Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD!


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 7:34:14 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
Why else would it be that the polls are so close. Stipulating that everything being said on both sides on these forums is correct; how else can you explain it?

According to this source; it's obviously not as obvious as represented by either side.

quote:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows the race for the White House is tied with Barack Obama and John McCain each attracting 44% of the vote. However, when "leaners" are included, it’s McCain 47% and Obama 46%. Source: http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

The great 'change' promised  not good enough? Or is it that many people realize that the only change desired is the change you get back, called a paycheck, after the government bureaucracy sucks up a big chuck of change for social engineering 'good intent' programs. ALL of which have generated only failure and bureaucratic waste.

People aren't convinced that the promise of domestic security not assured by the commitment of 100 years of protecting corporate interests in Iraq? The working class not convinced that the expressed intent of 'legalizing' 5 Million criminal workers helps improve the standard of living of anyone other than the rich and corporate entities that increase their profits through cheap illegal labor?

Sincerely yours,
A Voter Without a Candidate
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 7:43:23 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

Maybe there's a market for nosepins this year, special clothespins that go on your nose as you go in to vote. They could be made in red or blue and come in many different styles...

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 7:46:01 AM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
My question to you would be what are you going to do Merc.These are the two we have and an independent stands no chance ,what alternative are you suggesting? 

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 7:50:27 AM   
Thadius


Posts: 5091
Joined: 10/11/2005
Status: offline
Morning Merc,

The polling has been interesting.  Not sure that it is all the telling.

Obama is in Michigan today, it is also his birthday, he will be discussing his new energy policy.  I am not sure if he understands that the windfall tax he is proposing on companies like Exxon will actually be affecting the unions he will be addressing.  I guess most people don't realize that, Exxon pays out quite a bit of it's profits in dividends, guess who owns a whole lot of their stock?  That's right, a lot of their stock is owned by pension funds and 401Ks, can't wait til that little tid bit sinks in.

McCain on the other hand is out in Sturgis... Yeah at the rally. http://www.sturgismotorcyclerally.com/rally-news/index.php?action=ReadMoreNews&newsid=19  His campaign has made some real goofball moves, and it really surprises me that Obama hasn't been able to  build a lead in the polls like the rest of the Dems... something is going on.

Just a few quick thoughts,
Thadius


_____________________________

When the character of a man is not clear to you, look at his friends." ~ Japanese Proverb

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 7:57:26 AM   
celticlord2112


Posts: 5732
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
Why else would it be that the polls are so close. Stipulating that everything being said on both sides on these forums is correct; how else can you explain it?

It is not merely that the candidates are "bad"--it is that the political parties themselves are that "bad". Both parties have failed to provide effective leadership on a variety of issues. Partisan bickering and obstructionism has been the order of the day.

The negative politics is just getting started, and the bulk of the vitriol will not be between McCain and Obama, but between Pelosi/Reid and McConnell/Cantor on the other.

_____________________________



(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 8:05:33 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

My question to you would be what are you going to do Merc.These are the two we have and an independent stands no chance ,what alternative are you suggesting? 
Mike, if I had that answer I'd have posted it.

I'd suggest this; I can understand why the Republican party nominated Senator McCain. They had nobody willing to run this time because, similar to 1976, they didn't expect to win. Short of resigning in disgrace like Nixon, this President couldn't have done worse for the Republican party leader wanting to be a candidate for this election. As a result they are stuck with Senator McCain; to me the dreg residue at the bottom of the barrel. What possible chance could he have against any Democrat?

Except it seems Senator Obama and his liberal, taxing, agenda laden coalition of spending special interests. Hard to believe that with the opportunity presented this is the best the Democrats can provide. A person who really believes that it would be better if the the government would be charge of cradle to grave care. A commitment to the bureaucracy necessary to support that believe.

What I would look for any one of them to say which would sway me? How about a commitment to disband and cut any program; defense or social, that has been a failure? How about a commitment to evaluate what our taxes are being wasted on before asking for more? How about serving the current underpaid and under utilized labor force instead of committing to legitimizing and supporting 5 Million more currently under the strict definition of the word - criminals. How about a broad brush, far reaching commitment to end the hypocrisy of making some drugs, nicotine, alcohol; legal and others illegal; which would dramatically reduce our prison population.

I know, any of that is too much to ask from either of these gentlemen. I'd settle for this. How about a simple speech from the heart instead of one read from a prompter where each word has been analyzed and spoken in front of a test audience? Too much? Then how about this; how about the first candidate that completely and with detail documents the 'how' for the what they are both spewing forth, which seems to be audience dependent.

< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 8/4/2008 8:07:37 AM >

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 8:10:30 AM   
Vendaval


Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline
Good morning Merc and happy Monday to you,
 
There are several possible explanations; voters have yet to decide, they are firm in their opinions on certain issues and not on others, they are not following the election closely, they are obsessing on it, they are looking for someone to blame, they are looking for solutions, they are constantly changing or they are unyielding.
They were watching something else on the TV and fucking around with the pollsters.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

Why else would it be that the polls are so close. Stipulating that everything being said on both sides on these forums is correct; how else can you explain it?



_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE


http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 8:51:23 AM   
Thadius


Posts: 5091
Joined: 10/11/2005
Status: offline
**Fast reply**

Okay, I have to suggest some mandatory drug testing for presidential candidates...

Obama, started his speech today  with "There is no place I would rather be on my birthday than here in Lansing Michigan".

I can think of a lot more places I would rather be.

_____________________________

When the character of a man is not clear to you, look at his friends." ~ Japanese Proverb

(in reply to Vendaval)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 8:55:45 AM   
atursvcMaam


Posts: 1195
Joined: 5/10/2004
Status: offline
   imho, if you all want to get the attention of those in power, vote out everyone that is currently sitting in congress, and up for election.  That would be a statement that the populace is not happy with the current operation of the legislature.  it will get the undivided attention of our next president.  and both parties.  Make your desires loud and clear to those who do get elected, be it drill locally, get the economy in order, do or don't allow the aliens to acquire citizenship, Do or don't raise taxes. all of that.  The president, by himself, has to battle congress to get these things done, if you desire to send an audible message, kick congress in the pants at the same time.
   write to your candidates, and make it clear that they are there because their predecessors did NOT do the job for which you elected them.  OR, you can sit back and whine, and say that your vote does not count, and that you can't do anything.

_____________________________

live hard, die young and leave a good looking corpse when you die.
Love ya, but, when the zombies start chasing us, i am tripping you.
The glass is always full, the question is, "with what?"

(in reply to Vendaval)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 8:56:59 AM   
Vendaval


Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline
What, it's not scenic enough for you?  Where is your patriotism!?

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE


http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to Thadius)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 10:29:30 AM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

Why else would it be that the polls are so close. Stipulating that everything being said on both sides on these forums is correct; how else can you explain it?



...i see a broad similarity between the choice facing Americans and the general election a few years back in the UK when Thatcher faced off against Kinnock. Kinnock was the candidate of change. Thatcher the candidate of more of the same.

Thatchers brand of politics tended toward the divisive. Those whom her rule benefited, benefited hugely. The sizable minority who lost out, lost out hugely. Thus that election became a kind of ideological decision......do i vote for my own specific interests, or do i vote for greater society? Kinnock eventually lost......hindsight suggests it was due to a overconfident campaign. However, the next day you couldn't find anyone who was willing to admit they'd voted for La Thatch. People admitted to me that they felt ashamed, but that tax cut she'd promised was too tempting.

i'm not trying to suggest a right answer here.....just that sometimes an election is about more than the candidates involved. Sometimes an election is society working out an ethical question. Merc, i think the important thing is not that the candidates are lacklustre or not.......it's about making a choice about what the next step for US society ought to be. Which means a bigger debate than whether Obama is inexperienced, or whether McCain is honest.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 10:52:22 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

Sometimes an election is society working out an ethical question. Merc, i think the important thing is not that the candidates are lacklustre or not.......it's about making a choice about what the next step for US society ought to be. Which means a bigger debate than whether Obama is inexperienced, or whether McCain is honest.


Ethics? Which of these men represent that in their past? Or have you been convinced that past decisions don't represent "ethics" in either case? I think the decisions both these men made regarding their philosophical associations is a truer indication of their ethics than any promise or representation made on the campaign stub. Ethics are reveled when a decision is made outside the public light. Both come up short on that basis, determined by the most minimal research. You should ask yourself a question; where they being true to their 'ethics' when they made the decision or now when they distance themselves from it? But of course, the rationalization is that "they didn't know the full truth" or "the 'good intent' was overwhelming". That reasoning is accepted by the same crowd that attempts to pump up their candidate with a favorable comparison to the current administration. Debating with a person from that perspective is a worthless endeavor.

Were there a candidate who represented a "next step" or progress in any direction it would be something to consider. Both of these candidates represent a future that insures special interest status quo in one form or another.

I've another standard to consider.

How about a vote for the candidate that won't have rewarding failure as a key platform plank? Better yet, how about a candidate that doesn't want to punish financial success with more taxes to pay for failures; professional, bureaucratic, corporate, and individual?

Unfortunately too many failures are voting for their piece of the entitlement pie, egged on by special interests and the black hole of bureaucratic sanctimony.

(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 10:55:01 AM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
Merc I have seen you refer before to the 5 million criminal workers in this country,I will not argue their status with you on this thread,what I would like to know though is this....remove them from the equation...magically deport them one and all...who do you see taking those jobs.Quite frankly we are talking ,for the most part ,kitchen help in restraunts ,landscapers,produce pickers and ,car wash worker's and domestics.Now I don't mean to be insulting or dismissive of anyone or their culture....But the idea seems to be if we could remove the illegal alien we could get American's back to work...IMO that is rediculous and silly..

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 10:55:06 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
Merc, I don't know where that type of thinking came from that thinks that enforcing our laws is "optional" regarding illegal aliens or anything else.
You'd think they'd have learned a lesson when we broke the senate phone system and also the fact that more than 90% of Americans are against it.
*If they try that shit again me and some neighbors are going to show up at the senator's district offices carrying pitchforks and lit torches!*
No shit!!!
It'll make for some great news footage and pictures as well as being *very* symbolic!
That's the problem with our govt, they don't FUCKING *LISTEN* to THE PEOPLE!
So, we have to MAKE them LISTEN!

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 11:19:04 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Merc I have seen you refer before to the 5 million criminal workers in this country,I will not argue their status with you on this thread,what I would like to know though is this....remove them from the equation...magically deport them one and all...who do you see taking those jobs.Quite frankly we are talking ,for the most part ,kitchen help in restraunts ,landscapers,produce pickers and ,car wash worker's and domestics.Now I don't mean to be insulting or dismissive of anyone or their culture....But the idea seems to be if we could remove the illegal alien we could get American's back to work...IMO that is rediculous and silly..


mike,
My answer has always been simple to this question; strick enforcement of the employee laws already on the books against the people hiring these workers is the answer. The lack of employment will eliminate the need for deportation. The lines to get back to the country of origin will form on their own without the need of government to pay transportation costs.

The workers are exploited. They are criminals, but at a misdemeanor level compared to their employers felony. Effected most are the US citizens from the highest skill level down to the entry level restaurant worker. Those wages are depressed by the fact that criminal workers accepting less than market wages depress the market.

The result may be that a tomatoes costs $5/each. However I doubt it. What will be depressed is the profit margin of the companies and individuals becoming rich on the current situation. What will also be depressed would be the bureaucracy created to deal with this problem at a variety of levels from heath care and education to 'sanctuary cities' like SF where one of the criminals was released instead of deported due to San Fransisco's 'sanctuary policy.
quote:

 
"'Sanctuary city' no haven for San Francisco family's grief" from the Los Angeles Times reports


It would seem ridiculous and silly to not consider the negative impact these criminals have on the US almost at every level of service. Only one thing more silly; any amnesty program which would give them priority status over the long line of people taking the appropriate, and LEGAL steps to residency status.

< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 8/4/2008 12:08:55 PM >

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 11:35:47 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

Why else would it be that the polls are so close. Stipulating that everything being said on both sides on these forums is correct; how else can you explain it?

According to this source; it's obviously not as obvious as represented by either side.

quote:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows the race for the White House is tied with Barack Obama and John McCain each attracting 44% of the vote. However, when "leaners" are included, it’s McCain 47% and Obama 46%. Source: http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

The great 'change' promised  not good enough? Or is it that many people realize that the only change desired is the change you get back, called a paycheck, after the government bureaucracy sucks up a big chuck of change for social engineering 'good intent' programs. ALL of which have generated only failure and bureaucratic waste.

People aren't convinced that the promise of domestic security not assured by the commitment of 100 years of protecting corporate interests in Iraq? The working class not convinced that the expressed intent of 'legalizing' 5 Million criminal workers helps improve the standard of living of anyone other than the rich and corporate entities that increase their profits through cheap illegal labor?

Sincerely yours,
A Voter Without a Candidate

Strangely the gallup daily tracking is still showing Obama with a lead. Maybe Rasmussen wanted to get some press coverage.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 11:53:14 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

Strangely the gallup daily tracking is still showing Obama with a lead. Maybe Rasmussen wanted to get some press coverage.


Yeah, you're right, Gallop has it as 46-43; for results based on a sample of 2,659 registered voters, the maximum margin of sampling error is ±2 percentage points.
(Source: http://www.gallup.com/poll/109264/Gallup-Daily-Obama-46-McCain-43.aspx )
I don't know why they are even having an election. With that plurality shouldn't he be appointed by acclimation?

Really, is that what was anticipated by even the staunchest Democratic supporter based upon the results of the present Administration? Come now - Jimmy Carter had over 30% lead at the same time with President Ford running behind a pardoned criminal. A pardon that he granted and was like an albatross around his campaign. Yet the end margin of victory was 2%. A practical dead even at this point gives you confidence?

quote:

In 1976, Jimmy Carter, who won that election, was ahead by 33 points in mid-July, but the race narrowed significantly by Election Day and he won by only two points. Source: http://www.gallup.com/poll/108676/July-Leader-Lost-Last-Competitive-US-Elections.aspx 


Yup - the sad situation is that we are looking at a situation that by November, baring any big event, will be trending to a McCain landslide. I just hope that each and every representative up for re-election in any district/State loses. That is, as someone already pointed out, our only voice this election.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 1:08:14 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

5 million criminal workers


That's just plain ignorance. Immigration laws are regulatory and not criminal in nature, hence people working without authorization and without legal status are merely here unlawfully, not criminally.

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 1:19:05 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

5 million criminal workers


That's just plain ignorance. Immigration laws are regulatory and not criminal in nature, hence people working without authorization and without legal status are merely here unlawfully, not criminally.


They entered the county illegally; hence they ARE criminals. Fugitives from justice and processing to be sure; but the reference is as accurate for them as any fugitive from justice. They are unprocessed, but their actions as defined by the law is criminal. A person whose actions are criminal IS a criminal.

You want to differentiate between "unlawful" and "criminal"? If that makes you personally as warm and fuzzy as calling the reference "ignorant" - go for it. However are you consistent? Do you reference a street drug dealer as an "unlicensed pharmacists"? 

Once arrested for these unlawful acts - they ARE criminals. Anything else is rationalized fancy ignorance. "Fancy" ignorance versus "plain" results are the same.  They ARE criminals, as are their employees. All that's missing is enforcement and arrest.

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! - 8/4/2008 1:27:43 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
What to do ? First of all I agree with not reelecting anyone, with the possible exceptions of Paul, Trafficant and maybe Tancredo. I actually proposed that a long time ago. Don't let them get comfortable.

And it is alot harder to get someone into the senate, there are only 100 of them while there are 435 congressmen. Therefore it takes alot more votes. That means it takes alot more money, under the present system.

In comparison there is only one President, so the task looks insurmountable. But one thing that I want to bring up, it is we who wasted the last four, or possibly eight years, or possibly more. First of all, I think it is a bad idea to ever reelect a Pesident. They do their worst deeds in their second term and that is because they know they can't run again. So in a way term limits have backfired. Sometimes a President will actually get his buddies indicted so he can give them a pardon, which usually happens very near the end of his term you may have noticed.

So the solution is the making of a President. That can be difficult for commoners like us. And don't fool yourself, I don't care if you make a million bucks a year, you are a commoner. Bill Gates is right on the edge. Proof ? Look at the court cases that have gone against Microshaft. If they were Haliburton that would have never happened.

What it would take is ALOT of us, to stop talking on CM with our thumb up our ass, to go out and find the best way to use the next four years. Or maybe eight. Obama is pretty likely to win I think, and his popularity might just do quite well. You never know. If that happens we can't get our Man in for eight years.

But who would that be ? I would support Ron Paul, but he is too old. I would support him though his views and mine about abortion law are diametrically opposed. But he is too old, and really not much of a public speaker. He probably would be the best Man for the job, and the checks and balances system should work well enough to keep him from making abortion illegal. But he is too old. How old is he going to be eight years from now ?

Bring someone up from the bottom. It might not work, but with eight years to work with, there may be a glimmer of hope. Opponents will of course bring up lack of experience, just let me be speechwriter that day. "Experience in what ? Screwing the American People, stepping on people to climb to the top, taking bribes and generally hurting our country ? I AM PROUD not to have that kind of experience and for decades you have had people with that kind of experience. Look at where we are. So do you really want experience ?".

Even though some people are doing well, their numbers decrease monthly. Of course they were doing well when they bought a house, and now look at the foreclosures. It is not all predatory lending and irresponsible buyers. Sometimes it's that their job got shipped overseas. And who's fault would that be ? It would be the fault of our "experienced leaders". If I were part of government I would have to share in the blame as well.

What people need to realize is that we have a mass market, therefore we need mass production. They gave the brownwares (TVs, stereos, most of the electronics) market away. Do you have any idea how many of these units they sell ? This is exactly what is screwing us up. We are importing all this crap, and it is crap they are building, and at the same time the whole class of semi-skilled workers in this country loses.

If the trend continues, there will be only three or four jobs here; politician, engineer, retail or fast food, and the things migrant workers do like pick fruits and stuff like that. The middle class did not consist just of engineers and such. Alot of the middle class either never got the chance, or possibly wouldn't be able to become a doctor or a nuclear physicist. But they are willing to work. The good manufacturing jobs did require some skill, a complete oaf would be relegated to sweeping the floor or something. There were machinists and welders all across this country at work. Look for some of them at Walmart, in uniform at the door.

There are enough people out there to support mass production of at least some of the things we consume the most. And I mean that in dollar value, not units. I mean plasma TVs not toilet paper. Hell, even the auto industry is in trouble.

This is where our "experienced leaders" have led us.

T

(in reply to Vendaval)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Yes - The Presidential Candidates ARE that BAD! Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109