HULK SMASH
First!
Ha! First, first in a long time.
toid?
hrc is suck
because MoveOn has "gotten too big for its britches" as far as the DLC is concerned?
Well, they are not important anyway. They are not "Her" kind of people.
(And she still has supporters? That is just amazing.)
Well, this is truly a dumb thing for Hillary to have said. But one thing the stories keep failing to mention is that MoveOn endorsed Obama. That doesn't excuse her comments but it certainly is an element that should be mentioned.
when dems don't use the easy target on the right, and instead use targets on the left, what does that say?
i mean how many fucking things have o'leilly and hume and robertson and others said that are ripe for fucking sound bites to diss the right?
when 'democrats' don't deflect and attack when it comes to stupid questions, they are simply playing centrist
Dear Hillary, this weeks turkee went to MoveOn a few minutes ago.
I'm sure they don't want folks to attack their gilded think tanks or their talking points.
I wish the freedom loving Democrat nominees would get a grip on the freedom of speech and then we might be able to decide.
from below:
The pileated woodpeckers love to sharpen their beaks on the neighborhood stop sign exactly at sunrise every day. It sounds like a jack hammer on a steel drum.
My guess is that it's a male or two who are using the stop sign as a way to resonate their pecking noises to attract females. Some people have lost yards of aluminum siding because woodpeckers also find find that siding makes a good percussive instrument.
ahhhhh, now this is some denouncin'
I like a lot of what MoveOn does and they're great here in DC at organizing short-notice demonstrations outside, say, someplace Rove is giving a speech. Lately, they've done some shit that I think is stupid, but no group is perfect.
It would also be preferable to attack them for something true, rather than false.
I do think that extra-party organizations are useful but would be more effective if they could channel that energy into transforming the party.
The real political battle is within the Democratic Party. Will Progressives finally gain their voice?
Some people have lost yards of aluminum siding because woodpeckers also
find find that siding makes a good percussive instrument.
resourceful little fuckers.
because MoveOn has "gotten too big for its britches" as far as the DLC is concerned?
'zactly. That HRC quote from earlier was DLC-speak at its finest.
You favorite grass-roots organization sucks.
I was as against Clinton resigning as anyone, but in retrospect, it would have almost assured a Gore win in 2000 (oh wait, he did win), and obviated the last eight years.
Well, they are not important anyway. They are not "Her" kind of people.
(And she still has supporters? That is just amazing.)
Because, not only does your candidate suck, but you suck for supporting her? I'm still a Hillary supporter. Obama says dumb stuff; she says dumb stuff. There is no perfect candidate.
Time for me to become unwashed. Have a good day.
Maybe Hillary is attacking the organization because she is still upset over Bill getting those blow jobs.
Some people have lost yards of aluminum siding because woodpeckers also
find find that siding makes a good percussive instrument.
Aluminum siding and gutters are also disappearing in Chicago but they've attributed this to aggressive scrap metal dealers.
as noted earlier, no democrat should be attacking any organization that effectively mobilizes the number of voters (and campaign donations/support) that MoveOn does on a regular basis.
I'm not a fan of bashing HC, but this just made her look desperate and nuts
Note to Hillary, bridges are burning.
Some people have lost yards of aluminum siding because woodpeckers also
find find that siding makes a good percussive instrument.
One of those assholes likes our living room window.
He's a very handsome bird, but damn he's annoying.
I think what's especially troublesome is the way that denigrating MoveOn is to implicitly marginalize a whole way of thinking.
Waging war for profit is perfectly fine, however.
You know, the 'late 90s' is pretty close to being yesterday in terms of memory.
Hecate, Runnymeade Conspirator | Homepage | 04.19.08 - 10:23 am | #
Thank you for saying what must be said.
OK, I'm going to go mow the lawn. Hope you get outside and enjoy the Spring!
Ok, i'm back. Where were we?
-
You know, the 'late 90s' is pretty close to being yesterday in terms of memory.
GWPDA
Late last week is pretty much gone for me.
OK, I'm going to go mow the lawn. Hope you get outside and enjoy the Spring!
one more cup of joe, and then I'm out the door! Enjoy the day!
(sigh)
IIRC, wasn't MoveOn created to "Move On" from criticizing and bashing Bill Clinton? Isn't that what "MoveOn" means?
--mf
[Insert crude joke here about aluminum signs, big trucks, and making peckers seem bigger.]
I'd just assume forget the late 90s.
And the early aughts, for that matter. Just reminds me of the efficiency apartments that I lived in.
I am concerned about the foreign policy aspect of what Clinton said. First, the untruth about Afghanistan, but more importantly the whole those dirty hippy peaceniks want to sing kumbaya for foreign policy as opposed to me Hillary, who wants to bomp peeps.
I am still leaning Hillary, but barely. Her health care plan is better. It's probably tied for my top issue. My insurance premiums went up 32% this year.
Move On is obviously an elitist group. I mean, how many of them live either inside the Beltway or in Manhattan? That mere fact disqualifies them from being part of the salt of the earth Real Americans.
One of those assholes likes our living room window.
Take a broom handle and when he does his rat-a-tat-tat thing, hit the window frame or a wall nearby with precisely the same rhythm. It will usually spook them. One possibility also is that the woodpecker has found some larvae inside rotting wood or whatever. If so, you will find dozens if not hundreds of holes he has dug to probe for these little gobs of protein.
MoveOn and CodePink are evil.
Well, I must have missed the part where Obama told the activists in the party that they were not important and he did not like them.
If Obama had done the same exact things as Hillary, would the Obama supporters still support him?
(I would not. I cannot speak for all but I think the answer would be no. )
MoveOn and CodePink are evil.
NTodd
Well Code Pink has semi adopted you as a member. QED.
If so, you will find dozens if not hundreds of holes he has dug to probe for these little gobs of protein.
Our house out east is board and batten, and there's one corner that is particularly tasty, it seems.
MoveOn and CodePink are evil.
I distrust any group that takes two existing words, capitalizes them, then combines them into one new word.
IIRC, wasn't MoveOn created to "Move On" from criticizing and bashing Bill Clinton? Isn't that what "MoveOn" means?
See the title of the post, MoveOn's original name. It was their proposed alternative to the impeachment of Pres. Clinton.
Take a broom handle and when he does his rat-a-tat-tat thing, hit the window frame or a wall nearby with precisely the same rhythm. It will usually spook them. One possibility also is that the woodpecker has found some larvae inside rotting wood or whatever. If so, you will find dozens if not hundreds of holes he has dug to probe for these little gobs of protein.
Good to know...thanks!
I am still leaning Hillary, but barely. Her health care plan is better.
It isn't single payer and single payer is what I intend to pass.
there's one corner that is particularly tasty, it seems.
No flirting!!!!!!!!
What does it even mean to "support the war in Afghanistan" at a time when it hadn't happened yet?
If plans had been made for a military action in Afghanistan that was managed appropriately, with a minimum of civilian casualties, that won hearts and minds of Afghans and others in the region, that captured Bin Laden and his lieutenants, that left that barren country a decent place to live for its occupants, I have little doubt that MoveOn and others in the "activist base" would have supported it. But it's pretty clear that's not what we were going to get, and it's not what we got.
So "supporting a war" or "not supporting a war" before the war has happened doesn't mean all that much. What kind of war will it be? Managaed by whom? With what objectives? What will the outcome be? How likely are we to achieve that outcome? If these questions had been frankly and openly discussed, and had the "activist base" supported the strategy and tactics, they would have mostly supported the war.
But that didn't happen. There was never a clear mission in Afghanistan. What are we doing now? What is the objective? Are we making progress? What would be different if we hadn't gone in at all?
Bin Laden's still alive, the people of Afghanistan are still fucked.
I dunno, Hillary, even if the dirty fucking hippies had opposed a war with unclear objectives executed by a swaggering West Texas sheriff wannabe, a war that has been mostly a failure, I'm not so sure that would be a bad thing.
Fewer wars, yes. But if war is occasionally the right solution:
Better wars, please.
MoveOn.org Political Action is entirely funded by hundreds of thousands of our members - we don't take big checks from corporations. The average contribution is around $50 and we don't take any contributions larger than $5000. That is why your contribution is even more special. Thank you so much.
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration violated federal law last year when it restricted states’ ability to provide health insurance to children of middle-income families, and its new policy is therefore unenforceable, lawyers from the Government Accountability Office said Friday.
The ruling strengthens the hand of at least 22 states, including New York and New Jersey, that already provide such coverage or want to do so. And it significantly reduces the chance that the new policy can be put into effect before President Bush leaves office in nine months.
At issue is the future of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, financed jointly by the federal government and the states. Congress last year twice passed bills to expand the popular program, and Mr. Bush vetoed both.
State officials of both parties say the policy, set forth in a letter to state health officials on Aug. 17, has stymied their efforts to cover more children at a time when the number of uninsured is rising and more families are experiencing economic hardship.
Blogging sweatshop exposed on video!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C...h?
v=CgQkKogqHDQ
Well Code Pink has semi adopted you as a member. QED.
I think it's more out of pity.
Which reminds me, I need to get back to Mila about my next visits. Logistics has become a little more difficult of late...
In regard to Thers' idea about "No sexism, no racism,..." for Progressive Blogs:
Would it be alright if I was the one who decided when a comment was sexist or racist?
The Bush administration violated federal law last year when it restricted states’ ability to provide health insurance to children of middle-income families
To be fair, some of those kids probably drink orange juice or don't wear flag pins.
There is no perfect candidate.
I was going to vote for Jesus, but then I found out he has a weakness for hookers and hangs out with lepers.
Oh noes. NPR's picked up the McCain girls bit.
Shared Humanity -- I do think that extra-party organizations are useful but would be more effective if they could channel that energy into transforming the party.
The real political battle is within the Democratic Party. Will Progressives finally gain their voice?
I do think this is happening, and MoveOn has made important contributions to it.
Progressives are finding their voices at the same time that they are learning just what progressivism means -- which is, of course, more than one thing.
I'm on the small-d democracy end of the progressive spectrum. That's ordinary citizens coming together in forums to share perspectives and explore ways to inject consensus views into the public dialogue and politics.
MoveOn has been a major contributor to that.
.
Sandra Lee: All of these recipes are available on FoodNetwork.com and, it seems, JohnMcCain.com.
The First Amendment was written at a time when no one had indoor plumbing, so freedom of assembly was a benefit to everyone, including journalists.
Best to minimize the unwashed masses so reporters don't have to cover them.
Would it be alright if I was the one who decided when a comment was sexist or racist?
I think it should be a committee made up of you, David Duke and Camille Paglia.
"..I think, that Move On basically has no credibility other than what its members give it. Their power comes not from having a seat at any table, but they are instead empowered largely by the actions of its members."
Not a particularly thoughtful or insightful comment. That's true of most organizations that function in the political arena.
It's problematic the same way every other distraction is problematic. How did MoveOn's Betrayus ad harm the war effort? Seriously, how? But the way the right wing reacted it was like they'd paid for a load of IEDs sent directly to Sadr's house.
It's one more way to keep people's eyes off the ball, and that's why it's infuriating.
A.
The Bush administration violated federal law last year when it restricted states’ ability to provide health insurance to children of middle-income families, and its new policy is therefore unenforceable, lawyers from the Government Accountability Office said Friday.
Fortunately, the DOJ has ruled that "One does not say 'no' to kings", and so it's all okey-dokey.
-
Their power comes not from having a seat at any table, but they are instead empowered largely by the actions of its members.
Fucking grassroots.
questions that Deorpge step should ask Mccain on Sunday via kos:
# Senator McCain, some have suggested that you take on Mike Huckabee as your running mate to offset the mistrust many Christian voters have of you given your support of stem cell research, which as you know, they consider to be murder. So my question to you is, will you ask Mr. Huckabee to join your ticket and can you explain why destroying unborn children isn't murder? After all, this viewpoint can be found on the internet.
# It has been widely reported that you told Senator John Cornyn to "fuck off." Given your famous and self-admitted temper, should the American people be concerned that you may use the same sort of language to world leaders?
# Let's move on to religion. You have "proudly" accepted the endorsements of Reverend John Hagee and Rod Parsley. Do believe and accept their belief that the Catholic Church conspired with Hitler to exterminate Jews, that Hurricane Katrina was a righteous punishment from God for the sins of New Orleans, and that a part of our American destiny is to destroy the false religion of Islam? If not, why haven't you publicly disassociated yourself from these remarks?
# Keeping on religion for another moment; 20 years ago you began attending a Baptist Church, yet you refused to be baptized into that church. Why?
# Do you believe that commiting adultery should disqualify someone to be the President of the United States? Why or why not?
# It's been noted that you don't wear an American flag on your lapel. Do you believe that wearing one proves ones patriotism and conversely, does not wearing one mean that you don't love your country? In other words, is this an issue that the American people should be concerned about?
# Senator McCain, after you returned from Vietnam, you divorced your first wife to marry a 25 year old heiress who financed your first campaign only a month after the divorce went through. Did you have an affair while married to your first wife, and can you explain why the voters can trust you on moral issues after your own past record?
# Given your wealth and privileged upbringing, aren't you - and not Barack Obama - the elitist?
# You spent five years living in Hanoi at the expense of a foreign government, how are you going to convince the voters you aren't a communist?
# You lived in very close quarters with a group of men in a place no women were allowed, how are you going to convince the voters you aren't gay?
#
You, sir, are very old. How can you prove to the American people that you will not die of a heart attack during your presidency?
# in your Navy career, you crashed five different planes. How can you convince the American public that you're capable of correctly steering the ship of state?
# can you explain to the American public how we are to be sure you are not a North Vietnamese sympathizer, especially since you claimed your country commited War Crimes during your stay at the Hanoi Hilton? Sir we want to know if y
None of the candidates, alas, is proposing single payer universal health insurance. A shame, but that's the way it is.
Not a particularly thoughtful or insightful comment. That's true of most organizations that function in the political arena.
Yeah, the Heritage Foundation hasn't bought and paid for any kind of politician.
It's one more way to keep people's eyes off the ball, and that's why it's infuriating.
A.
Athenae
What pissed me off was MoveOn didn't respond with even greater assertiveness. I'd have helped pay for the big follow-up ad.
None of the candidates, alas, is proposing single payer universal health insurance.
This candidate is.
Moveon wasn't the only victim of the
apologistas. We had a pandemic of people required to apologize for no reason other than to get ratings for assholes like Chris Matthews
It's the gooper way.
Maybe she feels "bitter" about MoveOn endorsing Obama (instead of waiting until after the primary to support the candidate) after this vote.
AP article re: Senate Condemns "General Betrayus" Ad: http://www.breitbart.com/article...&
show_article=1
"The Senate voted Thursday to condemn an advertisement by the liberal anti-war group MoveOn.org that accused the top military commander in Iraq of betrayal. . .
"The resolution condemning the ad was sponsored by conservative Republican John Cornyn of Texas. Voting against it were Democratic presidential hopefuls Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Christopher Dodd of Connecticut. . .
"Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, another contender for the Democratic nomination, did not vote, although he voted minutes earlier for an alternative resolution by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. That resolution condemned the MoveOn ad as an "unwarranted personal attack," but also condemned political attack ads that questioned the patriotism of Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., and former Sen. Max Cleland, D-Ga., both Vietnam veterans. . . "
but they are instead empowered largely by the actions of its members.
Heh. Like that's gonna work.
What pissed me off was MoveOn didn't respond with even greater assertiveness. I'd have helped pay for the big follow-up ad.
You and me freaking both.
Them yelling at you isn't a sign you need to apologize and back off. It's a sign you need to HIT BACK HARDER.
A.
stained owls!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I recommend reading Bob Herbert's column in the NY Times today.
Make sure you don't have any sharp kitchen implements nearby, though.
# Senator McCain, you voted against the King holiday in 1983, denied that your baby is the result of your raping a black woman, and are now running against the first black man to be a Presidential candidate from a major party. Do you hate negroes? Would you denounce Abraham Lincoln for freeing the slaves? You really hate both the negroes and the Republican Party, don't you? Let's get back to hating negroes. When's the last time you were at a Klan rally? How about a Nazi party meeting? We all know you were disowned by David Duke. Is it because you hate negroes more than you hate Jews? Why do you hate Jews so much anyway? Is it the fact that you don't want your sister marrying one?
So let's talk about abortion. Now, you're pro-life. Is that why you adopted your black mistress's baby after you raped her?
# Would you, Senator, once and for all submit to a complete body scan so that there can be no doubt as to whether the Vietcong embedded either digital or organic substances (into your brain or any orifice, organ, or toenail) that are programmed to release your latent communism once you become leader of the free world? If not, why not?
# Mr. McCain, your wife started a charity for wounded veterans, then stole pain medications meant for the injured troops to feed her addiction. Sir, why does your wife not support our troops? Tell me why the American people should elect a President who has a spouse that is not supportive of the troops.
# Do you wear Depends?
# Would you be willing to drop trou and national television to PROVE you don't wear depends?"
# Will Senator Lieberman be whispering into your ear to correct ALL of your erroneous statements?
#
Why do you continue to be associated with someone who plagerized recipes for a cook book? Do you consider her a liar or a thief? Which one?
# Sen. McCain, are you worried that your wife's riches from selling Bud Light will alienate the Christian right votes you depend on? Do you agree with those in many religions that buying, selling, and drinking alcohol is a sin? Do you wish your wife's money that funded your early political races had come from more Christian means?
#
Is there any better evidence of Bush's moral bankruptcy than his ongoing efforts to restrict access to health care for children who desperately need it?
Any?
At all?
I thought Pariser's response was fairly strong.
sheets, btw
HIT BACK HARDER.
A.
Athenae
They should be budgeting for that, setting aside even more money to pay for the follow-up smackdown, girlfriend!
It's one thing to reject MoveOn as being in your opponent's camp. It's quite another to equate MoveOn with activism in general. Especially for someone who has so much activist support herself. It's hard to make sense of it, even within the "donor" context.
virgotex--I'm talking followup NYTimes ad, not a press release the MSM can bury on page 26.
Them yelling at you isn't a sign you need to apologize and back off. It's a sign you need to HIT BACK HARDER.
Yep. Harder, and lower. If the candidates don't want to go there, let the rest of us.
Not a particularly thoughtful or insightful comment. That's true of most organizations that function in the political arena.
Nonsense.
.
Atrios:
"The issue is, I think, that Move On basically has no credibility other than what its members give it. Their power comes not from having a seat at any table, but they are instead empowered largely by the actions of its members. To dismiss Move On is to dismiss the large block of people that comprise it."
Lord Kos:
"It's bizarre, but I don't really consider [Hillary Clinton] a Dem any more."
Is there a difference here, and if so, what is it?
None of the candidates, alas, is proposing single payer universal health insurance.
This candidate is.
Snow (D-SC)
Pffft. That'll never work. Just ask my man DK...
Snow: good on you.
Y'know, you could look at the American Medical-Industrial Complex. Spends an ungodly amount of money; implicates a seventh or so of the entire economy. Makes huge profits. Employs huge numbers of people; a hospital is often its town's largest employer. Doesn't go as good a job at its core mission--health, y'know--as far less costly, widely varying models around the world.
So there's a little political problem attacking it. Major ox goring required. But, you don't attack it that way, the problem won't get any better, and real people will die.
This is pretty good:
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/o...incoln-
dou.html
The Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858
MODERATORS:
CHARLIE GIBSON, ABC NEWS
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS
"The issue is, I think, that Move On basically has no credibility other than what its members give it."
Is there any organization for which this isn't true? Or am I missing the point, yet again?
It's the same old story for the Clintons. They'll always be there when they need you.
The two of them are intelligent, dedicated, hardworking public servants. Alas, much of that is negated by their psychopathic level of selfishness.
It is truly incredible. Even the 'liberal' blogs have a version of Clinton rules. The Obama people are running a scorched earth campaign, but Hillary Clinton gets trashed by Atrios.
On January 20th, when John McCain is sworn in as the 44th President of the United States, the Obama people will blame Bill and Hillary Clinton. "If she had just kissed Saint Obama on the ass, Obama would getting sworn in."
This election is the best indicator of just how fucked up all political discourse is in the United States.
I don't think picking a fight with MoveOn.org is going to hurt Hillary Clinton in the long run. There's a real question as to how much of their muscle is coming from grassroots membership and how much is coming from the likes of George Soros. I'm not pulling that out of my ass or even Dennis Hastert's. It comes from knowledge of his history with Georgia, and the criticism of him in publications such as IBD.
"The issue is, I think, that Move On basically has no credibility other than what its members give it. Their power comes not from having a seat at any table, but they are instead empowered largely by the actions of its members. To dismiss Move On is to dismiss the large block of people that comprise it."
Isn't it ironic:
Eli Pariser, MoveOn.org’s executive director:
"We’ve learned that the key to achieving change in Washington without compromising core values is having a galvanized electorate to back you up. And Barack Obama has our members ‘fired up and ready to go’ on that front.""
The ironic part:
"A MoveOn spokesman says 300,000 people — 10 percent of the group's total membership — participated in the online voting over 24 hours."
So when moveon memebers get "fired up and ready to go" 10% do something.
The other ironic part is when moveon was under attack for the betrayus ad Hillary stood up with them while berry had other prorities:
Despite Bush’s criticism, the Democratic presidential candidates present for the vote, Clinton and Sen. Chris Dodd (Conn.), opposed the resolution.
...
Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) was not present for any of the votes, while Obama voted earlier in the day but left for an event in Atlanta.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-n...2007-09-
20.html
MoveOn marginalized itself when it decided to become an advocacy group for Obama. In doing so they made themselves a part of his vicious campaign. Before they made their choice a lot of people, like myself, asked them to stay neutral so that they would have more legitimacy to speak for liberal causes. MoveOn decided to throw in with Obama. Everything they do now is political maneuvering.
Unless MoveOn is the totality of "the activist base of the Demorcatic party", she wasn't just dismissing them. She dismissed the "dirty fucking hippies", too. Among others.
"attacking moveon shows Hillary isn't one of the elites like Obama"-Sean Hannity
well i guess she's secured the sean hannity wing of the party, jr. fucking christ.
Thanks for getting Hillary's back on this one, JasonC. I'm feelin the unity, as usual.
"To dismiss Move On is to dismiss the large block of people that comprise it". Bullshit. MoveOn dismissed a large block of people who were part of it by endorsing Obama. Stupid move. It has lessened MoveOn's influence, helped divide the party, and along with Howard Dean's missteps, will make McInane's election possible. History will not be kind.
First problem is that they picked a Democrat instead of endorsing the democrat that evntually won the nomination. Movement was then turned into a campaign for only one dem and you're left with only half a movement...and I think the online survey was stupid because at the time I wasn't for either candidate. They should have just backed the Democrat. Never mind the fact that Clinton actually defended them during the betrayus flak and even defended kos at one point...even attended one of the conventions. But whatever, I think she's right. And I was not happy they thought is was the right thing to do to endorse a specific dem...that's were this whole movement jumped the shark...and instead of being inclusive became exclusive by doing so.
Shorter version of my first comment above
I didn't leave the movement, the movement left me. They dismissed me.
MyDD has a link to MoveOn's pages back in the day and it clearly shows Eli's position on Afghanistan is exactly what Hillary said it was.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4...19/111736/
838#3
My theory on why the wingnuts are so quick and ferocious in attacking MoveOn and portraying it as ultra-liberal... It isn't, and that makes it especially dangerous to them.
MoveOn started off as very much a common-sense sort of group appealing to a broad swath of 'moderate independent' types. It still is, in large part at least. Obviously, speaking out for broadly appealing pragmatic positions and policies is anathema to getting people to vote based on 'god, guns, and gays' and them screwing them over on more pressing issues.
:I didn't leave the movement, the movement left me. They dismissed me."
What movement?
The Dem is not just an anti-war party. It is a broad coalition of varied interests, labor, health care, civil rights, good government, etc. Whenever the coalition is fractured, the Dems lose in November. There is a clear anti-Obama consensus growing in the country. Pretty soon Hillary will duck out of the primary battle and it will all be on Obama's shoulders. Pretty soon he will be asked to disavow Move On for some position they have taken....and he will disavow. The poor guy is in an impossible situation, and the country will be in a worse situation. I am sorry the narrowly focused idealogical differences have once again fractured our party.
Obama is DLC. When will you all get it? Al From has announced, even on their web site, that Obama is their candidate.
As far as MoveON, it used to be about issues not about candidates. Eli believes in his own greatness.
"We bought it, we own it, we're going to take it back."
Democratic activist? No, power obsessed
23 year old.
66 Visitors Online
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
