News Bush NOT Honest & Trustworthy/Republican Lies

  • Thread starter Thread starter SOS2008
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around significant events and controversies from the Bush administration, particularly in the context of Hurricane Katrina, the Terri Schiavo case, the CIA leak investigation, and the Iraq War. President Bush's statements regarding the levee breaches during Hurricane Katrina were criticized as misleading, as were comments from Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff about the storm's impact. The Terri Schiavo case became a focal point for debates on life and death, with political figures weighing in on the family's legal struggles. The CIA leak investigation led to the indictment of Scooter Libby and raised questions about the involvement of other White House officials, including Karl Rove.The U.S. military death toll in Iraq surpassed 2,000, prompting discussions about the validity of the intelligence that led to the war, which Bush later admitted was flawed. Criticism of the administration intensified, with figures like Harry Belafonte comparing Homeland Security to the Gestapo, sparking debates about civil liberties and government overreach.
  • #121
edward said:
And yet Cheny only just now, at the end of his "I pulled the trigger" confession to FOX news, revealed that he had been given the authority by executive order to pretty much do as he dam well pleases when he dam well pleases.

This includes doing what he dam well pleases with classified documents and outing CIA operatives to protect a lie.

Why the hell didn't he just say so in 2003? Because he couldn't have gotten away with it in 2003. It might have spoiled his little foray into Iraq that turned into a permanent occupation of that country.

Everything about this administration has been a secretive conspiracy to defraud the American people, yet a great portion of the American people bought into it. This administration has managed through their devious methods to fool enough of the people enough of the time to get away with anything.

I am going to sign off now I am suffering from an extreme chocolate deficiency.
The only catch -- you may recall the big deal about documents requested in regard to Plame's classification status. According to the documents, she was still considered covert (not declassified). Why would "superiors" give Libby approval to leak this information without having their ducks in a row? Maybe it was a bungle--that's completely possible. Maybe after years of observation, and being an intelligent man, Libby knew to keep some CYA insurance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #122
Video shows Bush got explicit Katrina warning
President, Chertoff clearly told of storm’s dangers numerous times

BREAKING NEWS
Associated Press
Updated: 6:52 p.m. ET March 1, 2006

WASHINGTON - In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, put lives at risk in New Orleans’ Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage.

Bush didn’t ask a single question during the final briefing before Katrina struck on Aug. 29, but he assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: “We are fully prepared.”

The footage — along with seven days of transcripts of briefings obtained by The Associated Press — show in excruciating detail that while federal officials anticipated the tragedy that unfolded in New Orleans and elsewhere along the Gulf Coast, they were fatally slow to realize they had not mustered enough resources to deal with the unprecedented disaster.

...“I’m concerned about ... their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe,” Brown told his bosses the afternoon before Katrina made landfall.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11627394/

Video included as evidence of Bush's complete advanced knowledge--and Brownie was thrown under the buss (Ooops, who did we give a Medal of Freedom to?).

WMD? Well that was faulty intelligence. A leak of a CIA operative? Not from my administration. Abramoff? Never met him. DP World port deal? Didn't know about it. That sucking sound you hear is Bush going down.
 
Last edited:
  • #123
Video included as evidence of Bush's complete advanced knowledge--and Brownie was thrown under the buss (Ooops, who did we give a Medal of Freedom to?).
Seriously, I can't say I'm surprised. In September, Bush said, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4204754.stm" . Obviously, that was a flat-out lie. There is no possible way that the video and the September statement can be reconciled with each other. (Unless you think that he managed to "forget" something that happened a couple days earlier.) IMO, anyone who continues to defend Bush is either seriously deluded or frankly, pretty stupid.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #124
Manchot said:
...IMO, anyone who continues to defend Bush is either seriously deluded or frankly, pretty stupid.
...or doesn't think it's such a terrible thing to tell lies (like this one).
 
  • #125
It is, in general, only Christians who defend Bush; in particular those Christians who are moral analphabets.
 
  • #126
Gokul43201 said:
...or doesn't think it's such a terrible thing to tell lies (like this one).
I could see someone forgiving white lies. But when there is such a pervasive pattern of serious ones, and they happen on a daily basis, I can't see how it could be forgiven. It seems to me that they often do it for little to no benefit. I truly believe that if the Bush administration was a person, they would be diagnosed as a pathological liar.
 
  • #127
Manchot said:
I could see someone forgiving white lies. But when there is such a pervasive pattern of serious ones, and they happen on a daily basis, I can't see how it could be forgiven. It seems to me that they often do it for little to no benefit. I truly believe that if the Bush administration was a person, they would be diagnosed as a pathological liar.
My exact sentiments.
 
  • #128
Actually, although I had intial reservations when he was first elected, I felt an immense admiration for George Bush and his team in how they handled the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 tragedy. My admiration for that particular handling has not diminished at all over the years past, but that cannot excuse what has happened in later years.
 
  • #129
arildno said:
Actually, although I had intial reservations when he was first elected, I felt an immense admiration for George Bush and his team in how they handled the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 tragedy. My admiration for that particular handling has not diminished at all over the years past, but that cannot excuse what has happened in later years.
The question is asked why BushCo has operated like clock work in some circumstances, particularly earlier in the administration, yet so poorly at other times. IMO they planned for activities within their agenda--activities of benefit, but their true ineptitude shows when something unforeseen occurs. And as time has passed and the scandals have mounted they are becoming overwhelmed.

Also Bush has surrounded himself with "Yes Men" so doesn't always get the bad news. Bush is known to dislike details, but it is all in the details. He should have paid more attention to the briefing on Katrina, been more engaged, asked questions, etc. But he didn't--that's not his bag baby.

But as with all the investigations the Republicans have stonewalled, the facts are getting out.
 
Last edited:
  • #130
Campaigning for the 2006 elections has begun!

Let's see where we are:

Katherine Harris Caught Up in Bribery Scandal
Campaign Donations From Defense Contractor Under Scrutiny
By MITCH STACY, AP
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060303035709990014

DeLay, Ney, Burns, Linked to Abramoff -

"Lobbyist's Credit Card Bill Outs DeLay Trip"
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=1679189&page=1

"Republicans Turn on Santorum"
By David Holman
Published 3/3/2006 12:08:26 AM
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=9482

"Most Americans Now Disapprove of Bush's Handling of Terrorism, Poll Shows"
March 3 (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/economy/politics.html

Also:
From the Fox News poll:
- 39 percent of Americans approve of the job Bush is doing, only the second time Bush has fallen below 40 percent in Fox polling.

- 81 percent believe Iraq is likely to end up in a civil war.

- 69 percent oppose allowing Dubai Ports World to manage U.S. ports.
Hmm... I wonder how things are going with the investigation of Frist's sale of stock.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #131
Thanks for the summary SOS. It is getting hard to keep track of all the lies, deceits, and outright crimes being committed.
 
  • #132
  • #133
Yet another member of Bush's staff in trouble with the law.

Claude Allen was apprehended by a Target employee in January, resigned his post as White House domestic policy advisor in February, and was formally charged with theft on March 9.

Doesn't anyone check these people out before they're appointed? Claude Allen was Virginia's Secretary of Health and Human Services under George Allen and was originally appointed by Bush as a deputy to US HHS Tommy Thompson, and was nominated by Bush as a judge in the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals.

Claude Allen's resignation was a blow to Focus on the Family, as well. Allen was a stalwart champion of family values - at least until he turned to crime. :smile:
 
  • #134
Egads, No! LOL , when will it stop.
 
  • #135
There are so many nasty issues with the Administration it boggles what is left of my mind. My favorite news headline was:
"Bush Administration creates Free Fraud Zone in Iraq"
 
  • #136
arildno said:
It is, in general, only Christians who defend Bush; in particular those Christians who are moral analphabets.
Careful. There are people who defend Bush and call themselves Christian. I could call myself a Martian, but it doesn't make me one.
 
  • #137
:smile: :smile: :smile: :smile:

Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy
by Bruce Bartlett, a conservative from the very conservative Cato Institute

FROM THE PUBLISHER
George W. Bush came to the presidency in 2000 claiming to be the heir of Ronald Reagan. But while he did cut taxes, in most other respects he has governed in a way utterly unlike his revered predecessor, expanding the size and scope of government, letting immigration go unchecked, and allowing the federal budget to mushroom out of control.

Despite their strong misgivings, most conservatives remained silent during Bush's first term. But a series of missteps and scandals, culminating in the ill-conceived nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, has brought this hidden rift within the conservative movement crashing to the surface.

Now, in what is sure to be the political book of the season, Bruce Bartlett lays bare the incompetence and profligacy of Bush's economic policies. A highly respected Washington economist--and true-believing Reaganite--Bartlett started out as a supporter of Bush and helped him craft his tax cuts. But he was dismayed by the way they were executed. Reagan combined his tax cuts with fiscal restraint, but Bush has done the opposite. Bartlett thus reluctantly concluded that Bush is not a Reaganite at all, but an unprincipled opportunist who will do whatever he or his advisers think is expedient to buy votes.

In this sober, thorough, and utterly devastating book, Bartlett attacks the Bush Administration's economic performance root and branch, from the "stovepiping" of its policy process to the coercive tactics used to ram its policies through Congress, to the effects of the policies themselves. He is especially hard on Bush's enormous new Medicare entitlement...and predicts that within a few years, Bush's tax cuts and unrestricted spending will produce an economic crisis that will require a major tax increase, probably in the form of a European-style VAT.

Bartlett has surprisingly kind words for Bill Clinton, whose record on the budget was far better than Bush's. Whatever else one may think of him, Bartlett argues, Clinton cut spending, abolished a federal entitlement program, and left a budget surplus. By contrast, Bush has increased spending, created a massive entitlement program, and produced the biggest deficits in American history. :smile:

In fact, Bartlett concludes, Bush is less like Reagan than like Nixon: an arch-conservative Republican, bitterly hated by liberals, who vainly tried to woo moderates by enacting big parts of the liberal program. It didn't work then, and it won't work now--and may have similar harmful effects for the GOP.
Well, isn't this something! Amazing, but some people do eventually come around to reality - it just takes several years. :biggrin:
 
  • #138
Paul Krugman, a columnist for the NYTimes and a strong critic of presidential malfeasance, has an amusing commentary on Bartlett's book - The Conservative Epiphany, March 10, 2006, NYTimes.

Bruce Bartlett, the author of "Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy," is an angry man. At a recent book forum at the Cato Institute, he declared that the Bush administration is "unconscionable," "irresponsible," "vindictive" and "inept."

It's no wonder, then, that one commentator wrote of Mr. Bartlett that "if he were a cartoon character, he would probably look like Donald Duck during one of his famous tirades, with steam pouring out of his ears."

Oh, wait. That's not what somebody wrote about Mr. Bartlett. It's what Mr. Bartlett wrote about me in September 2003, when I was saying pretty much what he's saying now.

Human nature being what it is, I don't expect Mr. Bartlett to acknowledge his about-face. Nor do I expect any expressions of remorse from Andrew Sullivan, the conservative Time.com blogger who also spoke at the Cato forum. Mr. Sullivan used to specialize in denouncing the patriotism and character of anyone who dared to criticize President Bush, whom he lionized. Now he himself has become a critic, not just of Mr. Bush's policies, but of his personal qualities, too.

Never mind; better late than never. We should welcome the recent epiphanies by conservative commentators who have finally realized that the Bush administration isn't trustworthy. But we should guard against a conventional wisdom that seems to be taking hold in some quarters, which says there's something praiseworthy about having initially been taken in by Mr. Bush's deceptions, even though the administration's mendacity was obvious from the beginning.

According to this view, if you're a former Bush supporter who now says, as Mr. Bartlett did at the Cato event, that "the administration lies about budget numbers," you're a brave truth-teller. But if you've been saying that since the early days of the Bush administration, you were unpleasantly shrill.

Similarly, if you're a former worshipful admirer of George W. Bush who now says, as Mr. Sullivan did at Cato, that "the people in this administration have no principles," you're taking a courageous stand. If you said the same thing back when Mr. Bush had an 80 percent approval rating, you were blinded by Bush-hatred.

And if you're a former hawk who now concedes that the administration exaggerated the threat from Iraq, you're to be applauded for your open-mindedness. But if you warned three years ago that the administration was hyping the case for war, you were a conspiracy theorist.

The truth is that everything the new wave of Bush critics has to say was obvious long ago to any commentator who was willing to look at the facts.

Mr. Bartlett's book is mainly a critique of the Bush administration's fiscal policy. Well, the administration's pattern of fiscal dishonesty and irresponsibility was clear right from the start to anyone who understands budget arithmetic. The chicanery that took place during the selling of the 2001 tax cut — obviously fraudulent budget projections, transparently deceptive advertising about who would benefit and the use of blatant accounting gimmicks to conceal the plan's true cost — was as bad as anything that followed.

. . . .

The point is that pundits who failed to notice the administration's mendacity a long time ago either weren't doing their homework, or deliberately turned a blind eye to the evidence.

But as I said, better late than never. Born-again Bush-bashers like Mr. Bartlett and Mr. Sullivan, however churlish, are intellectually and morally superior to the Bushist dead-enders who still insist that Saddam was allied with Al Qaeda, and will soon be claiming that we lost the war in Iraq because the liberal media stabbed the troops in the back. And reporters understandably consider it newsworthy that some conservative voices are now echoing longstanding liberal critiques of the Bush administration.

It's still fair, however, to ask people like Mr. Bartlett the obvious question: What took you so long?
:rolleyes:
 
  • #139
Bush ratings continue to drop to new lows
NBC/WSJ poll: Majority now prefer a Democrat-controlled Congress

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11843383/

According to the poll, only 37 percent approve of Bush’s job performance — his lowest mark ever in the survey. That’s a two-point drop since the last NBC/Journal poll, and a one-point decline from his previous low of 38 percent last November. In addition, just 26 percent believe the nation is headed in the right direction, a tie from the previous Bush administration low, which also occurred in November.
 
  • #140
Astronuc said:
Bush ratings continue to drop to new lows
NBC/WSJ poll: Majority now prefer a Democrat-controlled Congress

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11843383/
On the other hand, Bush is rated higher than Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rove, Hastert, Boehner, and Frist. Only Condi outshines Bush. Polling Report

(And Frist thinks he has a chance to win the Republican nomination in '08? He's lowest on the list!)
 
  • #141
BobG said:
On the other hand, Bush is rated higher than Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rove, Hastert, Boehner, and Frist. Only Condi outshines Bush. Polling Report

(And Frist thinks he has a chance to win the Republican nomination in '08? He's lowest on the list!)
Well, afterall, this is America! Land of opportunity where anyone can aspire to be president! :smile:
 
  • #142
Hmmm... I'm not sure where this thread is at the moment BUT...

1) someone on Wait Wait Don't Tell Me astutely pointed out that Cheney's current approval rating (19%) is only 9 points higher than the percentage of people who would eat a rat on television.

2) back to republican lies... I suspect the strong words on Iran today http://news.google.com/?ncl=http://...16144809_RTRUKOC_0_UK-SECURITY-BUSH.xml&hl=en are intended to move us towards war soon ---- for no particular reason other than that will help republican incumbents in November elections.
 
  • #143
pattylou said:
Hmmm... I'm not sure where this thread is at the moment BUT...

1) someone on Wait Wait Don't Tell Me astutely pointed out that Cheney's current approval rating (19%) is only 9 points higher than the percentage of people who would eat a rat on television.

2) back to republican lies... I suspect the strong words on Iran today http://news.google.com/?ncl=http://...16144809_RTRUKOC_0_UK-SECURITY-BUSH.xml&hl=en are intended to move us towards war soon ---- for no particular reason other than that will help republican incumbents in November elections.

The Administration will have to use their imaginations to come up with a rap sheet on Iran like the one below on Iraq.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB80/wmd18.pdf
 
  • #144
Bush admitting to be a liar - the cretin paradox.
 
  • #145
edward said:
The Administration will have to use their imaginations to come up with a rap sheet on Iran like the one below on Iraq.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB80/wmd18.pdf

HAHA. that presentation is just ilarious.. i can get better sat pictures than those with google earth! :smile: :smile:
 
  • #146
Christ, the archives in P&WA isn't even two complete pages. So instead of being able to add to an existing thread, one has to keep starting new ones -- ones that meet the thesis requirements of course.

So... I will post this here:

Bush's Uncle Earned Millions in War Firm Sale
An SEC filing shows William H.T. Bush collected about $1.9 million in cash, plus stock valued at $800,000, from the deal.
By Walter F. Roche Jr., Times Staff Writer
March 23, 2006

WASHINGTON — As President Bush embarks on a new effort to shore up public support for the war in Iraq, an uncle of the commander in chief is collecting $2.7 million in cash and stock from the recent sale of a company that profited from the war.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bucky23mar23,1,1874375.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

Hey Republican Bush supporters--You're getting screwed too! You know that don't you?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #147
American Theocracy - Clear and Present Dangers

This review is of a book by a former Republican party supporter, so those who may say it is biased are just a bunch of evil-doers. These are the main points of the book:

1) The American press in the first days of the Iraq war reported extensively on the Pentagon's failure to post American troops in front of the National Museum in Baghdad, which, as a result, was looted of many of its great archaeological treasures. Less widely reported, but to Phillips far more meaningful, was the immediate posting of troops around the Iraqi Oil Ministry, which held the maps and charts that were the key to effective oil production. Phillips fully supports an explanation of the Iraq war that the Bush administration dismisses as conspiracy theory — that its principal purpose was to secure vast oil reserves that would enable the United States to control production and to lower prices

...And while this argument may be somewhat too simplistic to explain the complicated mix of motives behind the war, it is hard to dismiss Phillips's larger argument: that the pursuit of oil has for at least 30 years been one of the defining elements of American policy in the world; and that the Bush administration — unusually dominated by oilmen — has taken what the president deplored recently as the nation's addiction to oil to new and terrifying levels.

2) Phillips is especially passionate in his discussion of the second great force that he sees shaping contemporary American life — radical Christianity and its growing intrusion into government and politics. ...On the far right is a still obscure but, Phillips says, rapidly growing group of "Christian Reconstructionists" who believe in a "Taliban-like" reversal of women's rights, who describe the separation of church and state as a "myth" and who call openly for a theocratic government shaped by Christian doctrine. A much larger group of Protestants, perhaps as many as a third of the population, claims to believe in the supposed biblical prophecies of an imminent "rapture" — the return of Jesus to the world and the elevation of believers to heaven.

Prophetic Christians, Phillips writes, often shape their view of politics and the world around signs that charlatan biblical scholars have identified as predictors of the apocalypse — among them a war in Iraq, the Jewish settlement of the whole of biblical Israel, even the rise of terrorism. He convincingly demonstrates that the Bush administration has calculatedly reached out to such believers and encouraged them to see the president's policies as a response to premillennialist thought.

3) THE third great impending crisis that Phillips identifies is also, perhaps, the best known — the astonishing rise of debt as the precarious underpinning of the American economy. He is not, of course, the only observer who has noted the dangers of indebtedness. ...The most familiar debt is that of the United States government, fueled by soaring federal budget deficits that have continued (with a brief pause in the late 1990's) for more than two decades. But the national debt — currently over $8 trillion — is only the tip of the iceberg. There has also been an explosion of corporate debt, state and local bonded debt, international debt through huge trade imbalances, and consumer debt (mostly in the form of credit-card balances and aggressively marketed home-mortgage packages). Taken together, this present and future debt may exceed $70 trillion.

The creation of a national-debt culture, Phillips argues, although exacerbated by the policies of the Bush administration, has been the work of many people over many decades — among them Alan Greenspan, who, he acidly notes, blithely and irresponsibly ignored the rising debt to avoid pricking the stock-market bubble it helped produce. It is most of all a product of the "financialization" of the American economy — the turn away from manufacturing and toward an economy based on moving and managing money, a trend encouraged, Phillips argues persuasively, by the preoccupation with oil and (somewhat less persuasively) with evangelical belief in the imminent rapture, which makes planning for the future unnecessary.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/books/review/19brink.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1

The author points to the three things I've been harping on since the chimp became president. That BushCo sought/seeks political power however they may--purely for profit, and has leveraged the religious-right to that end--including damaging beliefs such as the apocalypse, and that they have been and are willing to do so with only their own futures in mind.

To top it all off, the poor management of their forays has made it all the more despicable. But what else could we expect from the likes of Bush/Cheney--Just look at their private sector performance and explain to me why these men have been allowed to hold the highest office in our country?

Hey Bush Supporters--try voting with your feet--maybe you can do better that way.
 
  • #148
Republicans try to change subject from Bush
Now why would they do that? :rolleyes:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republicans, beset by an array of political troubles, are cranking up the attacks on Democrats and trying to change the subject from President George W. Bush ahead of November's congressional elections.

With Bush slumping in the polls and Republicans on the defensive over the Iraq war and a series of ethics scandals, the party wants to shift the spotlight away from the White House by convincing voters that Democratic rule would be a dangerous choice.

Republicans hope the strategy will limit the national momentum that Democrats might ride into November and fire up the party's conservative base to ensure they turn up at the polls.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060325/us_nm/usa_politics_republicans_dc_3
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #149
Iraqis in Tal Afar question Bush's optimism (2006-03-24)

TAL AFAR, Iraq (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush held up the northern town of Tal Afar this week as an example of progress being made in Iraq but many residents find it hard to share his optimism.

. . . . .

Sunni Turkmen Rafat Ahmed, 35, a shop owner said: "As I'm talking now the Americans and the Iraqi army are surrounding my neighborhood. If we leave our houses we could be arrested."

The town's population of some 250,000 is dominated by Turkish-speaking ethnic Turkmen, about half Sunni Muslims and half Shiites. Most of the remaining 20 percent are Sunni Arabs.

The deployment last year of Iraqi troops, who were widely perceived locally as Shi'ite Arab outsiders, prompted the Sunni mayor of Tal Afar to tender his resignation in protest at what he described as a sectarian operation. The involvement of ethnic Kurdish forces was also a source of tension, local people said.

"Anyone who says Tal Afar is good and safe actually knows nothing because the reality is we are unsafe, even inside our houses, because we don't know when we'll be arrested," said pensioner Abdul Karim al-Anizi, 60, a Shi'ite Turkmen

Some of the anger is being directed back at the U.S. forces that pushed out the militants.

"The situation in Tal Afar is deteriorating and the smell of death is everywhere. People never know why they are killed. They only know that the Americans are the cause of their agonies," said Hussein Mahmoud, a Shi'ite Turkmen university professor.
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/pri/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=893880
 
  • #150
One more entry in the list of corrupt Republicans : former Illinois Governor George Ryan (convicted today on 22 counts of fraud and racketeering).

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/04/17/ryan.verdict.ap/index.html

Ryan faces up to 20 years in prison for the racketeering conspiracy conviction alone, the most serious charge against him in the 22-count indictment. The jury found him guilty of all counts, including fraud, obstructing the Internal Revenue Service and lying to the FBI. Sentencing was set for August 4.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
514
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
11K
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
11K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
936
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K