February 28, 2009
— Ace Bennett speaking right now, stating that we are not facing socialism but "left-wing Democratic catechism." Advises we call the thing by its proper name.
Well, it's certainly socialism-esque and trending that way still further.
His greater point, I suppose, is well-taken, and gets to that Weird Kid Eating Paste thing we need to look out for. And, perhaps, by calling Obama's liberalism "socialism," it diminishes people's aversion for socialism, the same as calling everydamnthing "racist" diminished the power of that word as well.
Hey, he said it. Don't beat up on me as a "coward."
Posted by: nickless at February 28, 2009 06:38 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: SGT Dan at February 28, 2009 06:42 AM (YCle4)
Weird Kid Eating Paste thing
Could you expand on that? I been away ...
Posted by: Islamic Spy at February 28, 2009 06:42 AM (MEMCX)
Posted by: Teacher, Ouch! at February 28, 2009 06:42 AM (MU8FI)
Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2009 06:44 AM (AZGON)
Would Coulter and Limbaugh please grab the mic. The battle cry of "Down with Socialism Left-wing Democratic Catechism" is really mellowing my harsh.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 28, 2009 06:46 AM (swuwV)
Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2009 06:46 AM (AZGON)
Don't forget, every crisis is an opportunity to these people. Opportunity for what? Increasing their power, which is all they are interested in.
Posted by: the real joe at February 28, 2009 06:47 AM (VBjKB)
Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2009 06:48 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 28, 2009 06:49 AM (swuwV)
Paste does a body good.
That's a meal that'll stick to yer ribs.
Posted by: payaso at February 28, 2009 06:49 AM (wJ2/3)
too polite to say we are at war with the Left.
Yeah, Bill is of a time when sounding academic and lofty actually impressed people. His book on Clinton was prescient and right on point, but in today's ugly Uber-Liberal-Orwellian-Attack-Speech, which has become commonspeak, it sounds hopelessly as outdated, prissy, and ineffectual as prescient does.
Posted by: Islamic Spy at February 28, 2009 06:50 AM (MEMCX)
#10 was in response to #5 and not #9.
Orwell is in my head.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 28, 2009 06:51 AM (swuwV)
Posted by: eman at February 28, 2009 06:52 AM (Ee8qq)
Hes right about one thing, it is NOT socialism. It is communism. We passed socialism a long time ago.
Posted by: Vic at February 28, 2009 06:53 AM (f6os6)
Posted by: sears poncho at February 28, 2009 06:55 AM (uj/0b)
Posted by: locus Ceruleus at February 28, 2009 06:57 AM (e2mBS)
"When Cicero speaks, men say how beautiful his words, how clever his ideas," but when Scipio speaks men say "LET US MARCH."
Where is our Scipio today?
Posted by: Islamic Spy at February 28, 2009 06:57 AM (MEMCX)
Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2009 06:58 AM (AZGON)
The government didn't appropriate the banks, they subsumed them.
This is the same thing they did to the states over the past few decades...they injected transportation, housing, education money into the states then crammed beltway regulations down their throats.
This is behaving just like Nazi Germany.
Posted by: torabora at February 28, 2009 06:59 AM (Tou3T)
Posted by: locus Ceruleus at February 28, 2009 07:00 AM (e2mBS)
Posted by: Amy P at February 28, 2009 07:01 AM (n8Z8N)
Posted by: sears poncho at February 28, 2009 07:02 AM (uj/0b)
Posted by: ace at February 28, 2009 07:03 AM (leDZH)
Posted by: oblig. at February 28, 2009 07:07 AM (Hc34T)
Posted by: eman at February 28, 2009 07:08 AM (Ee8qq)
But the electorate is already half asleep. How to wake them up? will it take gas rationing and food riots?
Posted by: the real joe at February 28, 2009 07:09 AM (VBjKB)
use of overly charged phraseology subtracts, rather than adds, to the rhetorical power
Good point ACE, and rhetorical power we have lacked since Reagan. We need ACE Scipio Africanus. (Sura 2:29)
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at February 28, 2009 07:12 AM (MEMCX)
Check 2 or 3 of the Democrats running for Mayor of L.A. They have no problem in stating they are socialists, and running on a socialist platform. Stop with the polite horseshit Bill. Even the whackjob Dems are openly stating their desire to go socialist.
SOCIALISM, SOCIALISM, SOCIALISM, SOCIALISM...I feel better now.
Posted by: Sparky at February 28, 2009 07:14 AM (J1f2W)
"When Cicero speaks, men say how beautiful his words, how clever his ideas," but when Scipio speaks men say "LET US MARCH."
Meh, who cares what them Greek fellers say.
Posted by: gebrauchshund at February 28, 2009 07:15 AM (ACDor)
Posted by: rplat at February 28, 2009 07:17 AM (Qrnps)
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at February 28, 2009 07:17 AM (MEMCX)
Posted by: eman at February 28, 2009 07:18 AM (Ee8qq)
Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2009 07:19 AM (AZGON)
Saying America is still a center-right nation does not mean Obama will feel obligated to govern as such. Thankfuilly both have pretty much backed off of this owing to Obama's actualy governance and ligislation, EO's etc.
Bill is also a bit to intellectual at a time when we don't need cerbral arguments/positions. We need in the trench opposition; #18 's quote is spot on.
Posted by: catmman at February 28, 2009 07:19 AM (BCSpK)
His point is tactical-- that the use of overly charged phraseology subtracts, rather than adds, to the rhetorical power of opposition.
I agree that's his point, and he couldn't be more wrong. I don't know who these guys think actually comprises the American electorate at this point, but it's not people who know what the fuck a "left-wing Democratic catechism" is. Bennett doesn't even know what the fuck that is.
Good lord. Our opposition has torn off a huge chunk of the people who used to vote for Republicans and their primary -- and really only -- weapons have been hyper-charged rhetoric cranked up to 11 and vile bumper-sticker phrases repeated ad nauseum. It sure as shit hasn't been fresh ideas.
Who gives a crap if what the Dems are implementing is according-to-Hoyle "socialism"? How many "moderates" know what socialism really is? Most Americans just know it's a scary pejorative and, thankfully, still react with revulsion at the word.
So, yeah, what they're doing is "socialism" if that's what gets us votes. Call it "fascism" if it gets us even more votes. No bonus points for the latter's greater accuracy, because it doesn't fucking matter. If the Dem's only agenda item was the renaming of JFK Airport to BHO Airport, we would still be best served by attaching an emotionally-charged word to the act. "Rape" is always an ice breaker.
I mean, is this no longer about winning any more? For my part, if I could build a meme that Harry Reid was a child molester, I'd do it in a heartbeat.
Posted by: VJay at February 28, 2009 07:19 AM (k87Wm)
Markie Marxist sez: "Hey! Bill Bennett isn't giving us Marxists credit! We're nationalizing stuff! That's socialism on the road to communism! He must have opiates in his suppositories."
Posted by: Chas at February 28, 2009 07:20 AM (81ekr)
Stop. Just, stop!
Posted by: catmman at February 28, 2009 07:22 AM (BCSpK)
Meh, who cares what them Greek fellers say.
The greatest orator the the 20th century, Winston Churchill did. He modeled his rhetoric after them (Romans),
... we shall fight them on the beaches, we shall fight them in the fields, and in the streets, we shall never surrender...
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at February 28, 2009 07:22 AM (MEMCX)
Posted by: ann at February 28, 2009 07:23 AM (US+1l)
If you know the kind of stuff Obama marinated in throughout all his life, you know he's a Marxist revolutionary. What he really wants is much more dangerous than soft Scandi socialism.
Of course, Mr. Spread-the-Wealth has no problem hogging courtside seats at an NBA game.
Posted by: AmishDude at February 28, 2009 07:23 AM (i01iV)
Posted by: the real joe at February 28, 2009 07:25 AM (VBjKB)
Posted by: JackStraw at February 28, 2009 07:27 AM (VW9/y)
Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2009 07:28 AM (P1JmH)
Then his tactical plans undermine the main strategic one. We're trying to defeat Obama and his very liberal (as in radical neo-liberal, not classical liberal) policies, right? How exactly do you introduce "Democratic catechism" to the debate? Seriously, WTF? Do we get to hand out poly-sci theory texts to the public to get them up to speed to the hip, new vocabulary... and will it be Bennett's? This is so over the top I'm beginning to think he'll be shilling a new book explaining the nuance of it all: Democratic Catechism, The One, and His Ascendancy.
His tactics will be so genteel as to be ineffective because no one will know what the hell he's talking about and will put an extra burden on those trying to pitch it to the great unwashed who barely find their way to the voting booth. OK, so maybe CPAC people will appreciate the nuance, but is that what he's instructing the water carriers to run with once they leave? I see fail. Exceedingly, precisely defined fail.
Bennett's thoughtful and wonky. I like that in my holster. It's the Deringer on my ankle. But this is the big time. Give me the shotgun... or at least a revolver.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 28, 2009 07:28 AM (swuwV)
That "Greek fellers" bit was intended as a joke. A little shot at the protest goober at NYU, who referred to Cicero as a "Greek philosopher".
Posted by: gebrauchshund at February 28, 2009 07:29 AM (ACDor)
the MSM still sets the tone, which is in harmony with the tone of the cultural Deciders, the entertainment media, and academia.
George, the proble with repeating the word socialism is that it has no sting to it even now, as many Lefties are either outright socialists or are very sympathetic to it and talk endlessly about Eurpoean style socialism and its benefits. Repeating it is not going to give it more power. We need something trenchant and shocking, like Newt's calling O's budget a "jobs-killer". Not thats power.
ATTACK OF THE JOB KILLERS!!!
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at February 28, 2009 07:30 AM (MEMCX)
That "Greek fellers" bit was intended as a joke
Yes, I know, and as an NYU alum I am mortified.
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at February 28, 2009 07:36 AM (MEMCX)
Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2009 07:37 AM (P1JmH)
Posted by: rockmom at February 28, 2009 07:38 AM (xOEA9)
It seems to me that the charge of racism has not lost it's power. Just look how Republicans are painted as racists for not believing in Dem programs.
Against Affirmative Action: You must be a racist. Never mind that the notion of preference base on the color of one's skin is, in fact, racist. Republicans are in favor of doing away with this because they hate black people.
School Choice: You are a racist because you are merely trying to take money away from public (read inner city) schools. Never mind that the public schools of the inner city (dominated by Dems) have failed children for going on two generations now. Republicans just hate black people and are trying to leave them uneducated.
We could go on and on, building a list and talking about why black people do not vote for republicans. The fact of the matter is, Republicans have been branded as racists, and the label has stuck. Doesn't seem to be a weak charge to me.
Posted by: sears poncho at February 28, 2009 07:40 AM (uj/0b)
It would be nice if we could all be on the same page and the same point all the time:
LIBERALISM KILLS JOBS
OBAMA = PRESIDENT JOB KILLER
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at February 28, 2009 07:42 AM (MEMCX)
ultimately, this is a problem with our culture
I know, I hate to even got there. I think it is a crisis of faith, as Pope JPII said a very long time ago.
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at February 28, 2009 07:45 AM (MEMCX)
Posted by: eman at February 28, 2009 07:48 AM (Ee8qq)
Posted by: matt foley at February 28, 2009 08:02 AM (f6IGq)
Vic @ 15. Brother. I'm a commie-bater from way back, and won't back down.
gebrauchshund. "Cicero spoke Greek." Probably thought in Greek, too. Classicists call his Latin speeches boring--I'm a piker, so I don't--but he wrote books in Latin that have been lost, and critics at the time (one of whom had him killed, so it was a tough room to work) called his writing style "silver"--which to Romans meant "Greek-like." I get the joke though, and think we should all keep it alive. Do we have Latinists? I love a terse epigram.
Amy P @ 22. Brilliant. Perfection in a colloquial mode. Are you female? "What's your situation?" (a little blog-referential commentary there). Would you lead my Tea Party? That right there is what hits them in the breadbasket. Salud.
Hard to believe anyone would let Bennett into a conservative meeting. He's a "Pastor Dobson" conservative, perfectly willing to use the power of the state to keep portable radios out of the hands of Elvis fans. I'm not making this up. No wonder he doesn't want "socialism" bandied about, since he's one himself.
Posted by: comatus at February 28, 2009 08:02 AM (mtQad)
Stay tuned for an indirect rebuttal by Rush Limbaugh, who (and I) want Obama's socialist policies to fail.
Posted by: Admr. Sebastian B. O. Buniontow VI at February 28, 2009 08:10 AM (NLtVk)
"Amy P @ 22. Brilliant. Perfection in a colloquial mode. Are you female? "What's your situation?" (a little blog-referential commentary there). Would you lead my Tea Party? That right there is what hits them in the breadbasket. Salud."
Thanks! I'm a housewife. I was a journalism/Russian major back in the day and worked two years in Russia in the immediate post-Soviet period. I'm a big P.J. O'Rourke and Florence King fan, so I suppose those are some of my influences.
Posted by: Amy P at February 28, 2009 08:39 AM (n8Z8N)
Posted by: MlR at February 28, 2009 08:46 AM (40F+f)
Posted by: MlR at February 28, 2009 08:50 AM (40F+f)
For Gods sake people the government now owns banks and auto companies. They did not use the term nationalize but is it any difference between what Chavez does and OBama does?
As for socialism, we went that route with FDR.
Posted by: Vic at February 28, 2009 08:53 AM (f6os6)
Posted by: Druid at February 28, 2009 09:00 AM (mdr+B)
Posted by: monkeyfan at February 28, 2009 09:01 AM (cEE8N)
i see his point, it's not classic socialism, but that's not a distinction the average person can make, which is part of our problem, part of the reason we are losing, we have to frame these arguments simply, simple enough for a Union worker to understand (think about 5th grade)
Posted by: shoey at February 28, 2009 09:04 AM (RxUMK)
i see his point, it's not classic socialism
BS, the liberal intelligencia like to make these nifty little distinctions between socialism, fascism, and communism. Since the term was invented by Marx why not use his definition? Because the liberals dont even like the term liberal, much less socialism. Karl Marxs definition for socialism is that intermediate stage between capitalism and communism.
The real definition is built into the word itself. A socialist country is one in which the government provides for the social functions of the people. We have that in more than half the functions and all of the functions in about 40% of the population. Ergo, we are a socialist country.
The government has begun taking private property with the advent of the eco-idiots. They upped the ante in Kelo and now they are taking the means of financing and auto production. Next will be the electric utility industry via their camel nose smart grid. They have already hamstrung the industry with useless regulations.
Posted by: Vic at February 28, 2009 09:20 AM (f6os6)
As for Bennett, what the hell would he know about it?
Posted by: Ken at February 28, 2009 09:37 AM (Gtgrx)
We tried tax and spend in Canada-didn t work.So what does the States do?Spend and tax.I suppose that s the proper way to go Socialist.Medicare is next.I guess you guys are going Communist.
Jiminy Peanut invented stagflation and the ducks are in a row for it this time-on a massive scale.
The Dems projected some polyanna economic growth in about 2 years-just in time for another dose of hope and change.
When we went socialist,we lost 3 major banks and 100,000 jobs in the oilpatch.This was in western Canada,so it didn t matter to the Liberals.You guys could learn from us-what not to do.So far we haven t lost a bank and our Federali government is conservative.God bless Harper.
Posted by: chicocano at February 28, 2009 10:02 AM (P2bg4)
Posted by: joh at February 28, 2009 10:06 AM (1DPb/)
For the children , of course .
Posted by: aubrey at February 28, 2009 10:39 AM (8jWgL)
Bill Bennett's a nice guy and all, but I disagree with him on this. I'm not so sure Barry's administration isn't socialist; hell even Obama propaganda outlet Newsweek said "we're all socialists now." Come to think of it, the Democrats and their ilk got a lot of mileage out of Chimpy McBushitler and assorted namecalling.
Are we going to have to wait until Mr. Transparency forms up an American KGB before we tell people that he cut his teeth on radical politics, anti-Americanism, was mentored by an assortment of pinkos? I think that it will be too late then.
Posted by: trentk269 at February 28, 2009 10:45 AM (i6cFP)
Posted by: Terry at February 28, 2009 11:34 AM (foKte)
Posted by: monkeyfan at February 28, 2009 11:37 AM (cEE8N)
Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2009 12:52 PM (AZGON)
Posted by: Thomas Jackson at February 28, 2009 12:58 PM (0Qynq)
You can debate terms, but there are two things going on here - one is the reckless federal spending on socialist programs in an attempt to buy votes, but the second is the attempting to wrest permanent power and control over everyone by a few of the extreme liberal ruling class.
The second is the one to fear, the first is the means to get there.
The first is evidenced by the expansion of government spending on social programs - that's the socialism piece.
The second is evidenced by funding ACORN and other left-wing constituencies, the backdoor approach to shutting down dissent via talk radio and the freedom of speech of the internet, the environmentalist wacko carbon taxaholics to control, the moving of control of the census from the commerce dept to the chief of staff, the refusal of the house to allow any Republican input, the threats to nationalize the banks (and the buying of stock in banks by the federal government), the threats of tight gun control and Leahy's "fact-finding" investigation into the Bush administration (sounds like the Ministry of Truth in Orwell's 1984) - these are raw and naked attempts to seize power permanently to exact an extreme leftist agenda and deny freedom and personal rights.
I don't care if you call it statism or fascism, jack-booted thug-ism, Orwell-ism or whatever-ism, their intent is the permanent subjugation of the masses to their small group of elitist extremists.
Yes, Orwell's 1984 can really happen and we must stop it before it gets that far.
That is why the conservative agenda must include personal freedom and strict adherance to the consititutional limitations of the federal government.
Posted by: FrankReality at February 28, 2009 01:36 PM (t5/IN)
1. Simply nationalize industry X when you get a big crisis. This is the Chavez/France/Germany/Canada model.
2. Offer 'alternatives' which don't have to compete in the market on price (or chance of failure) which chokes out the private suppliers enough they can be marginalized to finally execute #1.
Posted by: DavidM at February 28, 2009 01:46 PM (ifGKh)
Sears Poncho (#16): Point taken, but we'll never be able to call anything in this country socialist or communist. Simply, those terms won't stick to anything in this country.
You say "socialist," they say you're being an alarmist, pro-business, right-wing crank. You might be right, and so might they (except for the "crank" part) but as far as effecting or opposing policy, it's a wash. You're neutralized, someone else with rank will just say "it's not socialism" on TV and we all go on to the next trillion dollars.
I know -- this is kind of a longhand version of what Ace said (#24).
Posted by: FireHorse at February 28, 2009 01:55 PM (5KNeJ)
Posted by: CoolCzech at February 28, 2009 02:44 PM (iafWn)
This, This, A THOUSAND TIMES THIS!
We have to communicate that socialism doesn't mean "free" healthcare, "free" college, or "free" housing. we have to communicate that socialism means COMPLETE AND TOTAL SUBMISSION TO THE STATE!
Posted by: Infidel at February 28, 2009 03:06 PM (NviqG)
left-wing Democratic catechism
Posted by: davod at February 28, 2009 03:29 PM (GUZAT)
Not too long ago I read a story about the British National Party - a very right wing party in Britain. Apparently it began making some gains in spite of everyone calling them "Fascists" and "Nazis" - the article said that people had become desensitized to those terms and - well once you've neutered your ability to insult anyone with terms like "Fascist" and "Nazi" - what terms are really left to you?
So Bennet has a point here.
Posted by: HondaV65 at February 28, 2009 04:08 PM (9vlDt)
Whether you call it socialism or fascism, either one of those is a *very* short step away from totalitarianism.
The end result's the same in either case.
Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at February 28, 2009 04:29 PM (d4LHu)
The 52% of the electorate needs to learn something that the drill sergeants at Benning ground into us, well, the 26 out of fifty that graduated. "You fuck up, you pay up." The 52% fucked up and elected this clown. Now they get to pay up. And as we learned when we got PT'ed in puddles of our own puke,
Bennett is one of the intellectual too-cool Buckley-wannabes who sat back, tried to "win the war of ideas", and let this shit happen. Fine. Negotiations have failed. Get the diplomats off the deck and get the shock troops warmed up. Look at the fuckers in ranks behind Obama. To them, we're the bad guys and deserve to be on trains to the camps they haven't built yet. Do they think peace in our time is possible? Fuck no. When someone says they want you crushed and defeated, believe them. Bennett and all the other back-East thinker-writer types brought a fucking chess board to a knife fight, and they don't even realize they got stabbed.
Posted by: SGT Dan at February 28, 2009 04:41 PM (YCle4)
Posted by: Harun at February 28, 2009 05:16 PM (l2Pll)
Posted by: Harun at February 28, 2009 05:19 PM (l2Pll)
But something else would be good, I suppose, all things considered.
Posted by: Alana at February 28, 2009 05:22 PM (JE2zV)
It's FASCISM, not "socialism."
FRIGGIN' FASCISM. Google the term--even the LeftOWackies are beginning to use that word when describing the Obama program.
Posted by: dad29 at February 28, 2009 05:34 PM (iP+fs)
... watching first episode...
... good thing all those old white guys who lived through WWII are dead now, for Dear Leader it is a lesson in history on how to seize control.
Posted by: Druid at February 28, 2009 05:41 PM (mdr+B)
A huge chunk of our population does not see any downside to socialism... they just see something free in it for them. "yeah, but I'll get free healthcare!"
Yup. I was arguing with the Obama-bot brother last night, complaining that we are being turned into France, His response? "Well, the French get 10 weeks vacation and a 35 hour work week, free health care, and a fine safety net for the unemployed". In other words, a nation of freeloading bums. When I told him that France's economy is way worse off than ours, he shrugged and said that he'd love 10 weeks off. I afraid that he (and I ) may get a much longer "vacation".....
Posted by: Luca Brasi at February 28, 2009 06:15 PM (mJTYo)
Posted by: monkeyfan at February 28, 2009 06:36 PM (cEE8N)
It's a good thing he has a well-stocked liquor cabinet, I practice socialism by drinking most of when I visit.
Posted by: Luca Brasi at February 28, 2009 06:58 PM (mJTYo)
Posted by: Infidel at February 28, 2009 08:46 PM (NviqG)
Posted by: HULUGU at February 28, 2009 11:21 PM (5e11q)
Posted by: aaabs at March 01, 2009 03:28 AM (6+R+o)
Sorry if I'm not in the mood to quibble over the definition of Socialism. Whatever the textbook definition... this is a fucking disaster.
"A fucking disaster" -- accurate, not politically loaded; works for me.
Posted by: FireHorse at March 01, 2009 03:32 AM (5KNeJ)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 01, 2009 05:46 AM (PQY7w)
Posted by: SGT Dan at March 01, 2009 09:11 AM (YCle4)
This mincing of words is repulsive and, yes, cowardly.
A note about Bennett: since the election, he has been on a mission to sell Obomber to his radio audience. For several weeks, he was calling Obomber a centrist, too "complex" and too "smart" to be a hard core lefty. Of course, everytime Obomber comes up with a new installment of Bringing Socialism to Lower Canada, Bennett has to shut up for a day or two, but then he's right back at it. This is just the latest iteration of his 'Obomber is an ok centrist' message.
My guess is, Bennett's audience has shrunk since November.
Posted by: Les Grossman at March 01, 2009 01:30 PM (Vc/xe)
Of course it is--its classic Euroweenie electoral socialism. See eg Sweden, Britain, Germany, France. Free elections between a socialist and a socialist light party; high unemployment; sluggish economic growth; dependence on the state for everything, except security (for which they depend on us.) Now, that sounds good to a lot of folks in some of the blue states, but its going to scare the sh#t out of everyone else, and rightly so.
Conservatives should use the "S" word at every opportunity, and explain why in a sentence or two why the Sweden model is bad for the US. One of many questions to pose: if we go Sweden, who picks up the Defense a la the former US?
Posted by: Les Grossman at March 01, 2009 01:49 PM (Vc/xe)
Posted by: remy hair at March 01, 2009 04:18 PM (poHFL)
Posted by: 货架 at May 12, 2009 03:44 AM (49N5c)
Posted by: Kasia at July 17, 2009 12:52 AM (RwHhp)
Posted by: Zenerx at October 22, 2009 08:04 AM (H9sPV)
Posted by: coach online at May 03, 2011 08:36 PM (VR5Hj)
62 queries taking 1.0835 seconds, 340 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.