year’s presidential field, it’s the runner-up (Kerry-Edwards in 2004, Reagan-Bush in 1980, Stevenson-Kefauver in 1952). (Lyndon Johnson in 1960 hadn’t entered the primaries.) And Biden wasn’t even the third most successful candidate this year (hi, John Edwards!), or fourth (Bill Richardson, I suppose), or fifth (Dennis Kucinich!)…
A modest suggestion to my justifiably outraged Democratic friends: Hillary’s name should be placed in nomination not for the presidency (Obama won that more or less fair and square)–but for the vice presidency. It would be an interesting roll call vote.
I groused to a friend yesterday about how insane it is that nominees have to contest 50 grueling primaries/caucuses to win the nomination but the next in line to the throne if they’re elected is chosen purely on their own say so. If the wisdom of Democratic voters is trustworthy enough to pick the top half of the ticket (superdelegates notwithstanding), why isn’t it trustworthy enough to pick the bottom half? If Hillary was a little older and had no shot at a run in 2016, I wonder whether she wouldn’t drop the good-soldier pretense she’s displaying now and take a shot at this idea.
A tidbit from Rasmussen for delegates and PUMAs to mull: “Women are notably less enthusiastic [about picking Biden] than men—33% of women say Biden was the right choice while 27% disagreed. Men, by a 46% to 24% margin, said that Obama made the right choice.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4
okonkolo on August 23, 2008 at 11:21 PM
All of that is very true but you have to admit that the Democrats have the most convoluted primary rules every dreamed up by human beings. And it is all for the purpose of keeping the sheeple from making the real decision.
Cindy Munford on August 23, 2008 at 11:47 PM
Oh yes. That would be awesome.
lorien1973 on August 23, 2008 at 11:52 PM
You’d have to quintiple Juan Queeg’s USSS Detail.
sven10077 on August 23, 2008 at 11:56 PM
Exact same page.
MB4 on August 24, 2008 at 12:00 AM
A good question to ask. Let’s hope that a good answer might occur.
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 12:15 AM
This is absolutely wrong. I’m going to assume that you were educated in a government school, and give you a break.
The Constitution has always required that the Electors who choose the President and Vice President not be members of either house of Congress. Originally, Senators were elected by the state legislators (never by the Representatives), until “reformers” changed things. We really need to change that one back, for giving state legislators delegates to one house of Congress acts as a check on over-centralization of power that is sadly missing today.
The Monster on August 24, 2008 at 12:17 AM
All right conservatives. This is our chance. I was worried about an “old man” ticket before, but with Biden in the mix, that is nullified.
We should demand of McCain to draft his good friend… FRED!!!
Fred Thompson would eat Joe Biden alive in a debate. They would blow away the Obama/Biden ticket.
DEMAND IT! WE WANT FRED! WE WANT FRED!
bigred on August 24, 2008 at 12:53 AM
It’s cathartic for him. In many ways, he is the opposite of Terrye. Both rooted in emotional worldviews, and both strongly committed to that view, so help to vent it.
Don’t be too hard, pragmatists need idealists and idealists need pragmatists.
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 1:08 AM
Hey, you KNOW teh FRED is going to be in the cabinet no matter what. He might be better put to use elsewhere.
Secretary over the dept. of Common Sense.
Mojave Mark on August 24, 2008 at 1:22 AM
Michael in Michigan is a real good guy. Hardly anyone can write as flawlessly as he can.
I’m grateful that he’s here, whenever he chooses to be. He is polite and argues ideas, and yes, idealisms, but he is Mr. Integrity, agree or disagree with him, and I’ve been at both ends of this table, often. He’s a very thoughtful person and I respect him a lot. He’ll never vote for Obama, but can, obviously, vote for whomever he pleases.
Entelechy on August 24, 2008 at 1:27 AM
Mojave Mark, as usual, spot on!
Entelechy on August 24, 2008 at 1:28 AM
I’m afraid Cabinet might be too much work (not an insult, he’s just not a grind guy), but I would love to see him as Press Sec especially if he started every answer with, “Now listen here, Helen…”
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 1:33 AM
Dearest Spirit, if McCain wins Helen will die of a heartattack.
Entelechy on August 24, 2008 at 1:36 AM
Heh. Well, my dear Entelechy (MDE from now on) She will be in for a bit of a shock. Oh well, she can chalk it up to the crazy racists and crazy Zionists. I mean, surely Americans would choose socialism if they weren’t so barbaric!
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 1:39 AM
MDS, thanks for the chuckle. Good night,
Entelechy on August 24, 2008 at 1:42 AM
Good night to you. Glad you are back.
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 1:48 AM
interesting video, and good look at some very upset folks:
http://wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/
it’s long, and the people in it are not celebrities, so a lot of them are very self-conscious on camera. but it does show why so many Hillary Clinton supporters won’t vote for Obama this year.
funky chicken on August 24, 2008 at 2:51 AM
(please note: I have NOT read all of the preceeding comments)
RE: Update - Place her name in nomination for VP, urges Kristol
Were they to just do this, and were they to succeed…
Is it hubris? …or why is it that this year so many conservative writers/politicos think it is so “witty” to advise the Democrats what to do/how to “improve” their campaign?!
Lockstein13 on August 24, 2008 at 5:57 AM
Sweet Bejeebus, Did Michael in MI state that there are no moderates?
EPIC FAIL IN THE LAW OF STATISTICS AND AVERAGES, SON.
You lose teh interwebs.
Moderate muslim for McCain ’08
flashoverride on August 24, 2008 at 7:50 AM
So…it’s come to this…
All hope is gone, we have perspired mightily, swore as only olde sailors can, spilt and mixed what little gray matter we had into this great pile of dirt we have dumped… yet for all or best and worst efforts; all has been for naught and our dreams of power and grandeur have turned to dust.
300+ posts on one thread…
Let’s pin our last best hope and all our broken dreams on that…?
oh yah…?
oh no…!
J_Gocht on August 24, 2008 at 8:50 AM
I don’t think any conservatives are trying to tell the Dems how to “improve” their campaign. They’re just revelling in the fact that the Dems have once again managed to out-stupid the GOP (a/k/a the Stupid Party). See title of the article: it’s awesomely awesome!
I hope Hillary can force her way onto the ticket at the convention. Then I can be racist and sexist all in one vote.
Pavel on August 24, 2008 at 8:54 AM
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 1:08 AM
Entelechy on August 24, 2008 at 1:27 AM
Thanks to you both. I did feel like we were being a bit rough on him and I am not unsympathetic but geesh. I think I was probably going all wifey on him in the long run. You know, the “shut up or do something”. And the “do something” is posting here. Sorry Michael.
Cindy Munford on August 24, 2008 at 8:56 AM
That would make two of us. But you raise exactly the issue which concerns me: were there such a ticket, that might well increase Dem’s chances…or, does no one here see this formerly-known-as-Dream-Ticket-come-shotgun-weddin’ as still somewhat of a potential “plus” (for ‘them’…)?
Lockstein13 on August 24, 2008 at 9:15 AM
Wrong J, our hopes are pinned more along these lines…
As David Freddoso noted in his book, Obama represents the merger of two of the worst aspects of Democratic politics –’60s radicalism and corrupt Chicago machine politics. With the addition of Slow Joe Biden to the ticket, Obama has added to his unsteady candidacy an epic amount Beltway cluelessness and arrogance unsupported by anything except frequent flier miles and Delaware’s love for a chuckle-headed fellow with a big smile.
Rob Long asks “Isn’t [Biden] sort of the stupid person’s idea of the smart person’s candidate?” Yes, he is. But that’s not fair to stupid people. Even stupid people who watched Biden embarrass himself during the Alito hearings –remember the “I hate Princeton” moment followed by the donning of the Princeton cap?– know that Slow Joe is all tenure and no talent.
I was worried that the Dems had pointed out to Obama that his serial gaffing had brought the campaign close to a break point and that he needed Hillary. I was worried he’d actually go find Anthony Zinni or Sam Nunn or someone of accomplishment and purposefulness in foreign affairs. Webb would have been hell on the stump. Kaine or Bayh would have put different states into play. Sebelius was a wild card.
But Biden? Marooned in Marin has a collection of Biden’s greatest hits, which barely scratches the surface of the buffoonery Biden has produced over the years, and we’ll be getting the audio ready for next week and the next two months. See also XDA’s assessment: “That locks down the important swing state of Delaware and puts the combined fatuous egotism of the ticket into overload territory.” Geraghty the Indispensable has a list of choice Slow Joe quotes as well.
But put Biden’s obvious flaws aside and ask yourself how in the world Obama decided to go with Biden, and you’ll quickly realize that the Democratic nominee must have been impressed with Biden on the long campaign trail of 2007 and 2008 –even though voters weren’t and even though Biden has no accomplishments of note after 36 years in the Senate. Biden talked a great game and dropped some very interesting place names –and this impressed Obama. Talking the talk has been the key to Obama’s success, and in Slow Joe he found an older, far better traveled but equally prolix gas bag.
You want the counter argument: Read David Brooks, which Obama almost certainly did. But as a product of one of those towns in the industrial midwest full of Catholics and tough stories of the sort Brooks retails, I shake my head at the idea of a 36 year veteran of the Beltway who is down-the-line-liberal building a bridge to the old neighborhood. (And Dems have again got to face the problem of a hard-line abortion rights advocate explaining how this doesn’t conflict with his Catholic faith. Archbishop Chaput’s new book, Render Unto Caesar, is required reading on this suddenly central-again subject. My interview with the archbishop from Tuesday is transcribed here.)
Obama had another terrible week. His paean to the Chinese (he praised their “vastly superior” infrastructure on Thursday) his baffling equation of Russia’s rape of Georgia with America’s overthrow of Saddam, the new focus on his vote against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, his close ties with unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers and convicted felon Tony Rezko –all these things crowded in on him as he ran out of time to make a crucial decision. Pushed to the wall, he picked an empty suit like himself, a nice enough fellow who has done one thing well in his entire life, which is win elections in Delaware.
For Obama, it is all about politics and words, elections and poses. Slow Joe is the perfect running mate on a perfect ticket for a party betting on wind to solve the energy crisis. (HughHewitt)
Keemo on August 24, 2008 at 9:58 AM
Pavel on August 24, 2008 at 8:54 AM
We live to dream.
Keemo on August 24, 2008 at 9:58 AM
If only people outside of the choir read these things.
Cindy Munford on August 24, 2008 at 10:27 AM
We do and we luv yah…!
J_Gocht on August 24, 2008 at 10:46 AM
J_Gocht on August 24, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Well I think you are good fun also. Wrong but very witty.
Cindy Munford on August 24, 2008 at 11:04 AM
Michael in MI, MB4, Highhopes, and all of the others are not in the real world. They are unable to understand this basic concept of how the election works. Even after one candidate has won the most votes, and will be the one of two choices, then want to live only in the past and relive the primary season when there were many choices. And because you or I or anyone else recognizes this fact, then they can call people who disagree with them, McCain koolaid drinkers. This is not logical. This is emotional. He and others from their comments clearly show that they would rather live in the world of make believe than understand a very simple concept of how elections work.
Cindy Munford asked a perfectly reasonable question. And that was: “What is it exactly that you hope to accomplish with your posts.” and to me, that’s very obvious.
.
And so are some democrats who have pledged to defeat McCain and want Obama to win. We show ourselves for what we are by what we advocate, and what and who we wish to be defeated. Biden is a smooth speaker, in his opinion. He thinks he’s smarter than other people. Maybe even his mother thinks that her beautiful boy is Mr. Integrity, and a very thoughtful person. But thoughtful persons who want what is not in my best interests is worth exactly zero, despite the eloquent way they propose it.
It’s good that you have your opinion. But I would reject these ideas the day of the election between a democrat and a republican just as much as I would reject them the day after the republican primary has concluded. And I am no koolaid drinker. Many people here are dancing around the concept of throwing the election to Obama, and few actually right out and advocate it. If they were truthful, and if we all could see through what they are really advocating, what they really want to accomplish here with their impassioned postings, then the debate would be a lot more clear, open, transparent, and honest. I am completely honest as to what I want and why.
I sincerely doubt theirs. No matter how beautifully they speak. When it comes down to it, some people here are advocating the same things that the democrats are. On occasion, they even use the same reasonings that the democrats are. Even if they are completely honest in what they claim to be, the result – the logical conclusion of what they advocate is defeat. Let’s be honest with ourselves and not pretend that they aren’t. Defeat is not what millions of other republicans and conservatives are working toward for 2008. It’s not what the republican delegates are working for in the upcoming convention. Question for you: Whats the difference between two groups of people who argue for supposedly different reasons – and then come up with the same desired outcome. I don’t see much difference, quite frankly.
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 11:58 AM
And so are some democrats who have pledged to defeat McCain and want Obama to win. We show ourselves for what we are by what we advocate, and what and who we wish to be defeated. Biden is a smooth speaker, in his opinion. He thinks he’s smarter than other people. Maybe even his mother thinks that her beautiful boy is Mr. Integrity, and a very thoughtful person. But thoughtful persons who want what is not in my best interests is worth exactly zero, despite the eloquent way they propose it.
It’s good that you have your opinion. But I would reject these ideas the day of the election between a democrat and a republican just as much as I would reject them the day after the republican primary has concluded. And I am no koolaid drinker. Many people here are dancing around the concept of throwing the election to Obama, and few actually right out and advocate it. If they were truthful, and if we all could see through what they are really advocating, what they really want to accomplish here with their impassioned postings, then the debate would be a lot more clear, open, transparent, and honest. I am completely honest as to what I want and why.
I sincerely doubt theirs. No matter how beautifully they speak. When it comes down to it, some people here are advocating the same things that the democrats are. On occasion, they even use the same reasonings that the democrats are. Even if they are completely honest in what they claim to be, the result – the logical conclusion of what they advocate is defeat. Let’s be honest with ourselves and not pretend that they aren’t. Defeat is not what millions of other republicans and conservatives are working toward for 2008. It’s not what the republican delegates are working for in the upcoming convention. Question for you: Whats the difference between two groups of people who argue for supposedly different reasons – and then come up with the same desired outcome. I don’t see much difference, quite frankly.
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 12:00 PM
Michael in MI, MB4, Highhopes, and all of the others are not in the real world. They are unable to understand this basic concept of how the election works. Even after one candidate has won the most votes, and will be the one of two choices, then want to live only in the past and relive the primary season when there were many choices. And because you or I or anyone else recognizes this fact, then they can call people who disagree with them, McCain koolaid drinkers. This is not logical. This is emotional. He and others from their comments clearly show that they would rather live in the world of make believe than understand a very simple concept of how elections work.
Cindy Munford asked a perfectly reasonable question. And that was: “What is it exactly that you hope to accomplish with your posts.” and to me, that’s very obvious.
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 12:01 PM
Thank you wise_man, for granting me the right to my opinion. Much appreciated!
Tiny tip for your wise_man, and to be sure, I won’t vote for Obama (it would kill every fiber of my being) – if you think that you, or anyone else here, can/will influence anyone’s choice for voting, you definitely live in an altrnate universe. This is a place to pontificate in. Read, comments, reflect, debate, ignore.
Please note the “ignore” choice. It would do you some good. I might not agree with some of what’s said here but I’d hate nothing more than if we’d all agree with each other, and march down the cliff like lemmings.
I’m sure you’re familiar with the platitude “think outside of the box”. Well, I hate platitudes. For me the box is created by others, and wrapped around those who allow it. For myself, I refuse to admit that it ever exists. Therefore I don’t need the platitude. I find it as stupid as “teamwork”, “equality”, “world peace” or “kumbaya”.
Entelechy on August 24, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Hoooray…
Atta Girll…
Hip, Hip Hurrahh…
HooaaH…
You dah Babe…!
J_Gocht on August 24, 2008 at 1:08 PM
when I made the comment, it didn’t show up. So I stated as much and tried again. That didn’t show up either. So I broke it up into two. And now three of the four postings I made are here. For clarity, it would be good to remove the two halves, and delete this one as well. Thanks.
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 1:12 PM
Sorry for hurting your feelings that you are entitled to your opinion. Your sarcastic and irrelevant reply is MUCH appreciated!!!
I choose at times not to ignore the people who have as their purpose, to influence others by presenting the democrat’s case against supporting the republican nominee. And I will ignore any and all attempts by you who support their comments, and then suggest that I shut up and not respond to them.
Thaaaannnkkks!
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 1:18 PM
Congrats. You win today’s prize for thin skin.
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 1:20 PM
is that all you have to say?
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 1:35 PM
wise_man, if you believe that you hurt my feelings, then you must believe that my spine is made of mashed potatoes.
Also, if I’d “suggest that (you) shut up”, the communists, socialists and terrorists would have won. You must know how much I despise them all. Please carry on. Respectfully,
Entelechy on August 24, 2008 at 1:42 PM
Not if you wish. What more would you like me to say?
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 1:42 PM
Something relevant would be nice.
.
In any event, Entelechy, you seem to want me to ignore and not comment on these people. I’m sure that they’d really like that, too. So far there is getting to be more people challenging them. This is a trend that I am very glad to see.
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 2:05 PM
Okay.
Congratulations on winning today’s prize for thin skin. Once again showing that a robust debate of ideas is not universally welcomed, even though Republicans pride themselves in being able to win in the marketplace of ideas.
Unfortunately some people would prefer this site be an echo chamber. Which is detrimental frankly, to the strength of the party. Only the intellectually weak are bulliable. And I said above, idealists need pragmatists and pragmatists need idealists.
Again, McCain understands this better then you do. Else he would chose whomever he wished for as VP and damn the consequences. He has better sense then you, however.
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 2:14 PM
No, no, I don’t “want” anything. I simply pointed out that “ignore” is also an option. You do exactly what you please. However, consider granting all others the same.
Entelechy on August 24, 2008 at 2:28 PM
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 2:05 PM
I understand how you feel, I bombarded that poor guy but I think the long and short of it was that he needed to vent his frustration with this years election. And he was so down hearted about it that I have finally come to the conclusion that it is first experience with having to vote for someone he truly doesn’t believe in. Since I am getting up there it has happened to me several times so I can sit back and say it is what it is. My husband hates when I say that and I am pretty sure that Michael does to. I was taking it personally that he appeared to calling Hot Air folks sell outs and there was no personal offense being offered. My mistake.
Cindy Munford on August 24, 2008 at 2:52 PM
You’re a good egg:)
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Please quote my comment where I supposedly want there to be an echo chamber – where I said that I didn’t want them to speak, if you could, Spirit of 1776.
I’ll give you a “Tiny tip,” Spirit of 1776. I never said that. It’s another one of your attempting to put words into my mouth. Again.
Please do us all a favor and do try to improve you reading comprehension.
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 5:05 PM
Lol, don’t waste your time with me. You might fool someone else with semantic games, but not me.
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 5:39 PM
semantic games? Show me where in my 11:58 AM comment where I advocated an echo chamber. Please, I’d like to see you try.
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 6:14 PM
That is not possible, as you full well know. But you also know full well that am speaking of intent. Which (I hope you are sitting down since this may come as a shock to you) is why I didn’t use quotes or attribute that phrase to you. It’s a comment on intent. Here’s the definition if you need it.
Consider it my mastery of the English language that allows me to consisely sums up your intent. Cheers!
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 6:26 PM
then kindly don’t ATTRIBUTE something that I DIDN’T SAY.
And you are no judge of intent. But since you make yourself out to be the resident Hot Air psychic – let’s try out your superior mind powers, Miss Cleo. What am I thinking now? Can you guess? Do you know what my ‘intention’ is now?
wise_man on August 24, 2008 at 7:24 PM
I find your outrage amusing. You implied I should add to my brevity above, and having done so, you labor to be offended. From your use of bold and mild insults, I must conjecture you have succeeded.
I didn’t attribute something you didn’t say (ironic, you should claim I did after stating I need to read for comprehension). If I had done that you would have seen quotation marks or a reference to your name.
To clarify, this is a quote – “do try to improve you reading comprehension”. I might note, regardless of whether it is in CAPS or not, the word attribute or attribution doesn’t necessity quotation. I, and anyone else who reads your posts, am able to attribute to you your meaning. That is in fact, I presume, you entire reason for posting.
Everyone who reads anything anyone else writes must determine intent. You pattern of behavior leaves no doubt as to yours. I don’t need to be Miss Cleo to see the blatantly obvious. Everyone knows a bully.
Spirit of 1776 on August 24, 2008 at 8:01 PM
Is that anything like the tune you will be singing if Obama wins the election, which is, of course, far more important than who wins the Rep nom or the Dem nom, and it certainly is a real possibility?
Somehow I rather think not, but it’s your hole so keep digging it.
MB4 on August 24, 2008 at 9:22 PM
I don’t think Hillary wants veep at all, she can do more damage in the Senate. But this just makes it more fun, the laughs keep coming.
myamphibian on August 24, 2008 at 9:48 PM
McCain sucks. I hope that by posting this, we can remove him as the GOP nominee in a back room deal at the convention,
A man on the cusp of switching parties a few years back and acting as a saboteur to conservatives ever since does not deserve your vote if you believe in limited government.
Obama will burn down Rome in a day, but McCain will take a couple of weeks for the same result. (He has to reach across the aisle first). No sale.
Valiant on August 24, 2008 at 9:48 PM
Just thought I’d quote this little gem from another thread here. For wisdom’s sake and all.
RushBaby on August 25, 2008 at 12:14 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4