Democrats & Liberals Archives

George W. Bush vs "Slick Willie"

Here’s an interesting snippet of news that’s sure to annoy your Republican friends. In a poll taken last falll, respondents were asked to compare the trustworthiness of Bush and Clinton. Of these, 15% said it was a tie, 36% trusted Bush more, and 48% trusted Bush less. To reiterate: a plurality of people trust Bush less than Clinton.

At the time of the poll, 80% Republicans still approved of Bush's performance, but both Democrats and Independents overwhelmingly disapproved. Since then, Bush's approval among Republicans has dropped to 66%.

And to finish off this "to know him is to love him" vein: from the same CNN poll I cite above, in November 2001, Bush had an 87 percent overall approval mark. By November 2005, this fell to 37%. That matches the rating of newly-elected President Clinton in June 1993.

Posted by William Cohen at April 20, 2006 3:08 PM
Comments
Comment #141964

Abuse of Power trumps a Blowjob everytime.

Posted by: Aldous at April 20, 2006 3:42 PM
Comment #141965

This doesn’t surprise me a bit. Whether you loved or hated Clinton, he worked with Republicans to govern for America’s health and future well being. The same cannot be said of all of Bush’s actions or policies, given the debt, vast increases in government size and bureaucracy, and the ill-fated invasion of Iraq.

I hated Clinton for the damage he did to the respect for the office of the President with the Lewinsky affair. But, he was far more conservative than Pres. Bush, and that makes him a better president in my book.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 20, 2006 3:43 PM
Comment #141972

“Abuse of Power trumps a Blowjob everytime.”


hmmm… I think I need to do some more research… :)

Posted by: tony at April 20, 2006 4:21 PM
Comment #141974

Can you imagine how much better a president Clinton would have been if he had been able to devote himself to doing his job rather than having to defend himself from all the nitpicking attacks funded by the extreme right?
Hell, Bush can’t do a decent job even when left to his own devices.

Posted by: capnmike at April 20, 2006 4:27 PM
Comment #141978

The Lewinski/Jones debacle taught me unequivocably that the republican party was all about winning, at any cost.
Totally unable to compromise, viciously singleminded, scorched earth policies if they lose.
Not trying to be partisan, but it’s really how I see it, from example. Mostly started with Newt, and the Contract on America which the republicans are still reniging on today (term limits? Balanced budget amendment?)
The first few paragraphs of the “Contract”, signed by repubs in an ‘in your face’ ceremony on the capitol steps, said essentially “if we don’t do what we promise in this document, throw us out”.
I say, take em up on that offer.

Posted by: Norby at April 20, 2006 4:44 PM
Comment #141979

Clinton’s saving grace was the gridlock that kept his economic proposals from being enacted and tanking the economy, along with the senate Reps saying before his trial that they wouldn’t vote to convict no matter what the evidence showed. Too bad we don’t have gridlock now.
I’m amazed that either of them gets approval ratings as high as they do.

Posted by: traveller at April 20, 2006 4:44 PM
Comment #141986

Well, it depends on what the definition of “is” is.

Bush’s blunders are going to yield even lower ratings.

But, comparing the two presidents reveals how how low the bar is set (and getting lower).

Before long, we’ll be measuring our leaders like some Iraqis measured Saddam, and we’ll be saying things like:

He was OK. Maybe he murdered a lot of people, but there was, at least, electricity, and no looting.

Posted by: d.a.n at April 20, 2006 5:06 PM
Comment #141991
The Lewinski/Jones debacle taught me unequivocably that the republican party was all about winning, at any cost. Totally unable to compromise, viciously singleminded, scorched earth policies if they lose.

You said it. I remember hearing former Wyoming Senator Allen Simpson speak once about why he retired from Congress. He said that, whenever the Republicans in Congress got together on something, the issue was always framed in terms of “how can we get Clinton?” rather than “What’s best for the country?”

The Congressional Republican attacks on Clinton proved they weren’t interested in governing. Bush proves they can’t.

Posted by: Steve K at April 20, 2006 5:22 PM
Comment #141996

The Congressional Republican attacks on Clinton proved they weren’t interested in governing. Bush proves they can’t.

====

This is great. POTY.

Posted by: tree hugger at April 20, 2006 5:46 PM
Comment #142000

>>The Congressional Republican attacks on Clinton proved they weren’t interested in governing. Bush proves they can’t.

Wish I’d said that…


Posted by: Marysdude at April 20, 2006 5:57 PM
Comment #142007

I wish it didn’t have to be said

Posted by: tony at April 20, 2006 6:15 PM
Comment #142017

Only goes to show that the American electorate can at times be a very discerning lot.No president(Republican or otherwise)could have survived the kind of onslaught Clinton did and emerge with approval ratings that trump anything Bush will ever have between now and 2008.Bottomline Clinton is smarter than Bush.
Still trying to understand why Clinton was impeached and Bush hasnt been.Its not like his false pretenses caused anybody to die.Atleast his mistakes were forgivable.W’s are not.

Posted by: john doe at April 20, 2006 7:24 PM
Comment #142027

I love polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can’t believe people believe in them. I’ve never been polled. Of course, I never had health insurance during the “Blowjob” administration. Yeah, Clinton really cared about America’s health…he was too busy sticking some woman’s mouth between his legs in the White House. Needless to say, most people don’t even realize that the President does not work alone. A team is put together to support the President. Yes, the President may have the final say, but he has much input. I wonder who had input to the “Blue Dress” situation.

Posted by: Cindi at April 20, 2006 8:19 PM
Comment #142033

Cindi
Under Clinton I could afford Health Care. Under Bush, I have not and will not be able to afford Health Care. As far as why Bush hasn’t been impeached it probably has to do with the fact of the Rep run Congress no matter what he does will vote out one of their own.

Posted by: Sherri at April 20, 2006 8:55 PM
Comment #142038

“I love polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

This is an odd statement at best to start off a conversation about Clinton.

Posted by: tony at April 20, 2006 9:13 PM
Comment #142043

The polls are predictable since Bush is in power and Clinton is not.

It’s like a joke I once heard.

There was a pastor who was preaching and trying to confort a congregation by telling them no one is perfect. He asked the congregation “does anyone know anyone who is perfect? ” An older gentleman in the back raised his hand. The pastor said, “you know someone who is perfect?” The old man said “yes, my wife’s first husband!!”

What you should do, is find a poll from 1998 that (Clinton’s sixth year) that asks about trustworthiness of each candidate. Actually I would be interested in this. It would be great to find the same polling company asking the same question on trustworthinss during the sixth year. It would be a good apples to apples comparison.

Craig

Posted by: Craig Holmes at April 20, 2006 11:02 PM
Comment #142044

Here is a quote about Clinton’s trustworthiness in the polls from 1998 (Clinton’s sixth year)


It was not just the President’s perceived honesty and trustworthiness that suffered: The perceptions that the President has “… high personal moral and ethical standards” and that he “shares my [the respondent’s] values” suffered the same fate. At the end of August 1998, more than 60% of the sample told the Gallup Poll that President Clinton did not share their values; the September 13, 1998 Washington Post/ABC News Poll found that 77% of the public rejected the notion that the President had “high personal and ethical standards.”

To be fair, as I remember, public opinion polls also gave Clinton high marks on how he was leading the country. It appeared that people would trust Clinton with the country, just not their kid sister.

Craig

Posted by: Craig Holmes at April 20, 2006 11:07 PM
Comment #142045

Sorry for three posts in a row. I would guess it to be the opposite with Bush. They would trust their kid sister with him, but are having a hard time trusting him with the country.

Posted by: Craig Holmes at April 20, 2006 11:08 PM
Comment #142048

“I love polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can’t believe people believe in them.”


I’ve never been polled either.But I do believe that polls(especially ones conducted by non-partisan groups)do to a certain extent represent the nation’s pulse on particular issues.Politicians know this too.As a matter of fact,it’s been reported that some of them (Rick Santorum comes to mind) are afraid to appear publicly with Bush because they know the polls have been unforgiving on the president.
Bush says he doesnt watch the polls.Yeah right!Who is kidding who here? Of course he does.He would be be crazy not too.I bet if he had 60% approval on an issue like Iraq he would not bother running around the country trying to shore up support for the war.The fact that he is spending so much time on the issue is not because his generals are telling him the war is unpopular but because he looks at the polls.
Somebody once said “dont aknowledge polls unless they support your argument”.This administration certainly has consistently done that.

Posted by: john doe at April 20, 2006 11:35 PM
Comment #142054

Lying Comes Naturally to Republicans
Whenever Republican politicians find themselves in trouble, their automatic knee-jerk reaction is to blame Democrats. If there is nothing to blame Democrats for, they merely make something up - they lie. This is exactly what the Republican National Committee (RNC) chairman, following the lead of his boss George W. Bush, has done and is doing. He is placing the blame of the mean and punitive House immigration bill on the Democrats, when he knows that it is an outrageous lie.

Posted by: shawn at April 21, 2006 12:04 AM
Comment #142057

Surely , after all this time you guys have figtured out that the Clinton deal was a set up by republicans. That was why that Linda lady was taping the intern . You don’t tape girl talk, ask any women. When girls get together to talk about their men friends , they don’t tape it.That was a frame deal. Find out his weak spot and go get him with any thing you can.Both ladies were paid off big time. Linda got a face lift and a major make over and the young one was supposed to get a movie deal, that didn’t pan out.Grow up guys, Bill Clinton was framed big time.

Posted by: suzieq at April 21, 2006 12:29 AM
Comment #142058

I thought I would get a kick out of this and I did! All of the anti-Bush rants are hilarious. Who wrote all of these - Al Franken? These posts can be summed up by one thought..
If Liberals only knew as much as they thought was true…

Posted by: LLE at April 21, 2006 12:49 AM
Comment #142059

suzieq, i thought clinton had a iq of 186 are you saying he was using his wrong head? and you would defend a sex maniac womanizer shame on you!

Posted by: jim c at April 21, 2006 12:50 AM
Comment #142062

The reason George W. doesn’t get impeached is because we would be stuck with Cheney.If Cheney gets in trouble we would have to deal with old Rumsfield. We would go from bad to worse to bottom of the pile.

Posted by: Norma at April 21, 2006 1:04 AM
Comment #142063

If Liberals only knew as much as they thought was true…

Posted by: LLE at April 21, 2006 12:49 AM

Something about an assumed conservative talking about the truth at this point in time seems rather disingeneous, ugh?

Posted by: expatUSA_Indonesia at April 21, 2006 1:16 AM
Comment #142065

No, Bill Clinton had this country in great shape, beats the h—- out of what it is now. He was framed and any one with any smarts at all can see that.The Republicans have been planning for years to take over the congress and do the things that is taking place right now. This whole countyr is in shambles. People can’t afford health care, now they can’t afford to drive to work, this was like back in the 70’s when we had a gas shortage , and gas was sky high . But all storage tanks were full , gas wells were capped.
I am just tired of bush and co. getting away with all their crap and the poor people needing help every where, Katrina , health care , childrens programs, childrens insurance, and talk of going to war in Iran, what are they going to fight it with, darts, and boys scouts?
I just read an articale about a week ago that Iraq had gas they were trying to give it away because they didn’t have room to store any more.
Well if we are helping them so much , why aren’t they giving that to the U.S.
Yes , I take up for Bill Clinton, he was one of the best Presidents we have had for years, the National debt was down, social security for our older people was secure , health insurance for children, welfare mothers were going to school and had jobs, the minimun wage was going up.it hasn’t gone up under bush.
People had jobs, there was even a little truth in goverment ,you can’t find any truth now .The only truth now is that everything they do is a lie.They govern by fear and try to control by fear.Every day there is a new story poked full of lies.
Yes I take up for Bill Clinton.He didn’t kill 3000 Americans and 40,000 Iraq citizens , for nothing .I will take a Rhoades Scholar any day over what we have now.

Posted by: suzieq at April 21, 2006 1:27 AM
Comment #142088

introspective and steve, your comments violate our Critique the Message, Not the Messenger policy. Comply with the policy or lose your privilege to leave comments here. This will be your only warning.

Posted by: Watchblog Managing Editor at April 21, 2006 4:52 AM
Comment #142090

Watchblog Managing Editor,

I understand the policy, but I still stand by my [now deleted] posts, which were a riposte on an abusive poster—not an attack. In an ideal world, I wouldn’t have felt the need to respond to steve’s insults…because I would have felt certain that the Wachblog editors would take care of it on their own. However, after reading many, many, abusive posts (in other topics) this is the first sign I’ve witnessed in a long while that the editors are still around. It’s nice of you to stop by. If you continue to do your job, I won’t feel the need to do it for you. Possibly I overstepped the bounds, but it’s like trying to drive the speed limit when everyone is passing you doing 100 mph.

Posted by: Introspective at April 21, 2006 5:34 AM
Comment #142092

With out a doubt it would be Bill Clinton I trust more. George Bush is the worst president we ever had. He makes the weasel of a president on the hit show 24 look good.

Posted by: Chuck Stoehr at April 21, 2006 6:37 AM
Comment #142097

Unless you get paid to be a propagandist (Hannity and Limbaugh types) it is absurd to say the Bush presidency is better than Clinton’s.Clinton had his foils.That is well documented.And he was massively punished for it.Bush on the other hand,had nothing going on for him till that morning in Sept 2001.Best thing to happen to a failing presidency in modern times, sad as it was.Im willing to bet if Sept 11 had happened at the height of Watergate,Nixon would never have had to resign.

Id like to challenge any Republican in this blog to tell me what Bush has done that Clinton wouldnt have(or hasnt) done better:without mentioning the Lewinsky thing or the earlier successes of the Afghan war.As for rallying the nation after that tragic day,I sometimes get the feeling that the nation was reacting to the event and not to the president as an individual.Any sitting president would have got the same reaction.So,the bullhorn moment doest count either.

Posted by: john doe at April 21, 2006 8:47 AM
Comment #142100

I have been polled by Ipsos in fact. The covversation (actually Q&A) was 45 minutes in length and quite in depth. I was actually on of those statistics on Bush’s approval (actually disapproval)rating

Posted by: Frankie Bruchis at April 21, 2006 9:12 AM
Comment #142113

Cindi and Sherri:

Just thought you’d both be interested in the following statistics…

• The estimated number of people without health insurance has increased by 6 million since 2000, rising to 45.8 million, or more than one in seven people, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

• The percentage of companies that offer health benefits - the primary source of insurance for people under 65 - fell to 60% last year from 69% in 2000, according to an annual survey by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, which does health policy research.

• The number of people who get health insurance through their employer dropped by 3.7 million from 2000 to 2004 while the population increased by 11.6 million.

• The number of people insured through Medicaid and affiliated programs rose to 37.5 million, or 12.9% of the population.

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel online 2006-01-22

Posted by: Lynne at April 21, 2006 11:20 AM
Comment #142114

For those who’ve never been polled, I get polled by Harris Polls a minimum of once a month…I may be getting polled by phone, too, but I screen calls, so they can’t reach me.

Posted by: Lynne at April 21, 2006 11:22 AM
Comment #142116

Any body remember the polls on election day 2004?Your polls had john kerry winning the presidentual election big time.So much for polls.

Posted by: troll at April 21, 2006 11:29 AM
Comment #142121

troll

Any body remember the polls on election day 2004?Your polls had john kerry winning the presidentual election big time.So much for polls.

Funny how the exit polls have always been quite accurate…up to 2000 and 2004…did that many people actually lie to the pollsters or was Diebold more a presence than commonly acknowledged???

Makes me feel like my vote may or may not be counted in the next election…people who feel their votes may not be counted will quit voting…I think that’s the desired outcome.

Posted by: Lynne at April 21, 2006 12:09 PM
Comment #142136

troll, post a link to support your assertion. Without substantiation, your claim of Kerry polls appears to be fanciful to say the least.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 21, 2006 1:52 PM
Comment #142137

Troll,

See Lynne’s post. When your election results do not match up with the exit polls, it is not an “interesting anomoly” as every news outlet claimed — it is in fact a pretty good indication that your election was rigged. Even the most shallow examination of the Diebold voting scam makes clear that this technology is not on the up and up. Furthermore, under the current legal paradigm, with no paper trail, we have completely sacrificed the ability for recounts. Trade secret, indeed! This is intolerable. We used to dismiss the Soviet “Democracy” because of their sham elections; now, are we any better?

The Real Jim C.

Posted by: Jim C. at April 21, 2006 1:52 PM
Comment #142154

i dont understand why everyone allways compares clinton to bush. clinton is nolonger in office and bush should be held to his own marit,there he has really screwed things up big time our country is going down fast and every time ya say anything about it to a repulican all they do is say :well at least he aint getting is wick waxed : who freakin cares what sexaul habits one person or an other has as long as the person does their job correctly bush is a lier his adminastration is a farce gas is three dollars a gal and people want to compare bush to clinton HA i say stop comparing and get off our asses and do something about it before it truly is to late

Posted by: scott at April 21, 2006 3:03 PM
Comment #142168

Troll and Jim C (the real one)-

You folks should stop by the Brad Blog and read all of the news on the alleged voting fraud that took place. (I use the term “alleged” to refrain from assuming guilt until proven.) He has accumulated a large amount of documentation on what happened in 2000 and 2004. There are so many cases that are suspicious that it makes pure coincidence seem very doubtful. Then there are those cases which have already been proven. His archives will give you a wealth of reading and will raise your blood pressure in the process.

Posted by: Cole at April 21, 2006 4:03 PM
Comment #142191

I just wish someone would give W a blowjob so we can impeach the bastard!

Posted by: Tim at April 21, 2006 5:45 PM
Comment #142217

I guess, considering what Bush is doing to us now, Clinton’s BJ could really be considered foreplay.

Posted by: tony at April 21, 2006 6:56 PM
Comment #142245


you can bill me for the pizza…

Posted by: Jim C. at April 21, 2006 9:10 PM
Comment #142249

Where the hell is Lewinsky when you need her?

By the way,considering all the lies this administration has been telling us,I just gotta ask: have the charges that Sadaam tried to kill Bush Sr ever been authenticated or were they part of the whole war propaganda thing? Since the plot was “uncovered” by the same people who swore there were massive stockpiles of WMD in Iraq I wouldnt be surprised if the whole thing was somebody’s idea of setting the stage for bigger and more dramatic lies.

Posted by: john doe at April 21, 2006 9:34 PM
Comment #142253

I think the whole “Huge Stockpiles of WMDs” was just compensating for his shortcomings…

Why do you think they call him Bush? (OK, I really - really should’ve stopped last sentence… just couldn’t help myself.)

Posted by: tony at April 21, 2006 9:46 PM
Comment #142325

Bush doesn’t need a BJ: the only Hard On he’s ever had was for Iraq.

And the bloom is off that rose…

:o)

Posted by: Betty Burke at April 22, 2006 9:59 AM
Comment #142342

You Dipdo’s Back Clinton all the way. It was Clinton who allowed Sadaam, Osama Bin Laden and Zarqwahi, North Korea and Iran to become what they are today. You are all in denial and Stupid. You deserve World War 3. All you think about is labels such as Conserative, Anti War. Republican, Democrat, Pro War. Anti abortion, Pro Abortion, Illegal Imigrants, Enviornmentalists And on and on. Your so freakin stupid. I got a Label for you!! INFIDEL!! Trumps all the others and you all wear it and I don’t care what you think or believe!! Print that on your freakin Blog. Do you think the terrorists on 911 ran up and down the aisles of those planes and asked who was Reublican or Democrat? I don’t think so. They were all INFIDELS and guess what? They still are you dipdoooooo’s

Posted by: Don at April 22, 2006 11:50 AM
Comment #142359

Don -

Copy and pasting the same thing over and over doesn’t add any validity. Again - WTF???

Posted by: tony at April 22, 2006 1:34 PM
Comment #142375
You are all in denial and Stupid.
Hey, Watchblog Managing Editor! Here is where you step in! Don’s post is far more abusive than anything I said in my [now deleted] posts, and has gone far longer without a reaction. Do we need to start a full-on flame war to get a response from the editors?
Posted by: Introspective at April 22, 2006 3:45 PM
Comment #142391


sadly, Don, the conservatives who are trading our freedoms away in the name of fear and ignorance are the ones who are letting the terrorists win.

Posted by: Jim C. at April 22, 2006 7:22 PM
Comment #142404

Well, I would like to offer a vote of Thanks to “Don!”

(He is, after all, helping to prove my central thesis that Conservatism is only championed by those who are either Evil, or Ignorant, or some combination of the two…)

:o)

Posted by: Betty Burke at April 22, 2006 10:05 PM
Comment #142405

So vote in that BITCH hillary and you get your beloved slick willie back and the world will be safe again and the camel kissers will stop killing and we can all be gay again. What a great idea I feel safer already just think no one will have to die because bill and hill will stop globel warming.besides who needs borders we can all learn to speak spanish and we all will be set free from the evil we now live under. Then we can raise taxes and surrender to the war on terror woooo that will be so kool just think how proud we could all be again.

Posted by: angry white man at April 22, 2006 10:13 PM
Comment #142432

Don = angry white man?

Posted by: Introspective at April 23, 2006 12:24 AM
Comment #142476

dang, angry white man, i can’t say that i agree; your suggestions seem too extreme and somewhat leftist. But i will defend to the death your right to say it!

Posted by: Jim C. at April 23, 2006 12:37 PM
Comment #142482

Conservatism is only championed by those who are either Evil, or Ignorant, or some combination of the two…)—-$$$—-
It is so sad to see such missguided thinking but then again look at Howard Dean and the type of thinking that has taken down the democratic party politically. I am glag to see they are trotting him back out now that the black hotel worker comment has cooled off.now the dims can get the Chocolate’s all fired up again over New Orleans and yes N.O. is a chocolate city that will never be governed by vanilla. It makes you feel good to think that I might be a angry vanilla troll but you see there are millions of us every where all around you.The dimms need to brush there teeth and move on remember to much chocolate will rot your teeth.

Posted by: angry vanilla troll at April 23, 2006 1:10 PM
Comment #142486

“Don = angry white man?”

Wont be surprised if it was. Same pile different turd.
Anyway, I think the reason republicans are obsessed with Clinton is inspite of his many mistakes he was so good at being president he makes Bush look bad.Not that Bush needs any help in that department.
As for Hillary,the reason they hate her so much has to do with the fact that they are terrified by her intelligence,her suave,her forward looking mentality, her brilliance, her presidentness and the fact that she makes more sense on issues than they do.Thats why,because of fear,so many of this die hard conservatives (some of whom would normally never consider a candidate of color for office) are willing to back a unknown horse called Condi Rice so she can take away from Hillary.Ask this dudes what they know about Condi and you will get the usual “oh she has overcome so much in her life” and “Oh she is a woman” and my favourite “she is black”.Never mind that her family was rich enough to afford her piano lessons when others were more worried about next months rent.By the way,nothing wrong with that.Only goes to show how much she has overcome. Ask them where she stands on issues that are important in winning an election and they give the same blank look I give to others when Im asked the same question.

Posted by: john doe at April 23, 2006 1:17 PM
Comment #142518

“Needless to say, most people don’t even realize that the President does not work alone. A team is put together to support the President.”

Hey Cindi did you forget, “I am The Decider”

Posted by: Chick at April 23, 2006 4:03 PM
Comment #142531

Bush is probably dickless without alcohol, but he is supposedly on Vicodin now, or maybe Laura just gives it to him to keep the obnoxious drunk off her.

William Jefferson Clinton, 42nd President of the United States, is a better person than anyone named Bush will ever be.

Hillary should be elected just to get him back in the White House.

Posted by: ohrealy at April 23, 2006 4:49 PM
Comment #142591

Hillary should be elected just to get him back in the White House—-$$$—- thats right please just hold that thought till 2008 it’s all ya got to hang on too politicly.Ok pottie mouth you will change your tune when the poopie hits the blinder in 08. Hay Don they think we are the same person a nother liberal political hopeful misconception.—-$$$—-Bush is probably dickless without alcohol, but he is supposedly on Vicodin now, or maybe Laura just gives it to him to keep the obnoxious drunk off her.—-$$$—-Perhaps you should go see United 93 over and over again like you did with faharenheit 911. Bush bashing is all you got because that is all your party will give you that is the only red meat defeatists liberal democrat vegetarian’s can handle and remain in lock-step with one another.

Posted by: angry white man at April 23, 2006 10:26 PM
Comment #142632

now the dims can get the Chocolate’s all fired up again over New Orleans and yes N.O. is a

chocolate city that will never be governed by vanilla. It makes you feel good to think that I might be a angry vanilla troll but you see there are millions of us every where all around you.The dimms need to brush there teeth and move on remember to much chocolate will rot your teeth.

Posted by: angry vanilla troll at April 23, 2006 01:10 PM


[*wild applause*]

Posted by: Betty Burke at April 24, 2006 3:25 AM
Post a comment