Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 113

• 0%

  libsRfunny6 months ago

  Whoops!!!!!!!!!!!

  Reply

  22 Replies

  • 0%

    pc256 months ago

    that's a BIG "WHOOOOOOOOOPS"

    Reply

    15 Replies

    • 0%

      libsRfunny6 months ago

      "However, among the broad spectrum of lobbyists and legal firms, Hillary has taken in $15.7 million and Obama $13.8 million. McCain comes in last at $4.2 million."

      Whoaaaaaaaaa!!! Those are some pretty big digits there for the Dems. No wonder McCain is behind on fundraising.

      Reply

      11 Replies

      • 0%

        alakazam6 months ago

        Well the only other Republican Candidate still in the race is Ron Paul.

        Who I would vote for...his ideas may not be popular with Hawks and International Corporations but America's primary interest shouldn't be either.

        The People United is the true Strength of America...I should think your average first year Patriot should be required to believe that.

        We need to set the partisanship aside as long as our Daughters and Sons are dying in Iraq...at the very least.

        I would be glad to discuss the functions of true Republican Government sometime with any of you guys as well.

        I don't why understand the Republicans won't support Ron Paul.

        Reply

        6 Replies

        • 0%

          libsRfunny6 months ago

          It's not so much a matter on not liking or supporting Ron Paul as much as it is he's mostly an unknown. It takes big bucks to win a big election, and if you don't have it, you just aren't going to stand a chance because no one will really know who you are.

          That said, Ron Paul has made himself known, which might be why he still hasn't dropped out of the race - he's running for the next election at this point.

          But, if he doesn't do like Romney did and concede the fact that McCain has won it, Republicans will look upon him much like Obama supporters look upon Hillary - only worse. Mathematically, Hillary still is in the race.

          Some of Paul's supporters are a bit over the top and have ticked off quite a few people with their antics, like at the recent Nevada State Convention. That never helps.

          My first choice this year was Giuliani. Then it was Romney. But McCain had it won by the time the primary came to my state, so I never had a choice. Now I'm voting for McCain.

          Reply

          4 Replies

          • 0%

            alakazam6 months ago

            Don't you see? It's the The whole super security state thing that should be abhorrent to any free Man?

            That's what they told me at Briarcrest Christian made the U.S.S.R. Evil.

            It's Fascism...it boils down to War for Money.

            Ain't the Truth a Bitch?

            Reply

            3 Replies

            • 0%

              libsRfunny6 months ago

              You have no idea what you are ranting. It's goofy statements like those that make rational people say: Those Ron Paul supporters are nuts! Ain't the truth a bitch?

              Reply

              2 Replies

              • 0%

                alakazam6 months ago

                I was not Ranting at all.

                I was polite and reasonable and stated things the way I see them.

                Defend the Federal Reserve System.

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 0%

                  alakazam6 months ago

                  This school...Erm...an Apostolic Republican early leanings think tank.

                  I know just exactly what I am ranting about when I do Rant.

                  You haven't seen Rant.

                  Reply
        • 0%

          Endoscopy6 months ago

          alakazam

          "I don't why understand the Republicans won't support Ron Paul"

          Could it possibly be that his backers are a problem.

          Ron Paul has taken money and backing from Nazi, Skin head, and KKK organizations without returning it or repudiating their backing.

          Reply
      • 0%

        amazed6 months ago

        yet, McCain is the one everyone is screaming is in the lobbyists pockets...

        what a hoot.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          cushi6 months ago

          Reading comprehension is not your long suit! The article CLEARLY says that both McSame and Clinton received roughly TWICE as much in campaign contributions as Barack Obama.

          Accidentally on purpose missed that, huh?

          Reply
      • 0%

        CRYMTYPHON6 months ago

        Ooops, LibsRfunny:

        ya kinda left out the part of the quote that says it was McCain who got the most money from this law firm. Obama got least.

        I don't blame you; it was a bad article and not much was worth quoting, unless you are doing research on hit pieces.

        The gist was, this was a legal firm where all 3 candidates knocked on the door, asking for contributions; they gave most to Mccain. And that is significant, because it is McCain who has made the most noise about lobbyists; not Obama.

        Lets end with this quote from the rag:

        "After all, lobbyists represent people with real concerns about how federal dollars get allocated. The problem is the oozing hypocrisy of politicians who demonize lobbyists on one hand and then pander to them for contributions on the other."

        And don't get mad at PC25; he didn't make you vote for this crap.

        Reply
      • 0%

        cushi6 months ago

        Actually, it said Hillary got the most, followed by McSame, with Obama a distant third! So here's the scenario: a pimple, a cyst, and a tumor!

        At least Obama acknowledges it's not the best way to raise funds and has made changes to the way funds are recruited to ensure that less of that kind of thing takes place. Did either of the other two? Nahhhhhh

        Reply
    • 0%

      HOUSEMD6 months ago

      George Soros helps Obama through some of his surrogate 527 organizations with positive advertising for BO and negative advertising toward all of Obama's critics. BO is a politician just like all the others.He takes what he can get from anyone that will help him get elected.

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%

        ybdogsct6 months ago

        Want to talk about 527 organizations? Fine.

        http://www.newsmax.com/politics/527_groups_elec...

        "Members of Obama's finance team earlier this month urged his donors not to finance the 527 groups, and called on them to instead work with his campaign directly. The message has left many donors and group organizers seeking clarity from the campaign.

        They worry Obama may freeze the resources of Democratic-leaning 527 groups and other nonprofit organizations operating in the political arena."

        http://citizensforethics.org/node/29942

        "The FEC has fined a 527 group that aired ads during Barack Obama's 2004 Senate campaign. The Empower Illinois Media Fund violated campaign rules by raising money to defeat Obama without registering with the FEC as a political committee or complying with federal contribution limits and reporting requirements. The group agreed to shut down and pay the fine."

        Reply
      • 0%

        ybdogsct6 months ago

        http://www.jedreport.com/2008/05/john-mccain-a-...

        "Two of John McCain's campaign co-chairs are advisers to an anti-Obama 527."

        http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/b...

        "Both John McCain and Barack Obama say they want to rein in 527s. But two of McCain's own campaign chairmen are serving on the board of a 527 behind a new attack ad against Obama, "an apparent violation of the Arizona Republican's new conflict of interest policy.". In addition, McCain's foreign policy adviser, Max Boot, also sits on the group's board."

        http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10394...

        "Craig Shirley doubled as a consultant to McCain and to Stop Her Now, a 527 group barred from coordinating its activities with presidential campaigns."

        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

        "The McCain campaign has been less organized than Obama's in its efforts to counter 527s."

        Reply
  • 0%

    Aidenag6 months ago

    McCain also recieved six figures from this firm. Though i really wouldn't put much into the fact either of them got money from them... It's a huge firm with 1700 lawyers, 19 locations, And is the 16th largest law firm by revenue in the world, 8th largest in the US.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/12/mccain...

    Reply

    5 Replies

    • 0%

      libsRfunny6 months ago

      yeah, we saw your post before. Turns out Obama didn't get much less than McCain, and you railed McCain for it. Yet, this is the most damning of all ...

      "However, among the broad spectrum of lobbyists and legal firms, Hillary has taken in $15.7 million and Obama $13.8 million. McCain comes in last at $4.2 million."

      Nearly $10 million more than McCain. Any wonder Obama has more cash? Needless to say, every time I see a self righteous Obama article excoriating McCain for lobbyist ties and Obama pretending he has nothing to do with lobbyists - even though several work on his campaign and he has a long history of accepting lobbyist funding - that figure will resurface.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        cushi6 months ago

        "yeah, we saw your post before. Turns out Obama didn't get much less than McCain, and you railed McCain for it. Yet, this is the most damning of all."

        Surely you jest!! McSame got nearly TWICE the amount of Barack Obama...you can add $75,000 and $75,000 can't you? McSame got $142,000, just shy of TWICE what Obama received.

        Reply
    • 0%

      newbie04206 months ago

      "McCain also recieved six figures from this firm."

      Wow, so because McCain did it it's ok for Obama, you know the guy who preaches CHANGE in Washington all the time?

      I've been saying he's a politician like the rest of them the whole time, looks like I was right, too bad you can't admit it.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        cushi6 months ago

        The difference is Obama recognized that it was not the thing to do and took steps to correct it and obstruct it from occurring in the future...for McSame, it was business as usual. That's right, he IS the guy who preaches CHANGE and then PRACTICES what he preaches. Deal with it!

        Reply
    • 0%

      fsev416 months ago

      This is primarily a law firm.Obama and Clinton are lawyers. If they're trying to raise money why wouldn't they go to law firms. They know where the money is.

      Reply
• 0%

  ZiegfeldGirl6 months ago

  Abramoff is the overlord of lobbyists!

  Oh poor Obama, he's done for.

  Reply

  24 Replies

  • 0%

    ybdogsct6 months ago

    I wonder why PC25 chose not to post the original Newsday article. Maybe, this is why.

    LOL.

    http://www.newsday.com/services/newspaper/print...

    "To link an attorney there to the illegal actions of Jack Abramoff simply because they worked at the same firm is ridiculous.

    The attorneys held fundraisers for not only Obama, but also for McCain and Clinton. McCain, who chaired the Senate probe of Abramoff, held two events, one in the firm's New York office, another in Miami. McCain raised $138,000.

    Unlike McCain and Clinton, Obama accepts money from advocates but not lobbyists. The Center for Responsive Politics said lobbyists gave McCain $590,952 and Obama $115,163, but Obama returns lobbyist funds.

    Obama stated he doesn't accept money from 'currently registered federal lobbyists, registered foreign agents, PACs, or minors.' His filings show he was true to his word."

    Reply

    19 Replies

    • 0%

      libsRfunny6 months ago

      Yet, Obama seems more than knee-deep indebted to them and others ...

      "However, among the broad spectrum of lobbyists and legal firms, Hillary has taken in $15.7 million and Obama $13.8 million. McCain comes in last at $4.2 million."

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        ybdogsct6 months ago

        Actually, if you had read the ORIGINAL Newsday article (and it's clear that you haven't), NONE of that money donated to Obama's campaign is PAC money and NONE of that money donated to Obama's campaign was bundled by lobbyists. Those funds represent the INDIVIDUAL donations of INDIVIDUAL citizens. As such, those funds are classified by the FEC as private donations-NOT as PAC or bundled-donations-and must abide to the giving limits imposed on personal donations.

        The law firm itself gave Obama nothing from its PAC funds. The individual lawyers were acting and donating as individual concerned citizens.

        A literate person would have understood this from the original Newday article.

        LOL.

        Reply
    • 0%

      nostalgia6 months ago

      You must have missed this:

      The Boston Globe: Obama and lobbyists 2007:

      PACs and lobbyists aided Obama's rise

      Using campaign appearances, e-mails, and Iowa TV ads, Sen Obama has repeatedly reminded voters that his presidential campaign does not accept contributions from lobbyists or political action committees, casting his decision as a noble departure from the ways of Washington.

      Behind Obama's campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth. A Globe review of Obama's campaign finance records shows that he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs as a state legislator, a US senator, and a presidential aspirant.

      Though Obama has returned thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from registered federal lobbyists since he declared his candidacy in Feb, his presidential campaign has maintained ties with lobbyists & lobbying firms to help raise some of the $58.9 million he collected through the first 6 months of 2007.

      Reply

      6 Replies

      • 0%

        nostalgia6 months ago

        Obama has raised more than $1.4 million from members of law and consultancy firms led by partners who are lobbyists, The Los Angeles Times reported last week. And The Hill, a Washington newspaper, reported earlier this year that Obama's campaign had reached out to lobbyists' networks to use their contacts to help build his fund-raising base.

        http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007...

        Reply

        5 Replies

        • 0%

          ybdogsct6 months ago

          You must have not read YOUR OWN article, which clearly says that while Obama USED TO accept PAC money in the past, Obama decided to spurn PAC money after seeing the influence of special interests in Washington. He does NOT accept PAC money or lobbyist-bundles.

          http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007...

          "After seeing the influence of lobbyists firsthand during his two years in Washington, Obama decided before he entered the presidential race that he would take a different approach to fund-raising than he had in the past.

          Obama is leading by example to clean up the undue influence of Washington lobbyists.

          And some good-government activists say that, past fund-raising practices aside, Obama has genuinely been a champion for ethics and campaign reform, both in the Illinois Legislature and in Congress."

          LOL. Reading comprehension must not be your forte.

          Reply
        • 0%

          ybdogsct6 months ago

          http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2...

          "Sen. John McCain secured millions in federal funds for a land acquisition program that provided a windfall for an Arizona developer whose executives were major campaign donors.

          McCain, who has made fighting special-interest projects a centerpiece of his presidential campaign, inserted $14.3 million in a 2003 defense bill to buy land around Luke AFB in a provision sought by SunCor Development.

          The Air Force later paid SunCor $3 million for 122 acres near the base. It was the highest single land transaction of the private lots purchased by the government... three times the county's assessed value and twice the military's estimated value.

          McCain's campaigns have received $224,000 since 1998 from donors connected to Pinnacle West, including $104,100 for his current presidential run."

          Reply
        • 0%

          ybdogsct6 months ago

          http://news.propeller.com/story/2008/04/26/mcca...

          "McCain's help for Keating came after Keating had donated $112,000 to McCain from 1982 to 1987, had taken McCain and his family on nine trips, including three to the Bahamas, and had gone in on a business deal with McCain's wife and father-in-law.

          In 1982, Keating held a fund-raiser for him, collecting more than $11,000 from 40 employees of American Continental Corp. In 1983, as McCain contemplated his House re-election, Keating hosted a $1,000-a-plate dinner for him, even though McCain had no serious competition. When McCain pushed for the Senate in 1986, Keating was there with more than $50,000. By 1987, McCain had received about $112,000 from Keating and his associates.

          The Arizona Republic revealed that McCain's wife and her father had invested $359,100 in a Keating shopping center."

          Reply
        • 0%

          ybdogsct6 months ago

          http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/201671...

          "John McCain's campaign asked prominent Republican consultant, Craig Shirley, to leave. Shirley doubled as a consultant to McCain and the group Stop Her Now, a 527 group barred from coordinating its activities with presidential campaigns.

          Shirley's firm, Shirley & Bannister Associates, was paid more than $22,000 by McCain for work to win conservative support. Stop Her Now has paid the firm more than $155,000 since 2007 for public relations work.

          Shirley's background is in some of the hardest hitting Republican attacks on Democratic politicians. He was a member of the team that tarred Michael Dukakis with the "Willie Horton" ads in 1988, and he helped organize the press conference with Paula Jones. In 2004, his company did public relations work for a movie attacking John Kerry called, 'Stolen Honor.'"

          Reply
        • 0%

          ybdogsct6 months ago

          http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/mccain/a...

          "The McCain campaign has instituted a series of rules aimed at lobbyists on staff, trying to eliminate conflicts of interest. Many of the lobbyists supporting McCain have represented telecommunications companies with business before the Senate Commerce Committee, which McCain chaired from 1997 to 2001 and 2003-05.

          This site presents a list of 5 lobbyists who have quit McCain's campaign after having been exposed and 13 lobbyists still working for the McCain campaign as of the publication of this article."

          Reply
    • 0%

      quackpot6 months ago

      Not fair. How dare you spoil the fun by actually consulting the source?

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        CRYMTYPHON6 months ago

        Ybdogsct has kinda like pointed out that PC25 and company, are wrong in this thread.

        This is sad.

        Because it doesn't make any diference; they won't go, oops, I'm sorry; they won't take it back; they won't say 'good point, next time I will be more careful'.

        There is a malice behind their stubborn indiference to the truth; they throw what they can; if it doesn't hit the mark, they try again.

        Reply
    • 0%

      pc256 months ago

      the newsday link is there for all to see........second of all he accepted the money didn't he...........and for someone who is accusing McCain it is hypocrisy at best because it is politics as usual and not change you can believe in........It does kind of leave open many questions and make one start to question what is his actual relationship with Rezko and how dirty is it..........

      Reply

      7 Replies

      • 0%

        ybdogsct6 months ago

        1) Your post breaks Propeller's "Middle Man Rule.

        2) If you had actually bothered to read the ORIGINAL Newsday article, you would have read that Obama did NOT accept lobbyist-bundled money and PAC money. Any lobbyist-bundled money and PAC money donated to his campaign was returned. Obama only accepted money from lawyers acting as individual concerned citizens, NOT money bundled by lobbyists.

        3) Yes, let's talk about Rezko and his links to REPUBLICAN KARL ROVE.

        http://www.newsweek.com/id/134294

        "The trial of Antoin "Tony" Rezko has been closely watched for any mention of Barack Obama. But last week, prosecutors threw a curveball, telling the judge that one of their witnesses is prepared to raise the name of Karl Rove. Former Illinois state official Ali Ata is expected to testify that Rove was 'working with' a top Illinois Republican to remove the Chicago U.S. attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald."

        LOL.

        Reply

        6 Replies

        • 0%

          pc256 months ago

          take it up with the anchors hotshot......they summarize and add their own comment to the article excerpts of the original appear in gray on top of which your assertion that I am trying put a spin on something does not hold up as in Hotair article they state.....

          "Newsday says that John McCain and Hillary Clinton have also received money from Greenberg, and they're correct. McCain has actually done better with Greenberg employees, to the tune of $142,000, and Hillary wins the gold medal with $163,000. However, among the broad spectrum of lobbyists and legal firms, Hillary has taken in $15.7 million and Obama $13.8 million. McCain comes in last at $4.2 million."

          Reply
        • 0%

          ybdogsct6 months ago

          PC25:

          "take it up with the anchors hotshot"

          http://www.netscape.com/FAQ/

          "In order to ensure that there are not multiple duplicates of the same story, it is important that Propeller community members always link to the original source of a story. Whenever the Propeller Anchor team spots a story that is not linked to the original source, we will change the link."

          PC25:

          "they summarize and add their own comment to the article"

          Actually, they don't "summarize and comment" on the article. They quote excerpts out of context and spin it to suggest something the ORIGINAL Newsday article doesn't. Even a CURSORY reading of the Newsday article would have shown how erroneous HotAir's summary was. Their reading comprehension is nearly as bad as yours.

          Care to address points 2 and 3, or are you simply going to concede that you hadn't bothered to read the original Newday article?

          LOL.

          Pathetic.

          Reply

          4 Replies

          • 0%

            pc256 months ago

            go ahead and take it up with the anchors hotshot

            you are apparently blind to the fact that they used the newsday article as a basis for their story which is why they included reference..

            if you are so concerned about this become an anchor or complain to james marcus........

            Reply

            3 Replies

            • 0%

              ybdogsct6 months ago

              PC25:

              "go ahead and take it up with the anchors hotshot"

              Don't have to. When they see this post, they'll make the appropriate corrections. If they decide to let it be, that's their prerogative.

              PC25:

              "you are apparently blind to the fact that they used the newsday article as a basis for their story which is why they included reference"

              And you are apparently so obtuse that you need others to tell you how to think instead of referring to the ORIGINAL STORY. Even after direct quotes from the original story were cited to demonstrate their slanted summary, you futilely persist in defending HotAir's partisan spin. A true partisan hack, indeed.

              You must be a glutton for punishment.

              LOL.

              Reply

              2 Replies

              • 0%

                pc256 months ago

                hey hotshot I see they didn't redirect the story per your wishes.......irregardless of the fact that you were totally wrong.......I guess you don't have they pull with the anchors you think you do.....LOL

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 0%

                  ybdogsct6 months ago

                  How obtuse can you possibly be? I already stated in my previous post that I didn't care enough to report your violation of Propeller's rules to the anchors. I also stated that it was the moderators' prerogative to redirect the article.

                  It's telling that you continue to obfuscate the debate regarding McCain's lobbyist connections because you were too lazy or too inept to find and read the ORIGINAL article.

                  LOL. You are a waste of Propeller's bandwidth.

                  Pathetic.

                  Reply
  • 0%

    ybdogsct6 months ago

    http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/05/30/...

    "McCain has more lobbyists working on his campaign staff than any other candidate."

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/136321

    "Doug Goodyear, McCain's selection for GOP Convention Chair, is CEO of DCI Group, which earned $3 million lobbying for ExxonMobil and GM.

    DCI was paid $348,000 to represent Burma's military junta, which was condemned by the State Dept. for its human-rights record and remains in power today. His firm created a PR campaign to burnish the junta's image, denouncing 'falsehoods' by the Bush administration that the regime engaged in rape and other abuses.

    Goodyear's firm also pioneered 527 groups, precisely the kind of operations that McCain, in his battle for campaign-finance reform, has denounced.

    Ironically, Goodyear was chosen for the post after the McCain campaign nixed another candidate, Paul Manafort, who runs a lobbying firm with McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis."

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      CHAM6 months ago

      ybdogsct

      Right on.

      And you didn't even have to mention that McCain was a living breathing member, actually was one of the Keating Five, the group that bilked the American public of over a Billion dollars. Robbed retirees and investors of their life savings and etc.

      Keating is the one who slipped hundreds of thousands of dollars to McCain, his wife, and her father.

      The funny thing is McCain got real hot when questioned by a reporter, asked the reporter if he was stupid, that the money was given to his wife and therefore didn't count against him! Oh the Chutzpa of it all.

      Yeah - good ole boy McCain is a saint - NOT!

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        pc256 months ago

        and what the hell is obama...........

        the Shamwow sales man

        Reply
  • 0%

    cushi6 months ago

    Dream on! (Unless, hopefully, you're being tongue in cheek.)

    Reply
• 0%

  pc256 months ago

  So much for "Change you can believe in"

  Reply

  4 Replies

  • 0%

    Nixie6 months ago

    No he's right, it is "Change you can believe in". What he didn't specify was that it is change in the millions and billions...quarters, dimes, nickles...

    Reply
  • 0%

    Global_Warmer6 months ago

    "So much for "Change you can believe in"...

    $13.8 million....is that "Chump Change?"

    Reply
  • 0%

    CRYMTYPHON6 months ago

    Change, Pc25; believe in it.

    You CAN change.

    Change now.

    Or else, as the Republican party threatens, You will get the change you deserve.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      pc256 months ago

      don't lite that cigar before you horse crosses the finish line

      Reply
• 0%

  tanglang6 months ago

  This should be on page one for all to see. Unfortunately it seems as though some here do not want stories trashing their golden boy to get out.

  Reply

  5 Replies

  • 0%

    alakazam6 months ago

    There was only man who voted to sunset the Military Commissions Act.

    Anyone know who it was?

    Reply

    3 Replies

    • 0%

      tanglang6 months ago

      Do you know why he voted against it?

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%

        cloud156 months ago

        Nope he doesn't, he heard he voted for it and therefor he is against a military raise...

        Too bad McCain is all for a helping the military, but he just thinks the aid should be based on length of serving instead of just whether or not you served.

        This is one reason why McCain will win in a general election, most of the issues people make about McCain aren't represented correctly. If Obama brings up some of the issues, which he most likely wont because hes smarter than most people, he would get killed.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          tanglang6 months ago

          McCain also votes against every pork filled bill the dems bring forth.

          Reply
  • 0%

    cushi6 months ago

    Doesn't matter to me because it shows so glaringly who is in the back pockets of the lobbyists to the greatest extent, and it isn't Barack. It also shows that neither of the other candidates have made any effort to change the status quo; just him.

    Reply

• ranchhandComment removed: User banned.4 Replies

  • AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.1 Reply

    • 0%

      jumpmaster6 months ago

      LOL!

      Reply
  • 0%

    Global_Warmer6 months ago

    I love you. The check's in the mail. And what was that third one?

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.
• 0%

  TheRealizer6 months ago

  Innocent children should not be in politics, if he can't cover his tracks he should quit. Every professional politician is for sale, some are just brighter than others.

  Reply
• 0%

  TheRealizer6 months ago

  Innocent children should not be in politics, if he can't cover his tracks he should quit. Every professional politician is for sale, some are just brighter than others.

  Reply
• 0%

  TheRealizer6 months ago

  Innocent children should not be in politics, if he can't cover his tracks he should quit. Every professional politician is for sale, some are just brighter than others.

  Reply
• 0%

  TheRealizer6 months ago

  I got more entries than I tried for..

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • 0%

    pc256 months ago

    it's what happens when the page locks up and you don't know whats going on and then you click the submit button again....the system does get a little quirky at times

    Reply
  • 0%

    pc256 months ago

    it's what happens when the page locks up and you don't know whats going on and then you click the submit button again....the system does get a little quirky at times

    Reply
  • 0%

    Wolfie20076 months ago

    Real, the problem is he ain't innocent or a child. lol

    Reply
• 0%

  alakazam6 months ago

  I would like to see this investigated.

  Make no mistake Ladies and Gentlemen...Alakazam loves America.

  Can we please elect a person of true Presidential Nature.

  Is there a truly "GREAT" American that actually can unite us?

  I will not vote for McCain or Hillary...Period!

  Can we please have some Integrity back in Politics?

  Reply

  2 Replies

  • 0%