Your 2nd paragraph is complete and utter nonsense. sm
Posted By: Not the OP on 2008-02-21
In Reply to: Because we all have a spirit whether you believe it or not. I sm - Kim
You wrote: 'Besides, a lot of atheists who try to disprove that God ever existed will usually come to the conclusion that there is too much evidence to prove that He does exist. It usually scares the you know what out of them and they become converts.'
And you know this how? I would say show me the evidence to back up this ridiculous claim, but I already know you have none. It's your opinion/religious propaganda, and it's blantantly false. You also have it backwards. You're implying people start out being athiest, then convert to religion. It's the other way around, when religious or secular people start questioning all the improbable/impossible things the bible is overflowing with, in addition to all of its inconsistenties and outright contradictions.
Forgive me if I doubt that you're an expert on athiests, and forgive me if I doubt your critical thinking skills, because religion frowns upon that - you're not supposed to question god or think for yourself, just obey his commands, or should I say, various human interpretations of his commands...
If there was indeed
'too much evidence to prove that He does exist' then everyone would believe in him. How could anyone deny it? They couldn't. But that's just it, there is no evidence to prove it, whereas there actually IS scientific evidence to the contrary, that you apparently are unaware of or haven't investigated.
Instead, you're willing to believe something based only on 'faith.' In every other area of your life where you'd want or even *demand* facts, proof, or concrete evidence before believing something so important, with religion (some) people are all too willing to blindly accept it on faith.
BTW, an athiest doesn't have to DISprove god (you can't prove a negative, anyway), you have to prove that he *does* exist, and you can't. And wouldn't you think if he really existed, he would prove it to the entire world's satisfaction anyway and put an end to the debate and all the relious wars, conflict, genocide, misery, suffering, etc? He'd rather we kill each over it? I think not. It makes no sense.
You also wrote: 'You can say all you want, but you just can't argue with a completely changed life'
Yes, I can argue it. You changed your life because *you* wanted to change it. You! Not some mystical, magical, invisible being in the sky who cares about your every thought and action. People change their lives for the better every day, without religion. IMO, if you hadn't found religion, you would've kept looking until you found something else that worked for you, and it probably would've been a lot healthier than the brainwashing, closed-minded, divisive phenomenon that is religion.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
I'm sorry but that is utter nonsense!
This is America people. If you don't like our National Anthem or our flag being flown.......go back to whatever country you came from. For someone to say that the American flag is offensive......that just shocks me. We have lost our freedom to fly our own country's flag for fear of offending others. What has our country come to. This is America....that is our flag.....and it was a national holiday to remember veterans and she couldn't put an American flag out. I truly don't buy that there were other people who were offended by it either. What a crock.
I think I would go out and buy a small flag and put it on my desk and keep it there everyday. Screw that!
I agree. This is a complete and utter...... sm
show of lack of respect for his family. They have lost a loved one and should be left alone in their time of grief. While I don't agree with his chosen profession, his family is not to blame and they are the ones being hurt by this, not him.
utter nonsense - where in the world did you come up with this line
Been watching a little too much Dr. Phil I guess.
This is utter nonsense and if so then we better keep an eye on you with everything you've been saying.
An utter disrespect...
and sad statement is made in this video.
This is utter BS, but I'd take a socialist nm
xxxxxxxx
utter fool of herself. nm
x
The very nerve!!! The utter gall!!!
Imagine McC hosting a dinner honoring Obama. NOT!
utter rubbish - show us the link
This is complete and utter nonsense. What study? One by democratic backers? Show me the link. The democrats have always been the "party dudes", usually you find more doped up, meth heads, war protesters, group hug type people voting democrat. They vote on looks and personality, not issues. Maybe when you said even keel instead you should have said "doped up to the state of oblivian". The conservatives have always been the party of free thinkers, small business owners, intellects, level headed, and open minded individuals. We look at both sides and listen to both opponents, and we are intelligent enough to decide who is throwing the "bull" around.
Every post I see on this board from a liberal is usually attacking personal and unimportant things (her daughter is pregnant, she was in a beauty contest, she had a down syndrom baby, she bought a tanning bed, she went to more than one school McCain is old, his wife is rich, Barack is good looking and his wife is pretty, he's a graduate of a law school, Biden (well nobody is saying anything about Biden - makes me wonder why). But all the issues I'm seeing by the liberals are all personality issues. Nothing of subtance. The messages I'm seeing from the conservatives are about issues. This is what Barack's policy will do, this is what McCain's policy will do, this is where Palin stands on this issue, etc.
You're obvious willingness to believe utter crap said it. nm
nm
I agree with poster below. Don't even waste your time reading the post. - Sarcastic and utter no
Oh brother - get real.
That's nonsense.
The post is obviously intact and there is no indication whatsoever that ANON advocated any kind of lawlessness. Many people are questioning the wisdom of giving shoot-to-kill orders knowing full well that many of the people of NO have no choice BUT to find food and liquid any way they can as a matter of desperation rather than criminality.
I believe the soldiers and policemen on the ground there as a whole have the sense to know who's behaving like a criminal and who is not, and I do think they should have the authority to both protect themselves and stop the really bad guys.
Too bad some people DON'T have the sense it takes to know who is intending harm and who is not.
such nonsense
While I don't think this represents the views of most conservatives (I truly believe that most Americans, whether Republican or Democrat, want what is best for this country, just have different ways of approaching it), it is still disturbing that there are people out there who think this way. You could also include people in this category who believe that the Holocaust didn't really happen, men really haven't been to the moon, Jews blew up the WTC, and other conspiracy theory/ridiculous nonsense that is hard to believe that anyone could take seriously. They're lucky there is no intelligence test required to vote.
What nonsense. (nm)
nm
what nonsense
Let;s discs something relevant -- like McCain's handling of foreign affairs with an explosive temper and short fuse and its impact on national safety.
What's this nonsense?...nm
nm
Ever since all the mad cow nonsense...
I have not been a fan. I think that it should have been criminal what she (with no real evidence) did to the cattle industry.
You know, I actually think that all of that nonsense
was constructive. Look at how much more respectful we are all being to each other.
:O)
This is nonsense
My parents never investigated relatives of guys I dated. Sometimes they didn't even meet the guy I was dating, and when they did they would know where he lived, but not who his parents or siblings were.
I lived in a small town of about 5000 people. Not everyone knew everyone. We knew most but not everyone. So you live in Wasilla and know for a fact that everyone knows everyone?
Oh please on what Gov. Palin knows and doesn't know. Talk about buying into the hate-filled bashing of Gov. Palin and repeating the false statements that she didn't know this or that.
Good luck to ya.
Nonsense.
nm
That is absolute nonsense.
Obama is the one making promises he cannot keep. Obama is the one connected to people and organizations like Rasheed Khalidi, Bill Ayers, Rev Wright, Rev Flager, Farrakhan, ACORN, Rezko. You people are so consumed by this promise of change that you can't see what is right in front of you.....a man who is lying and telling you what you want to hear just to get elected into the White House.
I will give Obama credit where credit is due. Obama is an excellent speech giver with a teleprompter. He is great when no one is there to question him. When he can just spout out his usual rhetoric without actually answering any questions....Obama is top notch. I think Obama's infomercial was a smart move. He did a great job so I've heard. It saddens me that people are going to take the word of any candidate without doing fact checking. Obama is a liar. He is telling us what we want to hear and is misleading us.
If you want change, you will get it with him but it won't be the change he promised. False hope, broken promises....that is the real Barrack Obama.
My thoughts exactly. Nonsense. How can he?
But he says 95% of american workers, not american workers who PAY TAXES. He has never said that, his website doesn't say that. You are classified as a worker if you work a week a year. Some people draw wages so low they don't pay federal income taxes after deductions. A LOT of people, in fact, 30 to 40% of all workers. The top 4-5%, the richest folks, pay the lion's share of ALL taxes now, well over 60% of ALL taxes. And he wants to hit them harder. But I digress.
95% of workers..his words. 30-40% of american workers DO NOT pay federal income tax now. So HOW is he going to give a tax break or cut to them? Either he is lying about the 95%, or he is going to cut checks. Please, someone, anyone, of the Obama faithful, explain to me how he is going to do that.
If he means 95% of people who PAY taxes, he completely MISSES his target group!!!
Obama and his nonsense sm
i have purposely stayed out of the debate for/against Obama but after this latest blunder, I gotta speak my peace.
This guy is only interested in himself and not this country. He is only interested in pushing his agenda and his so-called winning personality. He has made this country a "laughing stock." He needs to keep his rear-end in Washington and not trying to be a comic on the Leno show and wherever else he intends to "appear." The only thing he is good at is spending money he does not have and slick talking! It feels like we do not even have any leadership in Washington now with him in the white house. This country is in a mess..........the biggest mess it has ever been in. God help us all!
Please don't talk nonsense about God.
...or else you have to explain a lot of other things like Hitler and the Holocaust. I hate it when people attribute the evil deeds and bad decisions of mankind to God.
The last paragraph of
this article is just tooooooo good. I would LOVE to see the Bush supporters actually really "go to Iraq," and for free!!!!
|
Sacrifice? Count Me Out
If You Supported the War, Pay For It
|
by Ted Rall |
|
If America is truly on a war footing," Thom Shanker asks in the New York Times, "why is so little sacrifice asked of the nation at large?" Military recruiters are coming up short of volunteers, yet neither party is pushing for a draft. No one is proposing a tax increase to cover the $60 billion annual cost of the Iraq and Afghan wars. There are no World War II-style war bond drives, no victory gardens, not even gas rationing. Back here in the fatherland, only "support our troops" car ribbons indicate that we're at war--and they aren't even bumper stickers, they're magnetic. Apparently Americans aren't even willing to sacrifice the finish on their automobiles to promote the cause.
"Nobody in America is asked to sacrifice, except us," the paper quotes an officer who just returned from a year in rose-petal-paved Iraq. "[Symbolic signs of support are] just not enough," grumbles a brigadier general. "There has to be more," he demands. "The absence of a call for broader national sacrifice in a time of war has become a near constant topic of discussion among officers and enlisted personnel," the general claims.
Northwestern University professor Charles Moskos says: "The political leaders are afraid to ask the public for any real sacrifice, which doesn't speak too highly of the citizenry."
To which I say: Screw that. It's not my duty to suffer for this pointless war. I've been against it all along, and you can stick your victory garden where the desert sun can't penetrate.
I was among hundreds of thousands of Americans who marched against invading Iraq in early 2003. Tens of millions cheered us on. The largest mass protest movement in history (so designated by the Guinness Book of World Records) brought together pacifists, humanists and people like me. We knew Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. We didn't believe that the same White House that propped up dictatorships in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Egypt, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia--that had, when it suited them, supported Saddam--could possibly be interested in liberating the people of Iraq. When we scrutinized coverage of the CIA's prewar analyses, we found that there wasn't any. There were only reports dating back to 1998, ancient history in the intelligence business. We absolutely didn't trust Dick "cakewalk" Cheney's breezy predictions.
Bush and Cheney ignored our concerns. Instead of building a solid case and bipartisan political consensus, they bullied and lied to Congress and the UN to scam us into this unwinnable war. Who can blame them? They work for ExxonMobil and Halliburton, not the American people. But they, not us, broke Iraq. It can't be fixed, it's not our fault and it's not our problem. There's no reason to relinquish our creature comforts to back their grubby little oil grab.
The most galling aspect of this fiasco is that it was entirely predictable. I know; I predicted it. Here's my column written back in July 2002:
"Most experts expect Iraq to disintegrate into civil war after an overthrow of Saddam's oppressive Ba'ath Party," I wrote. "Opinion of the United States is now at an all-time low among Muslims around the world. Going after Iraq will make matters worse. Why give radical anti-American Islamists even more political ammunition with which to recruit suicide bombers and attract the financial donations that fund their assaults?"
I'm no genius, but even I could see that this war was doomed eight months before the invasion:
"Do the Kurds deserve a homeland? Sure. Would Iraq be better off without Saddam? Probably. But if we're smart, we won't be the ones to blow over this particular house of cards. We have too much to lose and too little to gain in the mess that would certainly ensue."
Did I call that one or what?
David Hendrickson, a scholar at Colorado College, tells the Times: "Bush understands that the support of the public for war--especially the war in Iraq--is conditioned on demanding little of the public." Of course, Bush himself hasn't given up a second of vacation or a single donated dollar, much less one of his hard-partying daughters, to the "war effort." Sacrifice is a hard sell down here among the citizenry when we don't see it starting where it should start, among our leaders.
I'm already sacrificing too much for a war I always believed was stupid and wrong. I'm paying three dollars a gallon for buck-fifty gas and walking through gauntlets of over-armed National Guardboys at airports and bus stations. I'm in greater danger than ever before of getting blown up by a pissed-off fanatic. And I dread the giant tax hike we'll eventually need to pay off Bush's deficit. But these aren't enough sacrifices for Bush and his vainglorious generals, who are planning "a Civilian Reserve, a sort of Peace Corps for professionals. . . a program to seek commitments from bankers, lawyers, doctors, engineers, electricians, plumbers and solid-waste disposal experts to deploy to conflict zones for months at a time on reconstruction assignments, to relieve pressure on the military."
If you voted for Bush, here's your chance to plant your butt where your ridiculous car magnet is, smack dab in the middle of the Sunni Triangle. Good luck.
© 2005 Ted Rall
### |
|
Might we see the whole paragraph?
context, you know, to make a valid decision?
The last paragraph.
Now I know Emanuel is chief of staff and why obama picked him, makes sense.
youre babbling nonsense - does
not make any sense. Move on dot arrgh.
I agee with you - what Obama says is nonsense
Finally you see him for what he is - nonsense.
birth certificate nonsense
Personally, I like the way factcheck.org handled this: They went and looked at the birth certificate. Then they went and looked at the birth announcement in the newspaper from 1961. Now, admittedly, it's possible that Obama's disciples FLEW BACK IN TIME to plant the birth announcement so that their Chosen One could ascend to power. I think we do have to consider that option carefully, because it leads us to ask--what if NEXT they GO BACK IN TIME TO CREATE AN OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT-ELECT FOR *EVERY* ELECTION EVER HELD IN THE US????
I agree with the last paragraph, as well.
This is definitely a campaign against the First Amendment, and I believe Bush will do whatever he can to silence people who either disagree with him or who catch him in lies (a full-time job in and of itself).
Bob Geiger - see 2nd paragraph
Actually that's not the complete story...
You did not mention that when Summersby was dying of cancer she stated that it had been a romantic affair after all and wrote about it in her book. This contradicted what she had earlier stated. Who knows what really happened, and does it really matter? I doubt it. It only proves that we're all flawed humans, even some Republicans!!
The last paragraph is why I posted it.
I am not at all convinced that the issue of abortion is a liberal or conservative stance. I think it tends to be tied to conservative because of its religious roots, but even that is debatable. Women throughout history regardless of religion have been having abortions. I believe it simply to be your own belief that really should not be attached to a political process.
As war is always a political process, the comparison isn't really fair is it? and I really, really hope that you are not referring to the war on Iraq because there is just too much refuting evidence to continue to believe we were justified in invading Iraq in the guise that we were defending ourselves.
How can you be pro-choice in the voice of war knowing that the very nature of it kills more people than abortion ever could? Just the war in Iraq alone has probably killed more people than the abortions in the United States in the past 100 years.
Makes no sense to me.
Please do complete a list
of Obama's so-called life-time experienced and then list Palin's. The only thing he has over her is he is in Washington and she is not....which IMHO is refreshing. Maybe we need someone who hasn't been corrupted by Washington. I still do not see how you people keep saying Obama has experience....HE DOESN'T!!!! You can't complain about Palin not having experience if you are for Obama because you are only bashing your own candidate......although you people refuse to see that. I can't help but chuckle.
Not complete! YOU ARE SLEEPING.
nm
No, it's not complete......still in the courts
Obama and hs lawyer have tried to get this entire thing dismissed but to no avail. I guess this judge can't be bought. We'll see.
Ho hum, lost me after second paragraph
x
Your last sentence of the third paragraph was just as...sm
uncalled for, I believe, and untrue.
They have to complete 40 hours of
community service each year. The district provides a list of opportunities for them to chose from. If they want to do something that is not on the list, such as initiate their own project, they simply have to have it approved beforehand to be sure it will count toward their credits. Scouting activities, NHS CS commitments, etc., all count toward this requireement.
I am a complete cipher
yet you know what I would do in any given situation? That is the kind of mindless reactionary, partisan thinking that dug this country in a pit.
This post is not complete without this
http://wonkette.com/406046/look-its-one-photo-where-george-bush-has-his-coat-off
Bush in shirt sleeves..2nd day in office, if I am recalling KO's report from last week correctly.
I like this paragraph in your post....
'For the most part I will find people who live in other countries and are observing what is going on here to be a lot more credible because they do not have an agenda.'
Right, and they are more objective as they are far away from it all.
you should forward that last paragraph
to the White House where they seem to think terrorists can be rational and reasoned with and will play nice with us.
There are complete morons
on both sides of the fence here. There are just as many crooked and ignorant dems as there are pubs. Once again, I wish you guys would stop playing party lines and actually see particular people for who and what they are instead of giving them free passes just because of their party. If you would take your blinders off, you would see that both parties have screwed us and they only complain about spending when it is the other party in control. Get a clue!
Keep up the good work? You are hilarious, such nonsense!...nm
nm
In one paragraph you have not only told me more than I ever wanted to know.
You have outlined and described in perfect detail the problem with why your arguments can never be recognized as anything but dividing. Gt, believe me, this is not all about you, which it always seems to end up being about in your posts. The fact that you refuse, not fail, but refuse to accept anything, any explanation, any single example of the image you project as well as your close-minedness, is illustrated in every post that you make.
I agree with the assessment in the last paragraph.sm
They will use kiddie porn and so-called domestic terrorism to limit our use of the Internet. Everything is greatly exaggerated to induce fear, and then you will allow them to slice up more of your liberties.
Yes, and regarding that final paragraph re: Iran
Seymour Hersh has yet to get it wrong, no matter how much the King George and his men attack.
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060821fa_fact
But you complete ignored the rest of the post....
I am just shaking my head. It is amazing to me that anyone would think God is okay with abortion. I believe he is okay with personal choice, of course I do, my faith is based greatly on that belief. Someone makes a choice when they take any life, inside the womb or outside. That does not mean God condones murder. You are representing that the Bible, and therefore God, condones abortion, and I cannot wrap my mind around that. To follow your line of reasoning, I should be able to steal from you and not have the government interfere because it is my choice to steal from you and I have to answer only to my maker. If a person breaks into your house (his choice) and rapes you or kills you, (his choice), then he should be free to do so and only have to face his maker. Can you not see how destructive that line of thinking can become? You think that is ridiculous, but I promise you that 20 years ago people thought abortion was ridiculous, same sex marriage would horrify my parents...if left unchecked, horrible things can happen. The amazing thing is, the moral compass becomes so skewed that the horrible becomes the acceptable. As I said before, that kind thinking is what helped a madman rise to power, and thousands upon thousands of people either jumped on the bandwagon or turned their heads and condoned something horrific, on the premise that a whole race of people were inferior and subhuman and therefore it was all right to exterminate them. THAT is what happens when people begin to devalue life. I do not want that to EVER happen again, to ANYONE. I realize that is probably falling on deaf ears because I will get the rote I don't believe it is life again and you are unable to draw the parallel. You see, that is a fundamental difference between you and me...I care about what happens to you as an individual and what happens to this country and every person in it, so I gave it one last shot. It is hard for me to just walk away. But walk away I shall, because sometimes you have to. We shall have to agree to disagree, but I will keep standing for what I believe in and calling wrong what I believe is wrong, just as you do. God bless, Maryland Gal.
CNN working to get COMPLETE info.
Perhaps there is more to the story than sam is trying to insinuate...like some of the replies have been suggesting. Take a peek at O's record on Katrina.
http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/08/29/when-the-cameras-are-off-barack-obamas-hurricane-katrina-record/
1. Here is O's record on rebuilding after Hurriane Katrina
2. Sept. 2, 2005: Obama holds press conference urging Illinoisans to contribute to the Hurricane Katrina relief efforts.
3. Sept. 5, 2005: Obama goes to Houston to visit evacuees with Presidents Clinton and Bush.
4. Sept. 7, 2005: Obama introduces bill to create a national emergency family locator system
5. Sept. 8, 2005: Obama introduces bill to create a National Emergency Volunteers Corps. Sept. 8, 2005: Obama co-sponsors the Katrina Emergency Relief Act of 2005 introduced by Senator Harry Reid
6. Sept. 8, 2005: Obama co-sponsors the Hurricane Katrina Bankruptcy Relief and Community Protection Act of 2005 introduced by Senator Russ Feingold
7. Sept. 12, 2005: Obama introduces legislation requiring states to create an emergency evacuation plan for society’s most vulnerable
8. Sept. 15, 2005: Obama issues public response to President Bush’s speech about Gulf Coast rebuilding.
9. Sept. 21, 2005: Obama co-sponsors bill to establish a Katrina commission to investigate response to the disaster introduced by Hillary Clinton
10. Sept. 21, 2005: Obama appears on NPR to discuss the role of poverty in Hurricane Katrina.
11. Sept. 22, 2005: Obama and Coburn’s Hurricane Katrina financial oversight bill unanimously passes Senate committee.
12. Sept. 22, 2005: Obama’s amendment requiring evacuation plans unanimously passes Senate committee.
13. Sept. 28, 2005: Obama and Coburn issue statement about the need for a Chief Financial Officer to oversee the financial mismanagement and suspicious contracts occurring in the reconstruction process
14. Sept. 29, 2005: Obama and Coburn investigate possible FEMA refusal of free cruise ship offer
15. Oct. 6, 2005: Obama and Coburn issue statement on FEMA Decision to re-bid Katrina contracts
16. Oct. 6, 2005: Obama co-sponsors Gulf Coast Infrastructure Redevelopment and Recovery Act of 2005.
17. Oct. 21, 2005: Obama releases statement decrying the extension of FEMA director, Michael “Brownie” Brown’s contract. Obama calls Brown’s contract extension, “unconscionable.”
18. Nov. 17, 2005: Obama and Coburn introduce legislation asking FEMA to immediately re-bid all Katrina reconstruction contracts.
19. Feb. 1, 2006: Obama gives Senate floor speech on his legislation to help children affected by Hurricane Katrina
20. Feb. 2, 2006: Obama introduces legislation to help low-income children affected by Hurricane Katrina
21. Feb. 23, 2006: Obama issues statement responding to a White House report on Hurricane Katrina. Obama noted that the top two recommendations that the report had for the federal government were initiatives he had been working on since immediately after the storm hit. Obama called the administration’s response “delinquent.”
22. May 2, 2006: Obama gives speech about no-bid contracts in Hurricane Katrina reconstruction
23. May 4, 2006: Obama’s legislation to end no-bid contracts for Hurricane Katrina reconstruction passed the Senate.
24. June 15, 2006: Obama and Coburn announce legislation to require amendment to create competitive bidding for Hurricane Katrina reconstruction for federal contracts over $500,000. Although it passed previously, the language was stripped in conference.
25. June 15, 2006: Obama releases podcast about his pending Katrina reconstruction legislation in the Senate.
26. June 16, 2006: Obama and Coburn get no-bid Hurricane Katrina reconstruction amendment into Department of Defense authorization bill.
27. July 14, 2006: Obama and Coburn’s legislation to end abuse of no-bid contracts passes senate as amendment to Department of Defense authorization bill.
28. August 11, 2006: Obama visits Xavier University in New Orleans to give Commencement address
29. August 14, 2006: Obama and Coburn ask FEMA to address ballooning no-bid contracts for Gulf Coast reconstruction
30. Sept. 29, 2006: Obama and Coburn legislation to prevent abuse of no-bid contracts in the wake of disaster passes Senate to be sent to President’s desk to become law.
31. Feb. 2007-Present: As Obama begins his Presidential campaign he references Katrina as a part of his stump speech as he travels around the country in his familiar line, “That we are not a country which preaches compassion and justice to others while we allow bodies to float down the streets of a major American city. That is not who we are.”
32. June 20, 2007: Obama co-sponsors Gulf Coast Housing Recovery Act of 2007 introduced by Senator Chris Dodd.
33. July 27, 2007: Obama and colleagues get a measure in the Homeland Security bill that will investigate FEMA trailers that may contain the toxic chemical, formaldehyde.
34. Aug. 26, 2007: Obama outlines a detailed Hurricane Katrina recovery plan.
35. December 18, 2007: Obama calls on President Bush to protect affordable housing in New Orleans
36. February 16, 2008: Obama releases statement on toxic Gulf Coast trailers
We will soon find out once the investigation is complete
x
|
