GOP to support primary challenger against Toomey?

posted at 3:40 pm on April 29, 2009 by Allahpundit

Nothing’s definitive yet, especially given Toomey’s head start on fundraising, but when you’ve got top dogs in the NRSC wondering aloud in front of reporters whether he stands a chance against Specter, it’s safe to say things are in flux.

“I don’t think there is anybody in the world who believes he can get elected senator there,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch, the vice chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Asked if the NRSC would back Toomey, Hatch said, “I don’t think so” and that the party should look for “someone who can win there.”…

Hatch later equivocated and said, “I’m not saying he can’t win – nobody gave me a chance when I ran.”…

On Wednesday, Cornyn said he didn’t know if Toomey would be the “only candidate” or the “strongest candidate” in the GOP primary.

“It’s too early to endorse,” Cornyn said.

Funny, it wasn’t too early to endorse Specter over Toomey a few weeks ago. The logical choice if they go for a challenger is Tom Ridge, but Ridge hasn’t held office in Pennsylvania since 2001, long before the state party began to bleed moderates. Would a pro-choice Republican, even with his credentials, stand a chance against Toomey? Let’s take your temperature on this. Assume that Ridge would be a 2-1 underdog against Specter in the general and Toomey would be 10-1. Should Ridge jump in to give the party a better chance of winning the seat or should he stay out so we can take our chances on the pro-life longshot? Food for thought from JPod while you decide: “Politics is not about casting the easy vote for the person you admire. It’s really about choosing the least bad alternative.”



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2

Ridge is just another Spector.
Send Toomey $$$$$$$$

MALICIOUS DISORDER on April 29, 2009 at 4:32 PM

Come on that’s way harsh. Ridge is a pretty darn good Republican. He may not be as conservative as you but he is not a self-serving fool like Specter.

petunia on April 29, 2009 at 4:34 PM

Unless the primary is uncontested, I don’t think the NRSC should be giving money to anybody in a Republican primary for a position currently held by a Democrat.

Loxodonta on April 29, 2009 at 4:10 PM

I agree.

Ridge must have spoken to his old buddies who feel they owe Ridge alliance.

That of itself is NO REASON to support Ridge who wants back in the game.

maverick muse on April 29, 2009 at 4:34 PM

If Toomey was going to crush Specter in a primary why would anyone think he couldn’t beat Ridge as well? BadgerHawk on April 29, 2009 at 3:44 PM

Because Ridge would be a better candidate than Snarlin’ Arlen, is all.

PA is Philly and Pittsburgh surrounded by Alabama. Unfortunately, the population of Philly and Pittsburgh is 90% Dem and they all vote twice.

Akzed on April 29, 2009 at 4:35 PM

Can we declare the Toomey-Specter race the final decider in social conservatives vs social moderates?

If Toomey loses, Pennsylvania Republicans will henceforth be more moderate and stop running social cons. If Toomey wins, Pennsylvania Republicans will henceforth be required to be social cons. Deal?

Speedwagon82 on April 29, 2009 at 4:35 PM

GOP Leadership still does not get what going on.
Stuck on stupid.

Romeo13 on April 29, 2009 at 4:33 PM

You have a valid point.

petunia on April 29, 2009 at 4:36 PM

I think that Mark Schweiker would probably be the best bet, though I don’t think he’ll run. He could have easily saved PA from Rendell and would probably get the nomination easy. Ridge’s star has faded and I don’t know if he’d be able to beat Specter, and Toomey is just a joke if winning is your goal.

LevStrauss on April 29, 2009 at 4:38 PM

If he so wants back into the game, Ridge should be the statesman out their campaigning for TOOMEY amongst Ridge’s cronies.

maverick muse on April 29, 2009 at 4:39 PM

Why is Specter a given? The guy is a doddering, wishy-washy 79-year-old.

Unless I’m a flaming liberal, I guess I’d be saying, “Toomey or this old fool? Heck, PA already has a Dem senator, and someone needs to stop this spending spree.”

In 18 months, I think a languishing (and heading south) economy and Specter’s spending votes won’t be good combinations.

BuckeyeSam on April 29, 2009 at 4:40 PM

Even though Ridge is ok, I don’t have an answer because I think they’re just purposely trying to screw Toomey over.

youngO on April 29, 2009 at 4:42 PM

If they convince Ridge to run, I’ll be enthusiastically backing him!! He’s the best idea for this Senate seat I have seen in a long time. Ridge is a moderate without being a flake like Specter, who I’m guessing is too flaky and senile to win the Democratic primary.

thuja on April 29, 2009 at 4:44 PM

Unless I’m a flaming liberal, I guess I’d be saying, “Toomey or this old fool? Heck, PA already has a Dem senator, and someone needs to stop this spending spree.”

In 18 months, I think a languishing (and heading south) economy and Specter’s spending votes won’t be good combinations.

BuckeyeSam on April 29, 2009 at 4:40 PM

Specter’s health is a wild card. He’s had two series of chemo for cancer. He does look his age, and one wonders how he’ll be out on the campaign trail.

Wethal on April 29, 2009 at 4:45 PM

I don’t get it either. Specter’s not going to pull a really high turnout in a non-Presidential year. It’s not like the nutroots will be out ‘organizing’ for him.

If the Obamessiah calls the lefty blogosphere ringleaders and asks, they would give him their first-born.

Speedwagon82 on April 29, 2009 at 4:47 PM

This is not about keeping a senate seat. This is a revolution to purge the poison from the party.

paulsur on April 29, 2009 at 4:49 PM

We don’t need moderates. They will come when they see their tax bill

MALICIOUS DISORDER on April 29, 2009 at 4:51 PM

IMHO, where we are, where we are headed, and what got us here cannot be fixed. It will have to be broken. Then, maybe it can be rebuilt.

And we have the clueless, worthless Republican party continuing to give conservatives and freedom loving people everywhere the big middle finger and then blaming them for not liking it.

Socialism is here. The all-powerful, all-knowing, all-seeing, all-controlling big brother government is here. The faster it breaks – the faster it can be rebuilt and the less painful it will be.

King of the Britons on April 29, 2009 at 4:51 PM

It,s plain to see that the Rep.in D.C. except for a few like DeMint do not get it.To loose Specter and gain Ridge you have gain nothing but another Rino.If Toomey wins the primary he should tell the RNC to go to hell.and if he wins he,s should tell them he,s coming to washington to kick ass Rep. or Dem.not to make friends and become a good old boy.

thmcbb on April 29, 2009 at 4:54 PM

The world is unraveling all around us, yet some insist on remaining fixated doggedly on a single social issue, despite its status as political poison. That, in my mind, is a textbook example of insanity.

Blacklake on April 29, 2009 at 4:20 PM

I agree with you, but I believe that insanity has the upper hand. I sometimes wish that I never thought about politics.

thuja on April 29, 2009 at 5:03 PM

Allah,

Why do you persist in referring to Toomey as “the Pro-Life longshot”? It seems to me that Toomey’s entire persona is wrapped-up in his high-profile backing by the Club for Growth, no?

The Club for Growth seems to get all of the hate from Specter’s handmaidens. They were pretty vocal backers of Toomey’s 2004 race.

Didn’t Specter’s real trouble boil over with his support of an economically disastrous, steaming pile of pork-dung? What does that have to do with abortion?

No wonder conservatives have a hard time, even other conservatives can’t concentrate on economic issues very long.

Jaibones on April 29, 2009 at 5:12 PM

Deal?

Speedwagon82 on April 29, 2009 at 4:35 PM

Uh…no. Get over your fixation on social issues, REO. Specter voted for the Porkulus. Toomey is a fiscal conservative.

Who would you vote for, and what part would “abortion” play in your decision?

Jaibones on April 29, 2009 at 5:16 PM

It’s a sad day when Republicans are afraid of Conservatives.

Maybe Holder was right.

Barrack on April 29, 2009 at 5:21 PM

Flimsey Graham started campaigning for Tom Ridge before the rotten apple stench of Specter left the Republican caucus. That right there is enough to tell you we don’t need no more stinking “moderates.” The air on the right side of the chamber is still putrid.

McCain’s presidential run was the death knell of the Bush-era Republican party. “Moderates” ran the party into the ground with their spending sprees and Specter-style (absence of) principles.

It’s time for “conservatives” to take it back.

If Graham and Snowe and Collins and McCain don’t like it, they’re welcome to run sniveling into the spindly bosom of Harry Reid.

Dem Fools on April 29, 2009 at 5:23 PM

As I said yesterday, it always comes down to abortion.

lorien1973 on April 29, 2009 at 4:13 PM

We will be in the Wilderness until that changes.

SlimyBill on April 29, 2009 at 5:23 PM

Isn’t Specter pretty much hated by a majority of Pennsylvanians at this point?

Doughboy on April 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

Yeah, I don’t claim to know anything about how elections go, but it seems to me that:

- the nutroots pretty much hate Specter,
- the feminists hate Specter,
- conservatives hate Specter,
- blacks hate Specter,
- the 2010 will see a huge drop in black voter turnout (among those nitwits who vote straight D),
- there isn’t a single reason why Democrats would be energized to get out the vote for Specter, and
- every breathing Republican and conservative will be hot to vote against Specter.

Seems like a pretty good recipe for Toomey to me.

Jaibones on April 29, 2009 at 5:24 PM

No wonder conservatives have a hard time, even other conservatives can’t concentrate on economic issues very long.

Jaibones on April 29, 2009 at 5:12 PM

It’s a disgrace.

SlimyBill on April 29, 2009 at 5:25 PM

It’s a sad day when Republicans are afraid of Conservatives.

Maybe Holder was right.

Barrack on April 29, 2009 at 5:21 PM

Yeah, something like complete devastation may be the only thing that can lead to a rebuilding. If the GOP is set on following a “moderate” course, that’s just what we’ll get.

ddrintn on April 29, 2009 at 5:28 PM

I wish the GOP Spent as much time selling conservativism rather than undermining it.

William Amos on April 29, 2009 at 5:29 PM

News Flash to NRSC: I hung up the phone on you once already when you decided to support that useless RINO, Specter. I will do it again just for good measure.

Update: My money and my time will be used to support Toomey for Senate, regardless of who you other RINOs wish to run against Specter.

Zorro on April 29, 2009 at 5:40 PM

Is Ridge the one who thought up that stupid color scheme for national security threat levels? What? It’s stuck on orange for 7 1/2 years?

Sloan Morganstern on April 29, 2009 at 5:40 PM

I think that Mark Schweiker would probably be the best bet, though I don’t think he’ll run. He could have easily saved PA from Rendell and would probably get the nomination easy.

LevStrauss on April 29, 2009 at 4:38 PM

I loved him when I was still living in PA. Hated it when he didn’t run for a term of his own. He totally would have beaten Rendell.

myrenovations on April 29, 2009 at 5:47 PM

Asked if the NRSC would back Toomey, Hatch said, “I don’t think so”

They want to protect their buddy arlen. It doesn’t matter which letter is behind his name, only that he’s part of the club.

peacenprosperity on April 29, 2009 at 5:50 PM

Ever since 1994 when the Republicans veered left I have watched them lose their principles, there people and their power because people keep accepting “the lesser of two evil”. Prime example when Arnold Schwarzenegger was running for Governor oF California, Tom McClintock ran also. Arnold got 48.6% of the vote Bustamante 31.5% and McClintock 13.5%. If everyone who I talked to represented a cross section of the voters, who would rather have had McClintock, but voted for Arnold had voted their conscience the numbers between Schwarzenegger and McClintock would ahve been almost reversed!

RedLizard64 on April 29, 2009 at 5:55 PM

Check out the NRSC Website.

It says “SUPPORT THE NRSC AND STAND UP AGAINST FORMER REPUBLICAN ARLEN SPECTER.”

So, not only is the NRSC saying a giant “screw you” to the Republicans in Pennsylvania. It looks they’re also playing bait and switch with their fundraising.

logis on April 29, 2009 at 6:04 PM

McCain won Pennsylvania, remember? Oh, and Pro-Life Democrat, Bob Casey, lost back in 2006. Remember?

Punchenko on April 29, 2009 at 6:04 PM

Redlizard64 “

Ever since 1994 when the Republicans veered left I have watched them lose their principles.

That is why I don’t want Gingrich anywhere around the power. He started the big tent and it worked for awhile until the RINOs became to many and took over.

SkyWatch on April 29, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Changing PA to pro-abortion would be great but that is a deal killer for most voters in PA. Statewide PA is pro-abortion.

So a pro-choice Republican who is committed to pro-conservative judges is much much better than a pro-abortion Democrat who will jump at the chance to stick another Lib in the Supreme Court.

petunia on April 29, 2009 at 4:23 PM

Um, isn’t Bob Casey Jr., the democrat who defeated Santorum, also pro-life? If a pro-life Democrat can get the nomination (much less win the general) in PA, what makes everybody think a Republican pro-lifer cannot win?

What am I missing here? Am I wrong about Casey’s position on the issue?

thirteen28 on April 29, 2009 at 6:17 PM

That is why I don’t want Gingrich anywhere around the power. He started the big tent and it worked for awhile until the RINOs became to many and took over.

SkyWatch on April 29, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Gingrich might be the only one who saves the GOP.

Punchenko on April 29, 2009 at 6:18 PM

In a scenario in which Ridge is 2:1 and Toomey is 10:1… this is a no-brainer. Ridge is a fairly solid Republican and as long as he his core principles include fiscal responsibility, limited government, and strong national defense, I can’t imagine why the RNC wouldn’t support him.

Social conservatism does not define the Republican party, so no one who possesses core Republican values should ever be called a RINO. The problem with Specter is that he couldn’t even get the basics right.

Murf76 on April 29, 2009 at 6:23 PM

I don’t have a problem with Ridge. Anything is better than Specter or any other Democrat.

Punchenko on April 29, 2009 at 6:27 PM

The world is unraveling all around us, yet some insist on remaining fixated doggedly on a single social issue, despite its status as political poison. That, in my mind, is a textbook example of insanity.
Blacklake on April 29, 2009 at 4:20 PM

I would argue that abortion on demand is the epitome of insanity and the world unraveling around us.

R’s have a choice of 2 guys:
Big government. Pro life. Anti gay-marriage.
Small Government. Pro-Choice. Pro gay-marriage.
I was willing to bet that it’d be 2-1 split for the first guy for most conservatives. Those 2 are the make or break issues for far too many people in this party. Gays and abortion. Everything else. Meh.
lorien1973 on April 29, 2009 at 4:22 PM

Well maybe in the Republican Party in your mind, you can help us all to see why this issue is so stupid compared to your pet issues, ON WHICH I AGREE WITH YOU ANYWAY.

Nobody has hard numbers of that sort when it comes to politics, and if they offer them, assume they aren’t reliable. Because most Americans–even if they are anti-abortion themselves–believe passionately in the separation of church and state, candidates who espouse their Christianity as part of their campaigns, usually in reference to abortion, do themselves enormous damage. Their evangelicism itself is the negative, not their abortion stance.
You need to let it go. It doesn’t matter if America allows or doesn’t allow abortions in the short term if, in the long term, there is no America. It’s a loser issue, and we’re in a struggle for national survival that’s far greater than any single cause.
Blacklake on April 29, 2009 at 4:26 PM

It does matter. It matters about equally as much as the war on terror. If we allow ourselves to sink further into their view that human life is not sacred, we’ve lost even if we win.

For now at least, abortion is settled law. Using it as a campaign issue doesn’t make practical sense. Why bring up something that the country is about evenly divide on and create a counter productive wedge issue?
FD/ I’m pro-life
oldernwiser on April 29, 2009 at 4:33 PM

The Dems don’t think that way. Of course, I’m not sure if they think at all. They hold to their extremism gladly. I don’t see the protection of innocent life as a “wedge” issue.

We will be in the Wilderness until that changes.
SlimyBill on April 29, 2009 at 5:23 PM

Right, so let’s get some conservatives on the Supreme Court and let the states decide this.

McCain won Pennsylvania, remember? Oh, and Pro-Life Democrat, Bob Casey, lost back in 2006. Remember?

Right!

bcm4134 on April 29, 2009 at 6:28 PM

Even though Ridge is ok, I don’t have an answer because I think they’re just purposely trying to screw Toomey over.

youngO on April 29, 2009 at 4:42 PM

Screw him for causing Spectator to switch, who was no asset to begin with. I might send Tooms a buck or two.

TinMan13 on April 29, 2009 at 6:37 PM

Politics is not about casting the easy vote for the person you admire. It’s really about choosing the least bad alternative.”

Tell that to reagan and Obama….

unseen on April 29, 2009 at 6:39 PM

Sen. Orrin Hatch, the vice chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee

Yet another reason for the GOP being a mess.

batter on April 29, 2009 at 6:50 PM

It does matter. It matters about equally as much as the war on terror. If we allow ourselves to sink further into their view that human life is not sacred, we’ve lost even if we win…
bcm4134 on April 29, 2009 at 6:28 PM

So, let me carry your position out to what I believe is your necessary ultimate conclusion: Better that every human on the planet die, than a single vote be cast for a politician who is not pro-life. Do you see how your “no compromise, ever” single-issue stance boils down to this?

If you don’t agree with the above proposition, then where do you draw the line of compromise, and why? And if you’d compromise to save humanity, why would you refuse to compromise to save the United States? Would you compromise to save your life? Your family’s? Why?

Blacklake on April 29, 2009 at 7:31 PM

Come on that’s way harsh. Ridge is a pretty darn good Republican. He may not be as conservative as you but he is not a self-serving fool like Specter.

petunia on April 29, 2009

I agree that Ridge is not a Spector. He is a good man and a good Republican. Ridge was a strong supporter of the second amendment here in PA. He widely supported home schooling! The cyber school in Midland PA was his personal project. It was and still is a great alternative for home schoolers! While he was governor, I don’t believe he pushed at all the pro-choice agenda even though he is pro-choice. I think he is more of the mind that this should be left to the states.
But,, once he’s in the Senate, who knows what he might do.

JellyToast on April 29, 2009 at 8:00 PM

If its Ridge vs. Specter a large chunk of the Republican base might not show up either, and you’re going to need them at the polls for all the congressional races.

BadgerHawk on April 29, 2009

You have to remember…This isn’t a question of who conservatives would vote for, this is a question of who Pennsylvanians would vote for. Except for Santorium (Whose rhetoric alot of people here tired of…) Senators here have been more moderate. If they haven’t, they don’t last long… If John Heinz didn’t die in a plane crash almost 20 years ago, he probably would still be in the Senate. He was very center in his votes, and was very popular with both (D) and (R). He did what he thought was right.

Ridge would be a good candidate for PA. He was popular as a governor. And most of his views would fit with conservatives. He would be a good fit in the Senate.

Only problem with Toomey is that really most of us in PA doen’t really know him. Yeah, he would do well in a primary against Benodict Spector, But if he went against him in a General, he wouldn’t do so well. He still might win (maybe), but no where near a 21 point lead. And also, I don’t think Spector will win the (D) primary…

And yes, I live in Murtha’s district. I voted for Russell. Went to a couple of Russell rallies. District is rigged heavily (D). Lots of unions here (Mines, Steel, Iron, etc) that swallow the party line, hook, line, and sinker.

Lynn Swann was a good candidate, but was really a novice going up against Rendell. (No chance) He needs some experience to do better in the future.

pennjazz on April 29, 2009 at 8:14 PM

So, let me carry your position out to what I believe is your necessary ultimate conclusion: Better that every human on the planet die, than a single vote be cast for a politician who is not pro-life. Do you see how your “no compromise, ever” single-issue stance boils down to this?

If you don’t agree with the above proposition, then where do you draw the line of compromise, and why? And if you’d compromise to save humanity, why would you refuse to compromise to save the United States? Would you compromise to save your life? Your family’s? Why?

Blacklake on April 29, 2009 at 7:31 PM

I said in earlier posts I’d vote for Ridge over Specter in an election (not just theoretical, I’m a PA voter). I am not a “no compromise, ever” person. And your hack view of my principles does not naturally lead to “Better every human on the planet die, than a single vote be cast for a politician who is not pro-life”.

Show me these pro-life politicians who don’t believe in defending America. Casey? He’s not pro-life. I’ve seen no evidence that he is.

I’m predisposed to agree with Republicans on issues anyway, even without abortion as an issue. But I refuse to concede defeat on this issue. We are closer to states deciding this issue than ever. If I have to just admit that we’ve lost, then I would have no passion for politics. What good is a government that refuses to protect the lives of its own citizens?

Democrats run candidates who do not want to protect America from harm unless they absolutely have to, and who in no circumstances care to lift a finger to stop abortions from happening. Both are ridiculous and irresponsible cases of politicians abandoning the primary role of government. Why shouldn’t we run candidates who do the opposite? Why compromise with them? The Dems nearly never do. I just wonder where all this disdain comes from. A candidate need not make abortion the centerpiece of his or her campaign to be pro-life.

bcm4134 on April 29, 2009 at 8:25 PM

Assume that Ridge would be a 2-1 underdog against Specter in the general and Toomey would be 10-1.

This is just pure and simple a moronic choice you’re presenting here. Toomey came THIS CLOSE to trouncing Arlen in his last primary. Are you KIDDING me?

And Ridge is not the darling of conservatives, here in PA or elsewhere. He was a disaster at homeland security, and he bailed on that position because he needed a bigger paycheck.

Ridge. Make it 1000 to 1.

seanrobins on April 29, 2009 at 10:07 PM

I’m not an absolute ‘no compromise ever’ person either, but the last few elections have got us where we are now; with a bunch of “republicans” that are too willing to pork us out and tax us up the wazoo right along with the liberal idiots.

In many cases, you wouldn’t know the difference between 1 house democrap and 1 house republican.

We need to STOP this, at least for the time being. We need to elect CONSERVATIVES that will get this crap ironed out, then start pressing for a way to force these guys and gals to be accountable for what they promise and how they campaign.

One way is to make recall elections a possibility, and easier than they are to recall a mayor. (One suggestion however, would be to allow republicans to recall their congressman or senator if they are republican and turned out to be liberal, or RINO. Dems should have that same option of course.)

Perhaps a prison term…1 year for ever lie they are caught in from campaigns that they flip flop on in office, along with a 10% tax against their campaign funds for every lie told.

These things should scare the crap out of politicians, maybe we’d even get a truly honest one once in a while.

Spiritk9 on April 29, 2009 at 10:10 PM

If this is true and the GOP supports another RINO against Toomey, then all I can say is: Third party! Third party! Third party! The GOP would be sending a huge f***-you to voters. Toomey took out a huuuuge lead against a well-known RINO in Specter showing that GOP voters of PA want a conservative. If the GOP does this they are beyond tone-deaf. However, it probably won’t matter if they do support a RINO; the PA GOP voters were already rebelling by supporting Toomey in the first place, they’ll just continue to support him anyway. Maybe they’ll give TPTB a black eye, lol! It’ll be delish to see a GOP-backed RINO lose.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on April 29, 2009 at 10:32 PM

This abortion crap is going to destroy the Republican party. I am sick of the purity of losing.

Hilts on April 29, 2009 at 11:00 PM

This abortion crap is going to destroy the Republican party. I am sick of the purity of losing.

Hilts on April 29, 2009 at 11:00 PM

Sorry, but what the heck are you talking about?

bcm4134 on April 29, 2009 at 11:09 PM

Toomey is da man, but the beltway insiders [RINO's ALL] need to keep the number of conservatives down.

Some morons never learn.

DannoJyd on April 30, 2009 at 12:18 AM

Senator Cornyn,

You backed Specter after he voted with Collins and Snowe.

We’re watching you.

At this rate you’ll achieve parity with McCain is less than 12 months.

Never Again !

Blacksmith8 on April 30, 2009 at 6:22 AM

Same old names, same old games. These tools will not learn. Maybe we need to send them some tea bags.

Kissmygrits on April 30, 2009 at 8:49 AM

The “elites” running the Republican Party cannot understand why we common folk aren’t bowing to their wishes and supporting their fellow elites. Their problem is that when they say “no more”, it is merely a campaign slogan trotted out for public consumption. When we say “no more”, we mean it. They don’t get the distinction. We need to help them with that by making them ex-congressmen and ex-senators. And it’s not about purity, it’s about principle. Show me you have some and I will support you. Otherwise, piss off.

SKYFOX on April 30, 2009 at 9:20 AM

And it’s not about purity, it’s about principle. Show me you have some and I will support you.

+1

bcm4134 on April 30, 2009 at 12:04 PM

Comment pages: 1 2