It’s on: Gingrich versus Michael Steele for RNC chair
posted at 6:30 pm on November 10, 2008 by Allahpundit
A follow-up to Ed’s post from earlier today: The Washington Times spies a gathering storm.
Republicans close to each man say they are intent on ousting Mike Duncan when his tenure ends in January and to insert themselves to articulate a counter-agenda to President-elect Barack Obama´s administration.
A bevy of backers for each man, neither of whom is an RNC member, have been burning up the phone lines and firing off e-mails as they try to sway the 168 RNC members in the wake of the second consecutive drubbing of Republicans at the polls.
“The Republican National Committee has to ask itself if it wants someone who has successfully led a revolution,” Randy Evans, Gingrich confidante and personal attorney based in Atlanta, told The Washington Times on Monday…
“Steele is a good guy,” Mr. Gingrich said in an e-mail response to The Washington Times. “There are a number of good guys.”
I’m partial to Newt just because he seems at times to be the only man left in the party with any new policy ideas, but you can’t go wrong either way.
You know what this calls for. Exit question: Is it worth trusting the Wash Times this time when they teased us with a similar story about a Steele chairmanship bid that went nowhere two years ago?
Update: None of the above, says Huck, who’s evidently going the Obama-esque crony route.
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 5 Next »
Either one would be good with me. Which ever way it goes the other should be on in a similar speachmaking role Regan had. I think someone recommended Thompson do the same.
liquidflorian on November 10, 2008 at 8:43 PM
The most common argument against Newt is that he sat on the couch with Pelosi and believes in global warming; I like the way he encourages the new faces in the party, he’s always good for a soundbyte, he’s dealt with the Clinton scoundrels before, and he is keen on training people. He is an effective manager who seems tailormade for the job. Michael Steele, I agree, would be good as the VP working with and learning from Newt, though he is very capable himself.
chunderroad on November 10, 2008 at 8:45 PM
I like both options and wish Steele had been the RNC chairman instead of Mel Martinez or Mike Duncan. But I voted for Newt and here’s why.
Michael Steele is telegenic, articulate and very appealing — all qualities that should not be wasted behind the scenes. I hope he gets as much public exposure as possible in 2009 and announces his candidacy for governor or senator thereafter.
Look at the list of 2010 gubernatorial elections, which includes his home state of Maryland. Here is the list of 2010 senatorial races, which includes Barbara Mikulski of Maryland and Chris Dodd of Connecticut.
Newt is a brilliant tactician, which is exactly what the RNC needs, but he carries too much baggage to be a successful national candidate. More than any other American conservative except Rush Limbaugh, Newt has the right ideas, the energy and the experience to lead the GOP out of the wilderness — again.
I love Teh Fred, but he told K-Lo that he’s definitely not interested.
Terrie on November 10, 2008 at 8:46 PM
I am sorry, but to simply say we need new blood is not good enough. Sounds like “we need change”, that’s the reason people had to vote for the big Zero. Yes, we need new blood, but not for the sake of new blood. We need the right people in the right roles, and I hope the RNC thinks really hard about this, this is not a general election, popularity should not be the main factor. I don’t understand all this talk about attracting this group of voters or the other based on the chairman’s personal characteristics. The general public does not care or have a clue who the chairman of the RNC is. The task at hand is to bring to the RNC ideas, discipline, organization, fundraising, quality candidates, wining strategies and tactics, effective communication strategies. Weather the public likes the chairman is not as important as his ability to bring these changes about. Someone could be the best candidate for President and yet be totally inadequate for this job.
neuquenguy on November 10, 2008 at 8:46 PM
Newt lost me with the Pelosi ad and he’s just so into himself with his wife sitting on balcony’s all over the world, blah blah blah….
Michael Steele is too RINO.
My vote is for get the hammer back. Get Tom Delay… we need him more than ever right now. Rush would actually be the best, but he’s doing the equal on the airwaves, which we can’t afford to lose. This is a battle and we need warriors, not people looking in the mirror or see how good they look or wondering what kind of website they can build or what book to sell. Phonies.
suzyk on November 10, 2008 at 8:47 PM
CHIP SALTSMAN
jparks1972 on November 10, 2008 at 8:50 PM
He does have an excellent plastic smile and used-car salesman charm that cannot be beat! Honestly, Tom would be better than, uh, Huckabee or Chip.
(Drinks a bottle of pepto)
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 8:51 PM
Steele is a vastly better tactical choice, although there has to be someone that would be even more appropriate.
No problem at all with Gingrich forming the basic platform for the RNC, but as much as I respect his brain (other than that “GoreBull Warming” crud)
This is why the Republican Party will never win again. I thought that the Elites were the ones that never learn, But I see the peasants are wanting to make the same mistakes again too. All too many didn’t learn a thing in 2006, didn’t learn a thing in 2008.
Always wanting these old retreads; these old has-beens to run things. As a retreaded old has-been myself, I’m ready for someone new and vibrant. Someone that can communicate not only with political junkies like us, but with the American Idol fans. Newt is a smart guy, but he does not connect with 80% of the people of this no longer great nation.
It would be great if he wants to be a top level adviser, but it would be a huge mistake to make him the face of the Republican Party. I’m not sure if Steele might be the best guy for that, but he would be better than Professor Gingrich.
We need a leader and a communicator, with unassailable character, not a Professor with a past that most people don’t really understand, but do have some vague idea that there was some kind of disgrace.
LegendHasIt on November 10, 2008 at 8:55 PM
Michael Steele for chair, because a Newt chairmanship would decrease the chances of our seeing the greatest Republican ticket to ever be fielded, Gingrich-Jindal
Brains on November 10, 2008 at 8:58 PM
I left something out of that, but I guess it doesn’t matter much.
LegendHasIt on November 10, 2008 at 8:59 PM
That’s where the nads I referred to come in.
sheesh on November 10, 2008 at 9:02 PM
I agree. I like Steele but that’s irrelevant, as is his race. Newt is the powerhouse here.
Folks, lets not play the Dem game by making statements or playing other forms of non-conservative politics rather than adhering to principle. Doing the former is how we’ve lost in the consecutive elections.
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 9:02 PM
I rather have an old retread than anymore of this new age “Compassionate Conservatism” crap. I rather have an old partisan war horse than a mushy, touchy-feely Republican who wants to water down our principles in order to get two or three votes.
I want a tried and true leader. I want NEWT.
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 9:03 PM
The best part about this ‘debate’ is at least the realization has hit that a tsunami needs to hit the GOP.
A new leader of RNC? Absolutely! A new direction can only begin with someone to steer the course. Either of these two would have its advantages and disadvantages.
I can easily see the ‘johnny come lately’ charges come with Steele being the Chairman. That would not be beneath the media or the left. (Not that I think anything is). The biggest advantage of course would be the fresh face this party desperately needs. However would Chairman be the only place he could have a positive affect for this new direction?
As for Newt. There is the proven track record (1994), however that was 14 years ago. The political landscape has changed since then. There is baggage there as well, but I think it would less of an affect in a Party role as opposed to running for an elective office. After all Howard the Screaming Banshee Dean was in charge of the DNC. Perhaps a mentoring role would be better for Newt. For Steele? Maybe. Maybe not.
I think we have yet to see all the names tossed into contention to pick up the reins of the party. I for one am glad to see this initial effort.
Onward Conservative Warriors
Ruffled Feathers
RuffledRaven on November 10, 2008 at 9:05 PM
After this election, you people (heh) should be just laughing that off.
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 9:06 PM
Newt’s personal past will prevent him from ever winning an election, so he’s my choice for RNC chair. Let Steele run for Mikulsi’s seat.
BitterClinger on November 10, 2008 at 9:06 PM
The selection of either shows me the RNC is as clueless now as when they pushed McCain. Neither man is inspiring as a speaker and both are failed politicians. Clearly the bench is empty.
Even more depressing is the selection of topics here at HA.
Angry Dumbo on November 10, 2008 at 9:12 PM
Get that idiot Mike Huckabee out of the picture now.
WisCon on November 10, 2008 at 9:13 PM
This is a no brainer. Newt is the past. Guys like Steele are the future.
GO MIKE!
therightwinger on November 10, 2008 at 9:13 PM
Definitely going to vomit if I hear that again. Our country just elected a radical friend of known terrorists and criminals, and you’re worried about Newt’s baggage.
Brains on November 10, 2008 at 9:14 PM
I’d be very happy to have either Gingrich or Steele. BitterClinger makes a good point that Newt is not really viable for office (which I consider a great loss) and, because of that, I would agree and lean towards Newt for RNC chair and Steele running for office. But, either as RNC chair would be great.
progressoverpeace on November 10, 2008 at 9:14 PM
I puke whenever I think about Mike Huckabee sliming around on his little “talk show”.
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 9:17 PM
Watch Chip Saltmans get it.
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 9:17 PM
I really hate it when someone as me a question with that qualifier.
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 9:18 PM
^ That one get me.
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 9:20 PM
gets*
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 9:20 PM
Woo hoo! Newt is pulling away… for now.
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 9:21 PM
Newt is far more articulate and persuasive, knows how to organize, and has more gravitas than Steele. Look at his Contract with America and his Drill Here, Drill Now movement. Steele comes across as a bit too blase’ and I don’t want to stand up and cheer when I hear him take someone or an issue on the way I do for Newt.
As for Huck. Go away. You’re a fabulous talk show host. Maybe you can last as long as Leno.
Buy Danish on November 10, 2008 at 9:21 PM
Steele without a doubt. Gingrich would be a visible move backwards. He could do a great deal in the shadows, but his days in representative government are bye-bye. Can someone tell me where the hell J.C. Watts is?
THE CHOSEN ONE on November 10, 2008 at 9:22 PM
Sold out for Obama.
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 9:23 PM
He did not.
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 9:28 PM
Steele is an articulate–can I say that :)–spokesman for conservative ideals.
That said, a good politician does not necessarily make a good party chair. Newt has the intellectual vigor needed to guide the Republicans to their come back.
BryanS on November 10, 2008 at 9:28 PM
Gotta be Steele. Newt just has too much baggage.
You can lipstick on a pig…
joepub on November 10, 2008 at 9:28 PM
I watched the first 5 minutes of the last one. It was awful.
WisCon on November 10, 2008 at 9:29 PM
I would rather Gov. Mark Sanford (SC), but I’ll take either of these two.
SouthernGent on November 10, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Fox News:
Full story link
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 9:36 PM
It’s no secret I’m not a big fan of Romney or his boyz, but the man knows organization, mobilization, and the dynamic of a large operation. He and the squirts could do some serious damage in that position.
THE CHOSEN ONE on November 10, 2008 at 9:36 PM
As was noted above – I guess baggage doesn’t matter anymore. Just like using drugs doesn’t matter anymore after Billy Jeff, W and BO. So Newt is all good. I would be perfectly happy with Michael Steele too – so I cannot participate in the vote.
HawaiiLwyr on November 10, 2008 at 9:36 PM
Wow those poll results are close. If Gingrich can shut his trap about Global Warming for five minutes I’ll be happy. Steele would be a good choice as well though.
I almost think Steele makes more sense because if we don’t get a prominent black Republican out there to make our case we’re going to get hammered with accusations of racism for the next 4 years. Just saying…
blankminde on November 10, 2008 at 9:40 PM
My vote goes to Michael Steele…with Newt whispering in his ear time to time
JustJP on November 10, 2008 at 9:40 PM
Newt… Understands that it’s time to be “putting on the foil”
phreshone on November 10, 2008 at 9:40 PM
I absolutely love Michael Steele, but I think Newt would be better. Newt knows how to tell it like it is and I believe Steele would just be another polite Republican, just trying to get along. No offense to Michael Steele, but I think this calls for someone who will not be walked on and that is Newt. I see bigger and better things for Michael Steele. Newt’s better in the background – don’t see him ever running for President.
Neocon Peg on November 10, 2008 at 9:41 PM
Romney’s campaign let me down when he rolled out his version of Obama’s “change” signs.
Romney change sign.
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 9:42 PM
Putting on the Foil
phreshone on November 10, 2008 at 9:42 PM
Yes I know about that. I wrote an op-ed on the June article. Watts thought about it.
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 9:43 PM
This is a tough choice.
They both make a lot of sense for different reasons.
Saltysam on November 10, 2008 at 9:43 PM
-blankminde
I was thinking of the same thing, but in the opposite direction. Certainly the Republicans have raised African Americans to high offices already – Condi, Colin. But are there going to be accusations of “tokenism” if they now put Steele in as the RNC chair? He’s attractive and charismatic. Newt has other qualities, not in the looks department.
Just my thoughts – but I’m not a conservative. Who has the deeper conservative vision? I guess I’ll have to read more from Steele in the coming years.
NoamSayin on November 10, 2008 at 9:46 PM
I think the fact that some black conservatives thought about voting for Obama is part and parcel of the same wrong mindset which would have conservatives “reach out” to black Americans on the same basis that Democrats do.
Stick to your foundation, conservatives, and they will come–’they’ meaning liked minded individuals of whatever color.
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 9:46 PM
I’m resigned to two media driven Messiah terms. Get the House. Remember the blue dog dems are gonna be under some serious heat on some of these changes.
THE CHOSEN ONE on November 10, 2008 at 9:50 PM
Yes, he thought about it. And then, after thinking about it, he announced to the entire world that Congressman J.C. Watts — a conservative icon — was actually going to vote for a mega liberal based on the Party’s shoddy perfomance in “reaching out”.
The crime wasn’t thinking about it. The crime was telling everyone he was thinking about it and then throwing his Party under the bus for not “reaching out” enough like the Democrats do. I only wish he could have enlightened us more on what “reaching out” really is.
My opinion: He is a sell out.
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 9:51 PM
I agree 110%.
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 9:53 PM
Well said. Besides, black americans will never respond to pandering from republicans, but more and more will respond if we effectively articulate sound conservative principles. Hopefully some day the color of our skin will truly be irrelevant when it comes to choosing what’s best for the country.
neuquenguy on November 10, 2008 at 9:55 PM
Do you have a link for that?
If he did, he is indeed, but I’d like to know for sure. This seems to suggest that he came to his senses.
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 9:56 PM
NOT Gingrich NOT Michael Steele but Hugh Hewitt. Hugh is at last as smart as Gingrich without all that baggage.
will13smith on November 10, 2008 at 9:56 PM
I agree that opening his mouth about it before making his decision was not helpful to the conservative movement.
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 9:58 PM
Steele is a great communicator. Gingrich is an excellent idea man – he’s got intellectual heft to spare and knows how to distill an idea into a sellable, simple concept. I like them both but Gingrich is very old-school, same-old as far as public image goes. Steele makes a better front man without question.
One guy who seems to combine the best traits of Steele and Gingrich is Thaddeus McCotter (representative from Michigan). He can’t be RNC chair because of his day job, but I’d like to see the “new” GOP contain a big dose of the McCotter sensibility.
I’m also very impressed with some of the younger guys like Patrick Ruffini and Jason Mattera. We’ve got talent, we just have to reward it and not be so risk-averse.
Gilda on November 10, 2008 at 10:00 PM
J.C. said:
It was a wonderful campaign! A campaign full of hope, change, Palin rumors and Bush bashing! Oh! Oh! And tax cuts for 95% of Americans!
(Drinks more pepto)
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 10:00 PM
Please no Chip.
thecountofincognito on November 10, 2008 at 10:01 PM
Newt’s a great ideas man, and boy does the GOP need some ideas now. Also a tough fighter. But he has baggage.
Steele is smooth on TV, and pushes the diversity buttons, but I don’t know much about him. He is GOP, but is he conservative? I don’t know, in all honesty, and that is important to me. I’ll support an up and coming conservative like Sarah Palin, but can do without another Establishment Republican, no matter what color. I think he has held one office, Lt Governor of Md. Based on this one gig, what do we know about him?
james23 on November 10, 2008 at 10:01 PM
BTW watch the interview with Governor Palin at GretaWire NOW
will13smith on November 10, 2008 at 10:03 PM
I <3 Patrick. He really, really gets the whole internets thing.
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 10:03 PM
I love Steele. But, Newt has more on the game. He won’t cow down or be bought. Not that Steele would. Hard decision to make.
sheebe on November 10, 2008 at 10:04 PM
NOT Gingrich NOT Michael Steele but Hugh Hewitt. Hugh is at last as smart as Gingrich without all that baggage.
will13smith on November 10, 2008 at 10:04 PM
I congratulated them too; that doesn’t mean that I voted for him.
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 10:05 PM
Salute him for winning. Salute him for breaking a barrier. But the campaign he waged? Please.
Done with J.C. Moving right along…
Punchenko on November 10, 2008 at 10:08 PM
You, er, pegged it perfectly.
Buy Danish on November 10, 2008 at 10:10 PM
Todd Palin for RNC Chairdude!
gobama08 on November 10, 2008 at 10:13 PM
Your sentiment is expressed frequently on this topic, but considering the baggage Dean had for the Dems, I don’t see the baggage issue being that big of a deal. How about all of McCaulif’s fund raising issues?–never got through the the average voter and was only an issue among the pols.
When was the last time any party chair was a campaign issue?
BryanS on November 10, 2008 at 10:13 PM
I understand.
Something conservative leaders need to do: be out front with the principles and the platform. That way those who are just in it for the novelty (or baser motives) have no excuse.
That’s why I picked Newt; he has a proven record of articulating those principles and of real leadership.
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 10:14 PM
Very impressed with Sanford. This guy is another up and coming conservative rock star.
Saltysam on November 10, 2008 at 10:17 PM
If we must have a black man, how about this one? :D
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 10:17 PM
You know who it would benefit if Hugh Hewitt was head of the RNC ?
William Amos on November 10, 2008 at 10:18 PM
Don’t laugh Baldi. The RNC needs this kind of energy.
Saltysam on November 10, 2008 at 10:21 PM
Oh I know, but if we could only take Newt’s talent and inject it into somebody else? ;-)
Saltysam on November 10, 2008 at 10:23 PM
Yeah, but people equate Newt with the Clinton Impeachment years and see him as much more divisive than Dean. When people think of Dean, it’s most likely just to laugh at this. From everything i’ve seen, Steele is a solid conservative and would be a clean break from the Bush/Clinton years. Newt’s a great spokesman and organizer, but he would just be seen as throwback to the Clinton impeachment days.
clearbluesky on November 10, 2008 at 10:27 PM
is death an option?
Uncle Bouncy on November 10, 2008 at 10:29 PM
I must laugh when a man who is wearing a Richard Pryor t-shirt knows what conservatives stand for better than do many “conservative” elected officials.
baldilocks on November 10, 2008 at 10:29 PM
Love it, baldi! I’d vote for that kid in any position short of Senator, and I’d vote for him against either of my current/worthless Senators, too. I’m in Illinois…
As for the Steele/Newt cage match – I like them both. But this is an ideas position, and Steele’s talents are wasted behind the scenes, as best I can tell. He needs to be out in front, slapping backs and giving speeches.
Newt, sorry old dog. You’re an idea factory, so keep sending those emails. But your time has come … and gone. I want a Cantor-like presence in the RNC, a genuine intellectual power. Don’t know who that is, except for Cantor, Jindal, DeMint, Sessions…hmmm.
Hey, can we get Mona Charen to take a pay cut?
Jaibones on November 10, 2008 at 10:31 PM
I’d go for the player with the best ability to articulate a plan and message to folks on both sides of the political spectrum. Seems like Gingrich has the most experience here, but I’m open to whatever.
droofus on November 10, 2008 at 10:31 PM
Scary, ain’t it? The really scary part – he has more clarity of thought than McCain.
Jaibones on November 10, 2008 at 10:32 PM
Picked Newt.
Need Steele in Congress, VP, etc.
Newt scares the hell out of the Dems and like others said seems to be the only one with a clue and new ideas.
Vigilante on November 10, 2008 at 10:33 PM
Yeah, the Huckster is just full of conservative cred. He’s full of it, all right.
Fine, let the Gingrich have chairman of the RNC. Just don’t send them money. The Republican Party proved repeatedly that it is incompetent and can’t be trusted. Only send money directly to the campaigns of conservative candidates. Blow off the party apparatus; they betrayed conservative candidates before this last election.
Feedie on November 10, 2008 at 10:35 PM
…a poignant sentiment and a common occurrence.
Saltysam on November 10, 2008 at 10:38 PM
I just think Steele is too valuable for a party chair position over elected official. Too bad he last ran in an uber blue state. Maybe we could carpet bag him to a more hospitable state :)
I just don’t think anyone will care about any baggage from Newt if he were party chair–before becoming speaker, he was an extraordinarily effective behind the scenes policy wonk. That’s just what the Republicans need right now.
BryanS on November 10, 2008 at 10:42 PM
Steele if I had to pick the two, but as Rush would say, it’s not about finding common ground. It’s about defeating the enemy. Bring back the Hammer!!!
THE CHOSEN ONE on November 10, 2008 at 10:45 PM
I think you’re points are solid.
When is the Governor’s race?
Saltysam on November 10, 2008 at 10:51 PM
Laura Ingraham. It just came to me. She’s got the balls for it! And she’s total conservative, through and through.
Consider it settled! If only she’d take it. Sigh.
sheesh on November 10, 2008 at 11:02 PM
Dude – not Newt…he is what the voter voted against…a traditional white guy that has baggage…..go with Michael…go with someone different….people are tired of the old politicians…yes Newt is smart and valuable..but BEHIND the scenes….he doesn’t need to be on Hannity everyday, he doesn’t need to be on Fox all the time…we need to get away from the Bush era Republicans…sorry but its true…We need new blood with more conservative ideas…the problem with Bush, McCain, Newt..is they can’t sell their ideas to our dumb postmodern world…they need younger people…Conservative ideas will win-but they need to be sold…Bush could have gone out a very popular president if he KNEW HOW TO BE A SALESMEN…..but everytime he talked about the war he looked like he was lost..and he never told us that we haven’t had an attack since 9/11….Repubs we need to talk a lesson in MARKETING NOW!!!! Conservative ideas work and people like them…BUT NEED TO BE SOLD ON THEM….even Rush will be fading away…sorry buts its the truth…We need Palin and Jindal to step up!
flash044 on November 10, 2008 at 11:03 PM
Nudt
Captain America on November 10, 2008 at 11:08 PM
Steele is weak, we need a fighter.
Captain America on November 10, 2008 at 11:09 PM
If Newt can get his mind right on global warming, he’d be a great choice.
moxie_neanderthal on November 10, 2008 at 11:09 PM
I’m seriously amazed by you people. Newt is not a Bush era republican first of all, genius.
Lumping Newt in with McCain, Bush, and people who don’t know how to express conservative ideas, just proves that you haven’t looked into him much at all.
Brains on November 10, 2008 at 11:10 PM
Looks like he was elected Lieutenant Gov of Maryland in ’02. I suppose the next Governor’s race would be ’10. Maybe by ’10 enough political winds will be at the Repubs’ backs to help him in that state. Though I don’t really follow Maryland politics enough to know how well the current Governor is doing.
BryanS on November 10, 2008 at 11:13 PM
Brains on November 10, 2008 at 11:10 PM
It doesn’t matter if he was or wasn’t. Thats how people associate Newt. Remember marketing….And I have talked to liberals who have no idea what conservative ideas are, and after talking to them, they change their mind. Believe me, when you get down to the root of the issue most people are conservative and they don’t know it. And I lived in an uber blue state – Oregon….
flash044 on November 10, 2008 at 11:15 PM
Maybe i wrong but i think Newt would be better at the RNC and Steele would be better at elective office.In fact i wish he would move to my state and run for the sen.Michael is the Consv. public face we now need more of. No more of the old fart Rinos like McCain,Hagal,Spector and the rest of them
thmcbb on November 10, 2008 at 11:29 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »