January 31, 2008

Rewind: McCain *Didn't* Say He Wouldn't Sign McCain-Kennedy Comprehensive Piece-of-Shit if President
— Ace

We thought he flip-flopped. He sure seemed to flip-flop from his Meet the Press "Straight Talk" that he would sign an amnesty were it presented to him.

But it's worse than that -- he evaded while sticking to his guns.

Now, when I heard this, I too thought he said he wouldn't vote in favor of his own comprehensive shit were he president.

But listen to what he actually says: He only says he would not vote for it because it wouldn't come to a vote in the first place. He repeatedly refuses to answer the question, even put to him three times by two different questioners, simply asserting that it won't come to a vote.

Via Kausfiles, with a transcript, except that transcript is wrong.

Kausfiles reports McCain as saying "No, it would not" (meaning the bill wouldn't come to his desk) when in fact McCain says "No, I would not" sign it.

But he's right on the actual point, because McCain's "No, I would not" is immediately followed by the claim that he woudn't ever be in that position because it woudn't pass:

No, I would not, because we know what the situation is today. The people want the border secured first. And so to say that that would come to the floor of the Senate -- it won't. We went through various amendments which prevented that ever -- that proposal.

He's still saying he'd sign the fucking thing if it comes to his desk! Fucking still!

So the little bastard is telling us he "gets it" that we want border security first, and he promises to give that to us -- unless 60 Senators pass a version of McCain-Kennedy without border security first, in which case, fuck border security, he's signing it into law.

So his "promise" on "securing the borders" first isn't a promise at all -- it's a prediction only, a prediction that the American people and the Senate will force him to "build the goddamn fence" before he can sign an amnesty bill.

But if that changes -- if we lose more Republican votes in the Senate, which is likely -- and if they present him his bill without that border-security-first, he is telling us: I will sign it, as I have made no promises about my own actions, only predictions about the likely actions of others.

The Lie: McCain's claim that Kennedy-McCain couldn't come to his desk as president is itself a lie.

Some of you may take comfort in the fact that the votes to sustain the filibuster were won somewhat easily. That's deceptive -- before the actual votes, both sides said the votes were too close to call, counting somewhere between 57-62 votes to end the filibuster and vote amnesty into law.

They weren't lying. They weren't saying that for dramatic purposes. There really were that many votes for amnesty.

So how did the amnesty side wind up with merely 43 or 45 votes?

If you don't know this, when the party, or the leadership of the party at least, really, really wants something, and your vote is needed to put it through, you are expected to vote the way the leadership demands. The purpose of "whips" is to whip votes the way the leadership wants them to come down.

They promise you extra campaign money from the party senatorial/congressional campaign funds to overcome voters lost due to your voting against your constituency's wishes. They'll promise money from big donors directed to your campaign to help you, and nice appearances by party bigs to help get out the vote. And they promise future committee assignments and leadership assignments, too -- if you play ball.

And maybe you'll get some tasty earmarks for your district, too.

And if you don't, you're threatened: You won't get any party help. You won't get prize assignments to committees. Your earmarks may be overlooked or simply refused. You'll be on your own.

That's the pressure that's brought to bear on Senators and Congressmen in a big important vote the leadership wants. And on amnesty, the leadership of both parties wanted it.

But if a vote looks like it's going down in flames, all votes are "released." You no longer have to jeopardize your electoral future by voting against your constituency's desires. You are "released" to vote either according to your own beliefs or your best electoral positioning. The latter, of course, is more important.

So there were in fact 57 to 63 or so votes to defeat the filibuster and pass amnesty into law at various times. Only a few key votes actually changed. Only three or four or maybe five Senators actually committed themselves to changing their vote to sustain the filibuster and reject the amnesty bill.

But these three to five senators were critical, as they dropped the votes in favor of amnesty below the crucial 60 vote threshold -- and at that point, and only at that point, were all the other pro-amnesty commitments released to vote according to how their outraged voters were demanding.

And that was when the lopsided vote against amnesty occurred, giving the illusory impression that amnesty was easily defeated.

It wasn't. But for the votes of three or four or five senators, those votes promised to the leadership would not have been released and would have stayed with the amnesty side, and amnesty would have passed by, say, 62-36 or whatever. (Some Senators, like Tim Johnson, were absent; others might have simply not voted.)

Remember how so many senators wouldn't give you an answer on how they were voting when you called their offices? They were not still deciding. They were in fact committed to vote for amnesty if it was close to passing but were reserving the right to vote against it if it wasn't going to pass anyway.

They were lying to you. They knew how they would vote -- they would vote with the winning side, whichever way it went. They just didn't want to tell you that.

So when Maverick McAmnesty tells you there's no way the Comprehensive Piece of Shit could possibly reach his desk again as president, he's flat-out lying to you and he knows it. Merely losing one or two or three anti-amnesty votes in the Senate will give it more than enough votes to pass this time 'round.

And don't forget that a McCain presidency would represent, as many are saying now, the death-knell of the supposed power of talk radio to influence politics. Many of those who voted against amnesty at the last moment did so because they feared what Laura Ingraham and El Rushbo might do to them.

McCain's presidency would be taken as proof that grassroots outrage like that is a spent force, and the voters can be spurned with impunity.

Amnesty was, is, and remains just a few crucial votes away from passage.

Those guys who wouldn't give you a straight answer last time -- like Burr, for example, or Stevens, or Brownback, the guy who thinks voting on amnesty is so nice he had to do it twice, once yes when it might pass, and then no when it had already failed -- didn't suddenly see the light and vote according to constituent wishes.

They were simply released from their commitment to vote for this very unpopular bill when the count showed it was just a few votes shy of passage.

And McCain is telling you the bill couldn't be brought up again.

Right.

Straight Talk, ya'll. Comin' right at ya, but a little sideways and crab-wise sometimes.


Brownback Changing His Vote From Yes To No: Video here at page bottom, in case you'd forgotten.

Yes when it might win, No when it had failed.

And the Senate is filled with bravehearts just like him.

Posted by: Ace at 04:46 PM | Comments (73)
Post contains 1324 words, total size 8 kb.

1 Are you surprised?  I knew McCain has consistently been a liar and people refuse to see the facts about McCain's record.

Posted by: Kaitian at January 31, 2008 04:50 PM (S5mm4)

2 Also supporting conservative ideals is only useful to McCain when it suits him but it doesn't mold his thinkings.

Posted by: Kaitian at January 31, 2008 04:51 PM (S5mm4)

3 Giving weasels a bad name.
Bad name.

Posted by: mbruce at January 31, 2008 04:53 PM (CxNJy)

4
It's so rare for these clowns to be asked pertinent  questions and on rare occasions when it is done, they weasel out of it. I guess that is an answer. Hello, President Obama!

Posted by: dlm at January 31, 2008 04:55 PM (wxBdh)

5 This reminds me of how Romney has stated about the gun control issues which it's no different from McCain on this issue right now.  Romney stated if the Congress works out a gun-control Amendment, he'll sign it but he knows Congress won't pass one anyways.  However Romney's honest about saying that point whereas Juan McCain isn't on the immigration issue.  He's trying to fool people into thinking "Oh this guy isn't really for amnesty."

Posted by: Kaitian at January 31, 2008 04:55 PM (S5mm4)

6 Totally off topic...

The Berkeley city council is teaming up with Code Pink to harrass the Marines. What a bunch of thuggish jerks.


Posted by: sandy burger at January 31, 2008 04:56 PM (K2rlS)

7 Yup, that about sums it up Ace.  He would still sign it today, tomorrow, whenever.

Posted by: CDR M at January 31, 2008 04:57 PM (TJoU6)

8 Sure, he'll sign a bill like that, but not the same bill because it won't be back. So technically he won't sign that bill.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at January 31, 2008 05:05 PM (hfyfI)

9

You have to give a little credit to McCain for at least one thing - he's got balls and he'll stick to his principles no matter the crap he gets for it. That was great on Iraq, but not so great for other issues. Sometimes his principles are poorly thought out or just wrong. But will he change his mind or compromise? Hell no.


I guess the question is whether he's right on more things than Hillary would be.


Posted by: Maetenloch at January 31, 2008 05:06 PM (HHAbw)

10 No kiddin, Ace.

The guy is an ass. He deserves to be bashed on. I won't vote him.

Posted by: LiveFreeOrDie at January 31, 2008 05:07 PM (/qt4o)

11 Talking about shamnesty, I'm watching the Democrat debate, and it's hilarious how Clinton and Obama avoid using the word illegal. They've uttered the word undocumented about 20 times each already. Pathetic. Liberals love their semantic games, don't they?

Posted by: Michael Laurence at January 31, 2008 05:13 PM (M0QEs)

12 With Obama's indicted mentor being Syrian born, and tied to illegal Iraqi payoffs, I would vote for a dead dog over him in the general.

Syrian born!!!
WTF?!

I had no idea until today how deeply Obama is tied to the scum of the Middle East.

So, McCain, I will go with you to the big dance.
Sigh.

Posted by: Stormy70 at January 31, 2008 05:14 PM (Y+o71)

13

You have to give a little credit to McCain for at least one thing - he's got balls and he'll stick to his principles no matter the crap he gets for it. That was great on Iraq, but not so great for other issues. Sometimes his principles are poorly thought out or just wrong.


No he just evaded the question so as to satisfy everyone that does not take balls. Yes I would vote for it again becouse I think it is a good bill  - now that would qualify


Posted by: ntac at January 31, 2008 05:20 PM (plhic)

14

Over the last 8 years, McCain has made it perfectly clear where he stands.  Although the news is interesting, it's not likely to change the mind of anyone who pays attention to politics.


So, for conservatives who pay attention and are not single issue voters on War in the ME, McCain = teh suxxors.  For the ignorant "I'm a Republican" types, I guess he's just fine and dandy as he has an R after his name and the best name recognition at this time.


I felt there was little to say over the past week or so and that we were waiting on Florida.  I feel the same way now in regard to Super Tuesday.  If, as expected, McCain all but wraps up the nomination, things are looking bleak for this election.


Posted by: Hermit Dave at January 31, 2008 05:21 PM (Tk5HT)

15

McCain sucks plain and simple he has been right exactly one time in recent memory. Well congratulations Senator you stumbled on the right side of an issue for once however did you explain it to all your leftist friends.  Now lets rally around Mitt and defeat this smarmy smirky jagoff  


Posted by: ntac at January 31, 2008 05:26 PM (plhic)

16 >>He's still saying he'd sign the fucking thing if it comes to his desk! Fucking still!

Seriously, are some of you still confused? He has been ass fucking conservatives for years. He lies and fucks over his supposed friends. He is worse than any Democrat, he is that supposed friend who never tires from stabbing you in the back. This is news?

I have been saying all along, Romney is my first choice but I would have voted for Fred and grudgingly for Rudy. I would never vote for McCain and I am amazed how many supposed conservatives are willing to line up and vote for Lieberman with a nasty streak. Not me. Ever.

Posted by: JackStraw at January 31, 2008 05:31 PM (t+mja)

17 now I don't want to start any rumors but I heard that McCain's mom is endorsing Mitt so catch the wave

Posted by: ntac at January 31, 2008 05:32 PM (plhic)

18 One thing I will say in Bush's favor: you don't have to bring in a squad of semioticists to dissect what he says. Dubya says what he means and means what he says, clear and plain-spoken. I thought we were done with the dissection of presidential statements once Billy Jeff left office, but it looks like Mister Straight-Talk could give Bubba lessons in slippery denial.

Just one more reason why Dubya is going to missed once he leaves office.

Posted by: Brown Line at January 31, 2008 05:34 PM (Efe/j)

19 Straight to hell express.

Posted by: Ostral-B Heretic at January 31, 2008 05:37 PM (+P4HU)

20 Really need to thank Ace and all the other conservative bloggers for getting this isssue and all the others out front.

Posted by: Hongqi at January 31, 2008 05:38 PM (+WuMm)

21 Uhmmmm,,,,,,Duh.




McCain is a piece of garbage.


Posted by: Kasper Hauser at January 31, 2008 05:41 PM (kX107)

22

No he just evaded the question so as to satisfy everyone that does not take balls. Yes I would vote for it again becouse I think it is a good bill  - now that would qualify


Any normal, reasonable politician would have realized by now that amnesty is anathema to most republicans. But McCain just grits his teeth and plows ahead anyway. He doesn't throw in the base's face, but he doesn't back off either. Sure he's being weasely in his wording here - he is a senator after all - but he could have just told a big fat comforting lie like Bill Clinton and he didn't.


His perseverance/determination in the face of opposition is both his greatest virtue and vice. It probably got him through his years as a POW, but it also makes him deeply unpopular with the GOP base.


Posted by: Maetenloch at January 31, 2008 05:41 PM (HHAbw)

23 Now remember - this is the same politician (read politician and not hero) who hired a dual-citizenship, Canada/USA/Mexico-is-a-bloc-US-not-one-nation, open-borders, special privilege for his particular "race," Hispanic outreach director named Juan Hernandez as one of his advisers; the same politician who says he's changed his open-border amnesty stripes but who has said he remains unaware of the positions held by said outreach director. I suppose Hernandez is advising color palettes and fabric swatches. The same politician who will advocate building "the goddamn fence"... if we really want it (condescending, bigotry-charged tone included for free because, well, he cares and loves you, my friends).

From Malkin:

"Your Hispanic Outreach Campaign Advisor [sic], Juan Hernandez, has written a book referring to illegal immigrants as 'New American Pioneers.' Hernandez has also stated that illegal immigrants who use social security numbers of American citizens really don’t steal, they have no choice but to make up a number. Are you aware of his statements? Do you agree with him? If not would you consider removing him from your staff?"

"John McCain answered that he supported Juan Hernandez because he holds the same views as he (McCain) on other issues. He says that he determines his positions and Hernandez agrees with him, not the other way around. He appeared to be unaware of the specific positions of Hernandez that I related."

Um, yeah. Straight Talk, Baybee! Catch it while you can!

He's a politician. Turns out, he has been for some time. Who knew? I mean, never let that fact get in the way of his life story. And now we know he's a lying politician. Seems redundant by nature and job definition, but usually it's less egregious. Maybe he's been consulting with the Clintons since he seems to hold them in such high regard this season.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 31, 2008 05:47 PM (Y0gTb)

24 Yeah, we have no room for his perserverance/determination to destroy real conservative values.

The POW thing can only work so long. I have known a lot of soldiers who were very heroic but...would not vote them to be President.

Posted by: Hongqi at January 31, 2008 05:51 PM (+WuMm)

25

Of course he would vote for it.  He wrote it. But that isn't the point.  Is there anything he has said that would lead anyone to believe that he won't go with amnesty and no border controls once he has all the damn racist conservatives out of his way?


We know who he is.  He seldom gives an inch.  If we go in for this, lets not do it pretending he is more conservative than he used to be. 


All my life the Republicans have been putting up guys like Nixon, Ford, Dole, GW, W, McCain.  They are next in line.  It has never really been about ideas except Reagan. And those were in SPITE of the party, not because of it. They just figured it was his turn.  


Gingrich seemed to grab hold of the wave, but once Ronnie left, well, they just settled in to the same old DC grind. Earmarks, Entitlements, Lobbyists and Graft. 


 


Posted by: PHenry at January 31, 2008 05:56 PM (ZCpnr)

26 Don't believe Ace!!!!111!!!!

A Senator would never change his vote on immigration.

Unless he were running for President of something.

Posted by: Sam Brownback at January 31, 2008 05:59 PM (hlYel)

27 Ace, stop making sense. It's depressing.

Posted by: h2u at January 31, 2008 06:02 PM (ajrfk)

28

I wish, no, I pray everyday that that hideous growth on the side of his face spreads throughout his Jiminy Cricketed body and he dies prior to November. At which time I will piss on his grave.


 


Posted by: RighTurn at January 31, 2008 06:11 PM (X7Ey1)

29

OK, everyone who has read any of my posts know I think McRhino is a bag of shit. A steaming bag of shit.


Having said that, I think we do not do ourselves any service by not proposing some solution to the open borders. 


A quick review. 


Perfect capitalism requires no cost for transportation, no cost for transfers of capital or LABOR, and perfect knowledge.  To reach a pure capitalist state we need to move toward those goals.  Some are not possible, no transportation cost and perfect knowledge


OK, got that, Econ 101, Wealth of Nations.


So an open border, without subsidies actually supports a capitalist economy, by reducing labor costs. 


We already have a pretty free market for capital. 


I will not preach, too much.


My family has been here since 1640.  My great great, etc grandfather paid for a boat trip as an indentured servent for SEVEN years.  No free ride here.


Think we could go back to the "good ole days"?  Let ANYONE come here, with no citizenship rights until they paid for the trip and spoke English.


I am such an idealist.


Kemp


 


Posted by: kempermanx at January 31, 2008 06:11 PM (iLWmI)

30 I really, really, really, really, really don't like McCain.

Posted by: Z as in Jersey at January 31, 2008 06:13 PM (RiRew)

31 He only says he would not vote for it because it wouldn't come to a vote in the first place.

.
I was neither amazed nor surprised when I first heard the audio snippet. What slays me is the thought of McCain becoming the presumptive nominee after Super Tuesday ... and then we've got TEN more months to go...

Posted by: X_LA_Native at January 31, 2008 06:14 PM (4cWxS)

32

Yesterday I received a bunch of emails from the McCain camp. One of them said "Thank you, Florida" I replied back and told them not to thank me, "I voted for Romney."


Today I received an email asking me to make sure to get out and vote, tomorrow, in the Florida primary.


Is his staff becoming old and senile as well?


Posted by: jmflynny at January 31, 2008 06:16 PM (l25Zd)

33 RightTurn,

Death-wishes are ugly and make you sound pathetic.



Posted by: ace at January 31, 2008 06:16 PM (SXBHu)

34 >>>What slays me is the thought of McCain becoming the presumptive nominee
after Super Tuesday ... and then we've got TEN more months to go...

Well, you wont' see much of him in ads.  Since he's accepted matching funds, he's got a cap on how much he can spend, and he's spent most of that.  He'll be out of cash by the end of the primary season and will have to wait until August-September for the party convention before he can spend more raised money.

Which puts him in the same position Bob Dole was in, when Bill Clinton ran ads against him all spring and summer, weakening him to almost nothing before he even formally received the nomination.



Posted by: ace at January 31, 2008 06:18 PM (SXBHu)

35

Death-wishes are ugly and make you sound pathetic.


I appologize to the collective.


 


I really, really, really, really, really, dislike McCain.



 


Posted by: RighTurn at January 31, 2008 06:19 PM (X7Ey1)

36 Three words: record low turnout.

Posted by: Ostral-B Heretic at January 31, 2008 06:22 PM (+P4HU)

37 That stubbornness that got McCain through all those years in the Hanoi Hilton is fully on display. He'll lie over and over about his record regardless of how many people point out the truth. If he's the nominee, I'm sitting this one out.

Posted by: Banjo at January 31, 2008 06:23 PM (1DQ52)

38 I wish, no, I pray everyday that that hideous growth on the side of his
face spreads throughout his Jiminy Cricketed body and he dies prior to
November. At which time I will piss on his grave.


In that same spirit, I sincerely hope that one day you are set upon and devoured by swine.

Seriously, dude...wishes for his death?  Sub-moronic.

Posted by: Slublog at January 31, 2008 06:23 PM (icHSw)

39 apparently, "Brownback" is an adjective as well....

Posted by: Frank G at January 31, 2008 06:35 PM (Ydps9)

40 Which puts him in the same position Bob Dole was in, when Bill Clinton
ran ads against him all spring and summer, weakening him to almost
nothing before he even formally received the nomination.

.
Even better!
Oy.
/sarc
<bangs head on desk>

Posted by: X_LA_Native at January 31, 2008 06:42 PM (4cWxS)

41 McAmnesty has been  fanatical open borders advocate in spite of the amount of shit he has received for it over the years.  He cannot be trusted on immigration.  Not now.  Not evah! 

When the time for his signature to be put on whatever ludicrous bill Ted Kennedy cooks up, he will make some lame excuse about how he must sign "comprehensive" immigration reform for the good of the American people and how he must do so without delay.

McCain is a man whose political sensibilities are shaped less by his years as a Vietnam POW than by his decades as a Beltway elite and Arizona plutocrat.

Posted by: Mike Z. at January 31, 2008 06:43 PM (GLMrI)

42 Actually I wish McCain many more happy years afer he loses the nomination

Posted by: ntac at January 31, 2008 06:44 PM (plhic)

43 Since he's accepted matching funds, he's got a cap on how much he can spend, and he's spent most of that.

Shit, I forgot about that.

Perfect, the Republicans are going to nominate the one national figure they have who can't beat Hillary and when he decides to blame that on the money she raised, he'll start looking for ways to restrict the 1st Amendment even more.

How long until after he goes down in flames until he proposes mandatory public financing of presidential campaigns?

Posted by: DrewM. at January 31, 2008 07:07 PM (hlYel)

44

If we have ten months of McCain going underground, maybe we can start a ground-swell of support for a write-in candidate. An "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore" candidate. Any nominations?


Different topic. One of the highlights of McCain/Kennedy was no penalty for an illegal immigrant that stole a social security number and therefore an identity. Say good-bye to the equal protection clause.


Posted by: elliott m at January 31, 2008 07:09 PM (xj5FC)

45 If we banned senators from running for higher office until six years after they left the Senate, we could improve the quality of both the legislature and the corps of Presidential candidates.

Posted by: Oscar Jr. at January 31, 2008 08:31 PM (AdJL5)

46

I think you guys are dead wrong on comprehensive reform and I still wouldn't vote for this guy. So I guess there's no reason to try to convonce you your "damn wall" is silly.*


*Expecting a wall to do more than slow illegals is silly. It's not a bad idea to put up some barriers. It is, how ever, an expensive idea unless we can get some cheap labor to build it!


Posted by: spongeworthy at February 01, 2008 06:43 AM (a00go)

47

John McCain's POTUS campaign will get on the national ticket one way or another, either way being politically equivalent as his presidency would prove.


His #1 preference is as is: RINO on the upcoming "GOP" RINOP ticket.


Failing that, then McCain perpetuates his now or never candidacy as an Independent.


McCain will destroy the GOP officially, just as Hillary will destroy the Democrat party structure's stability should she be snubbed if Obama wins the preferential vote. McCain and the Clintons share too much in common, including the mentality of murderous spouses, "if I can't have you, no one can!"


So if Hillary fails her effort should Obama get the Democrat nomination, the Uniparty Independent ticket will feature McCain/Hillary.


The Clintons have burnt any/every bridge between Hillary and Obama while buttressing every tie with McCain.


Whereas Hillary would not VP for Obama, she would for McCain rather than lose all together. Returning to her NY Senatorial seat may be more humiliating for her than the very real prospect of a world triumph alongside McCain, ever the POW who broke under torture.


No one would ever have held anything against McCain for breaking under torture until he insisted on proving his permanently twisted psyche by his perpetually destructive nature and behavior.


McCain is not going to VP for anyone. He will have his way or no way. And if McCain goes down, he will make certain to take the ship down with him.


Posted by: maverick muse at February 01, 2008 07:28 AM (ODnqn)

48 bmyf saitbf tkuwaxo iwymena uzmy szbq tfjh

Posted by: xrai mhnxecsjo at March 06, 2008 10:55 AM (xVybs)

49 Useful site. Thanks!!!

Posted by: detergent at April 30, 2008 04:07 PM (/BC/7)

50 dzrkq

Posted by: limewire at May 13, 2008 10:33 PM (cb/48)

51 temzk zmpodf ocrsi

Posted by: brite at May 14, 2008 01:35 AM (jqJPr)

52 vojxqsl zlerx jnkt

Posted by: brite at May 14, 2008 02:10 AM (IVwtn)

53 cjns falmyw

Posted by: brite at May 14, 2008 04:58 AM (iV1rw)

54 wcgehfi

Posted by: coumadin at May 15, 2008 11:43 PM (rkqzW)

55 pjygma nxlw qzybuh fcoa

Posted by: the kristen archives at May 16, 2008 08:07 AM (BysN2)

56 vpgw xlco hkmijb qfawsub

Posted by: breast at May 19, 2008 08:50 AM (73OYW)

57 guvah rzpoya tjivhmz

Posted by: breast at May 19, 2008 10:52 AM (73OYW)

58 mofhdin crhe rphnmc hlvykgn

Posted by: naruto at May 20, 2008 02:57 AM (XShpH)

59 xwrgco

Posted by: clomid at May 21, 2008 11:06 PM (iYOUx)

60 jsixvrb vecxz tzndea dcixsh

Posted by: limewire at May 22, 2008 04:04 AM (bNE+a)

61 qtiamc kudcbfl

Posted by: lamictal at May 24, 2008 06:13 AM (+o3rf)

62 nmwk xnejpv gnvorpk rpudxv

Posted by: casinos at May 29, 2008 02:11 PM (yZJga)

63 hxst vourgh luaoj

Posted by: viagra at June 01, 2008 08:26 AM (pVLHO)

64 aquoxey kajeyw yhnxv

Posted by: accutane at June 08, 2008 11:48 AM (wRSYs)

65 nyli xhuelb fymicle

Posted by: puberty at June 16, 2008 08:24 AM (Qm39K)

66 yplm lpaxn ypnjvx ysimql

Posted by: limewire at July 06, 2008 09:23 PM (i7ZBu)

67 mnlqcg tsfe nrmfeg beucdql

Posted by: bbs at July 21, 2008 04:31 PM (OytB4)

68 jhnx libtwuz ahlidw glsyo

Posted by: ford at July 23, 2008 07:14 AM (+nKgd)

69 pynf hcsqdk

Posted by: porn at July 26, 2008 01:15 AM (VqjPK)

70 DVD burner for Mac provides an easy and fast way to convert popular video formats (including AVI, MPEG, WMV, DivX, XviD, MP4, DV, VOB, ASF, 3GP, NUT, YUV, H.264/AVC, M4V files to DVD. The DVD Burner Mac could also burn DVD movie onto DVD disk that playable on portable or home DVD player and burn DVD folder or ISO files. No other Mac DVD burner can provide so many formats. DivX to DVD Converter for Mac can not only convert DivX to DVD Mac, but also support convert AVI to DVD, 3GP to DVD, MP4 to DVD, FLV to DVD, MPEG to DVD, WMV to DVD, etc. The DivX to DVD Converter Mac developed only for Mac OS (include Mac OS X 10.5 leopard) burning users. The DivX to DVD converter for Mac can convert all formats like MP4, M4V, MPA, MPG, MPEG, MOV,3GP, 3GP2, FLV, MOV,VOB, DAT, TS, TP, TRP, M2TS, DivX, DivX to DVD on Mac OS. AVI to DVD for Mac, a profeesional but easy-to-use DVD burn software for Mac users, can convert AVI to DVD format on Mac OS X perfectly and quickly. The AVI to DVD Mac not only supports converting AVI to DVD Mac but also supports other popular formats to DVD on Mac, such as MPA, ASF, DIF, H261, YUV, NUT and so on.With the AVI to DVD Mac, you can easily convert and burn AVI files to your DVD and play it on portable or home DVD player.

Posted by: rtyu at November 26, 2008 11:06 PM (53V9W)

71 Hi all. Nothing is so good for an ignorant man as silence; and if he was sensible of this he would not be ignorant. I am from Somalia and learning to speak English, give please true I wrote the following sentence: "Buy comforters found at fine hotels worldwide free shipping california king comforter sets com." Thanks :-(. Ahren.

Posted by: Ahren at July 16, 2009 07:23 AM (RwHhp)

72

Links of London silver is releasing new products which are of elegant shape and fashionable pattern.

Posted by: Michael at December 29, 2009 08:15 PM (1SZBI)

73 iPad to Mac Transfer is a professional mac software, designed for iPad users, aims to make it is easy for iPad users to transfer iPad to mac in a fairly easy and fluent way. iPad to Mac Transfer enable users to transfer various files on iPad to mac, including images, videos, audios, playlists, etc. Just by dragging and dropping, you can transfer iPad to mac yourself.

Posted by: ipad to mac transfer at November 02, 2010 06:31 AM (aqdkZ)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
119kb generated in CPU 0.33, elapsed 2.3292 seconds.
62 queries taking 2.1203 seconds, 309 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.