Obama To Limit Debates

Here is the entire ( un-cherry picked ) statement from the Obama Campaign.

Debates and forums going forward

By David Plouffe - Aug 18th, 2007 at 11:06 am EDT  

As we head into the fall, the campaign is entering a new more engaged phase that will give voters an even greater sense of Barack's message of change and require the campaign to make decisions that balance the important role of debates and maximize time to run the kind of campaign we need to.

We have just been thru a period of three debates/forums in six days and the outlook for the future holds more of the same. And, because of likely calendar movement, once we get past Labor Day the Iowa caucuses are less than 120 days away.

So far, Barack has attended seven Democratic debates and nineteen candidate forums. There are five remaining sanctioned DNC debates, which we are committed to attend and two Iowa debates normally held in January, which are being held in December, which we are also committed to attend. We will also be attending the Univision debate in Florida on September 9. This means that by the end of this year, Obama will have participated in a total of 15 Democratic debates.

The debates have been important moments for our campaign, demonstrating clearly that Barack Obama is the candidate who will bring about the greatest change to our broken politics. Looking at the first sanctioned DNC debate in South Carolina, Obama was scored the clear winner by undecided voters in South Carolina and New Hampshire.

Unfortunately, we simply cannot run the kind of campaign we want and need to, engaging with voters in the early states and February 5 states, if our schedule is dictated by dozens of forums and debates. Ultimately, the one group left out of the current schedule is the voters and they are the ones who ask the toughest questions and most deserve to have those questions answered face to face.

Therefore, after this week, we will only be attending the five DNC debates through the sanctioning period of December 10, Univision, and the two Iowa debates previously mentioned. Candidate forums - where candidates appear sequentially will be considered, but we are unlikely to accept many of these. Instead, Barack will spend his time answering questions directly from voters in places like Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada, and elsewhere. We simply cannot continue to hopscotch from forum to forum and run a campaign true to the bottom up movement for change that propelled Barack into this race.

After the sanctioning period, there will undoubtedly be a large number of debates scheduled in the early states and in February 5 states. We will make decisions on those as we get closer, but will clearly be doing a healthy number of debates after the sanctioning period.

Many friends and terrific organizations are sponsoring or planning to sponsor debates and forums. So this is not an easy decision for us to execute. But it simply won't work to navigate this one by one. We felt we needed to make our approach clear and consistent.

I think this approach will be better for the voters and the campaign.

David


Poll
Is It Smart To Limit debates In An Effort To Reach The Voters ?
Yes
No

Votes: 51
Results : Vote Link : Polls

Display:


Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 2)

Debates and forums help you reach voters , unless you think those that watch debates and forums aren't voters.

This move won't help him much , it might hurt him with all these groups he will be shunning. When Edwards , Clinton and all other prez candidate show up at these debates/forums and Obama isn't there it will reflect poorly on him.

This is a duplication of diaries though.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:15:05 PM EST

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (2.16 / 6)

no the other diary is troll piece of shit.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:22:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 2)

There is no point in participating because no matter what happens, the TV pundits always declare Hillary the winner.  In one of the last debates, Hillary was booed off the stage and the BIASED tv pundits still declared her the winner.  It's best for the candidates to focus on the voters and not biased tv pundits.  I think it is a good decision.


by allmiview on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:45:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

I too noticed how these things have become a farce.  Calling these debates is ludicrous.

FYI, I just came back from canvasing in NH today and spoke to over a dozen Democratic and Independent voters.  All but 2 were undecided.  None mentioned seeing any debates.  Some have read the headlines, but few bother with the stories that follow.  The voters there are used to and want direct contact with the candidates.

Obama's decision is a sound one.  Let the other candidates continue to hold these 60 second "debates".  Without Barack it will become even more boring than it already is.


by wizinit on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 08:40:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 2)

That's  a "duplication" lie. This is the actual statement. Not a piece of trolled cherry picked crap.

Period !


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:31:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

Actually, several polls this year have shown that the debates have had little effect in converting someone to a candidate.  If these debates had 4 or maybe 5 people at the most, they'd be worth something... Gravel and Kucinich shreiking like banshees does nothing for anyone.


by yitbos96bb on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 02:56:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Go to the other diary, (3.00 / 3)

where you guys sign up as different posters just to click a piece of shit diary into recommendation status.  Unfortunately, you guys can not do that on Daily Kos, because you will be tr'd into oblivion.  That is why many of you stay here and decided to pile on Obama, which is your choice, but in the same token you have just brought this site down in context and conversation.

In fact, I don't see Clinton disagreeing with Obama on this.  All of them have extremely tight schedules and they can not be everywhere, at once.  In fact, it was Clinton that did not even want to participate in the Univision debate, but when the format changed, "she did".

Anyway, it does not bother me.  He need to do what he is doing.  Meeting people in the early states.  And there is 9/10 more debates, all in early states before the first caucus?  More than enough.


by iamready on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 03:30:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 2)

It's fair to debate his strategy, I agree with it because Obama is not going to win this primary with traditional single issue dem interest groups. However to call Obama a "coward" when Hillaryt herself expressed a willigness to change the nature of these forums takes some kind of "Chutzpah".


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:17:52 PM EST

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (none / 0)

Actually I haven't called him a coward , because I don't think its helpful to call our candidates names or people for that matter.

However you have it all wrong , Clinton/Edwards were actually advocating more substantive debates , Obama is advocating pulling out of debates , so you apparently have it upside down. But I think you know that , that is why you said

" Hillaryt herself expressed a willigness to change the NATURE of these forums ".

No need to be disingenous.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:22:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

Again. That's a lie.

Clinton and Edwards were clearly CAUGHT wanting to remove people from the debates.

Tell the truth.


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:33:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

So why did they want to remove people at the debate , so as to make it more substantive.

What is obama doing ,

Limiting his appearance , in other words I don't want to show up.

A little clear thinking on your part is appropriate.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:37:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (2.33 / 3)

A little less spinning on your part would be more effective. By your defending Hillary and Edwards position, you just defended Barack Obama.

You spun yourself so hard , you ended up backing Obamas decision.

Ha Ha Ha !

Dizzy much?


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:44:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (none / 0)

You know I give up on you , you clearly find Obama's position indefensible.

The best advice for him is too rescind his decision because it will hurt him more if he doesn't attend this forums than the fear of his gaffes and being outshined by other candidates.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:49:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

You give up.

I'll take that as a cry "UNCLE"


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:51:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 3)

I don't understand your reasoning, and I am a Clinton fence sitter.  I read the totality of the other diary, which is horrible, especially having front page authors go alone with inaccurate banter to egg people on.  Now you come into this diary, just to hi-jack it.  You do have your own diary, which you are listed repeatedly as stating your anti-Obama stance, why don't you go back over there?


by caroline becker on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 03:48:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

Looks like the makings of a win-win. Obama ducks the debates. The other candidates have more time for substantive discussion. We all win!


by hwc on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 03:58:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (2.00 / 2)

Yes. Your candidate has an extra 5 to 10 minuets to stick her foot in her mouth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh6J1Gykq GU


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 04:48:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Substantive discussion? (none / 0)

In Presidential debates? Since when?

Just about the last thing you'll find in one of these 60 second/answer debates is "substantive discussion." This is why Hillary Clinton is so good in them.


by Mystylplx on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 05:18:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

Yet you didn't tell the piece of shit who wrote the earlier diary saying Obama was cowardly that he was wrong.... makes you just as bad.


by yitbos96bb on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 03:02:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

What part of "They're killing us out there" indicates they were seeking more substance?

Sounds like they were more worried about the amount of substantial criticism they were receiving.

In other words, the substance was killing them.


by Jacor on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 04:12:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

Where did you hear or read he's "pulling out" of debates.  He said not accept anymore for the year!  geeesh...people just can't read.  Read the parts form his website.

"Therefore, after this week, we will only be attending the five DNC debates through the sanctioning period of December 10"

Then this

"After the sanctioning period, there will undoubtedly be a large number of debates scheduled in the early states and in February 5 states. We will make decisions on those as we get closer, but will clearly be doing a healthy number of debates after the sanctioning period."

Talk about over-reacting.  People should read the candidates memos for themselves rather than the spin and mischaracterizations by other people.


by Jalenth on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 12:03:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 2)

he's not going top win playing Hillary's pander game, why should he try.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:18:34 PM EST

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

What better way?

Reaching them on the CAMPAIGN TRAIL!


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:42:33 PM EST

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

Right. On the campaign trail people will begin to notice how often Hillary ducks out of answering questions from real people. She attracts far more hecklers, and does more flipping and flopping trying to disagree, with what she is already on record agreeing with. I believe that her flaws will become more noticeable if there are fewer opportunities to play to her pundit advantage and sound bite strength.


by jazzyjay on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 07:17:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 3)

What better way to reach voters than thru a forum.

Personal appearances, town hall meetings, dinners and lunchs, speechs, tv interviews, etc etc.

The whole debate thing is so over-rated as to be absurd. The skills needed to do well at a debate with 30 second to one minute answers is almost exactly the opposite of the skills needed to be a good President. Debates like they are done reward candidates who can memorize a rolodex of pre-prepared answers and deliver them in soundbite form. This is not a skill a President of the United States will have much use for once in office.

The worst thing about debates is that almost no-one watches them, but instead they get to hear the MSM decalaring Hillary Clinton the winner no matter what actually happened. If 2 million people watch a debate and most of them think obama won, that doesn't make any difference if 200 million people watch the MSM pundits stand in lockstep and declare Hillary Clinton the winner.

Obama is not good in the contest of dueling soundbites we call Presidential debates in this country. It's a smart move to avoid participating in every single one. He's done most of them and will still do more, but just because someone says, "let's have a debate" doesn't mean he has any obligation to attend.


by Mystylplx on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 01:50:40 PM EST

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (none / 0)

The skills needed to do well at a debate with 30 second to one minute answers is almost exactly the opposite of the skills needed to be a good President. Debates like they are done reward candidates who can memorize a rolodex of pre-prepared answers and deliver them in soundbite form. This is not a skill a President of the United States will have much use for once in office.

Couldn't disagree more.

One of the most important jobs of the President is to communicate with the American people in a concise, coherent manner. Good Presidents have the guts to stand up to the questioning of the Washington Press corps in regular press conferences. The ability to handle agressive questioning, think quickly, avoid gaffes, and communicate sharp talking points is critical to effective leadership.

If Obama can't handle Hillary Clinton in a debate setting, what's he going to do at the press conference after his summit meeting with Ahmadinejad? Or Castro?


by hwc on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 03:56:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (none / 0)

Obama can and has handled Hillary Clinton in a debate setting. And there is no 30 second time limit at a press conference.


by Mystylplx on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 04:06:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Also... (none / 0)

... dealing with press conferences, while important, is still probably the least important aspect of the job of POTUS.


by Mystylplx on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 04:15:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (none / 0)

Oh, brother, what next.


by caroline becker on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 06:10:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

You think sound bites a sign of  a President's ability to communitate with American people? Have you been around for the last 7 years? What has soundbite politics created?


by bruh21 on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 10:36:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

A soundbite Administration

"Axis of Evil"

"Stay The Course"

"Wait Till September"

"I'm the Decider"

;p


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 11:20:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

It seems that the Clintons took the wrong example from what we should learn from Bush. Well, in the sense if the goal is progressive goals. This soundbite stuff is great for power for the sake of power. But if one wants to do something more, it has no place as being the centralizing principle upon which one governs. The fact people are defending these poorly done debates here is a bit disturbing because it truly reinforces the fact that this race isn't about issues or character, just name recognition.


by bruh21 on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 12:00:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 3)

OBAMA will not win the primary among the universe of typical dem primary voters. His aim is to get people that wouldn't bother picking between Hillary and other dems to show up come caucus and primary day, that's his strategy for good or bad. The way he executes that stategy is spending time on the ground in the early states going from town to town meeting regular people not affiliated with an interest group, Obama is trying to give himself his best chance to win, pandering to likely Hillary voters isn't it.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 02:13:39 PM EST

Exactly (3.00 / 2)

I've always made this exact point...If only regular hardcore democrats shows up , Hillary wins because they've known her for years....Obama has to bring in new people to balance out the advantage he has among old democrats.


by JaeHood on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 02:58:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (2.50 / 4)

Thank you for an unbiased clean diary on this story , unlike the dirty anti-obama diary posted by a Hillary-partisan.

Let's all rec this diary and hit all the anti-obama haters in their yellow teeth.

Hillary has some nasty yellowish teeth...Anyone noticed that?


by JaeHood on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 02:53:36 PM EST

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (2.00 / 4)

OK...that was cheap.

Hillary's OK, it's her supporters who are vile dirtbags.


by Bush Bites on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 03:31:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (2.33 / 3)

No, Hillary is not okay.....but it has nothing to do with her bad oral hygiene.


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 03:48:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

Hillary advocates the same dirty tactics on her website.

Almost every question is squelched.  Virtually all criticisms are also squelched.  They ask you to "join the conversation" giving you the impression that people are conversing about something.

But read the blog comments and they are all flat-out endorsements of support for Hillary.  There is no debate.  No openness.  No honesty.  They make an exception for one or two blog comments to try to appear fair, but those are handpicked as well.

She has also refused to release her earmarks, open her First Lady files, release the source of her campaign contributions, commit to ethics reform that would mandate meetings between lobbyists and government officials to be broadcast on the Internet, etc.

Obama has released his earmarks, released the source of his campaign contributions, and cosigned legislation for posting all government spending on the Internet for review.  He has also advocated posting lobbyist and government official meetings on the Internet.

She's as dirty and vile as a vile dirtbag. :P


by Jacor on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 04:17:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (none / 0)

You can find the all the contributors ($250 or more) to any candidate's campaign from this searchable database:

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/us/politics/2 008_EG_FINANCES_SEARCH.html#

Try searching city by city.


by hwc on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 04:42:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (none / 0)

Cheap? A little. But damned funny.


by horizonr on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 04:43:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (none / 0)

"vile dirtbags"

Entirely inappropriate comment.


by DoIT on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 10:47:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Too much hate. (3.00 / 0)

Some of the Obama and Clinton supporters on MYDD engage in hate against each other, but ignore issues.  It is just team sports.  

What a waste.


by TomP on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 03:44:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (1.66 / 3)

It would only look that way if he pulled out of all the remaining ones... He is still in 7 debates including the 5 DNC sanctioned ones... That means he faces SHE-WHO-MUST-NOT-BE-NAME 7 more times, something the douchebags who support her on MyDD that continually act like the worst of the right wing can't seem to understand or do the math on.  The trollish piece of shit diary done earlier is a great example of a piece of writing that is worthy of a Republican troll; of course that's also expected from that particular "writer".


by yitbos96bb on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 03:01:31 PM EST

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (none / 0)

"something the douchebags who support her on MyDD"

This statement is entirely inappropriate and offensive.


by DoIT on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 10:44:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (none / 0)

Makes sense to me. It was getting a bit ridiculous.

In any case, those events just play into the Repub meme that the Democrats are nothing but a bunch of special interest groups that the Democratic candidate must pander to.

If some people get their noses out of joint over it, so be it.


by Bush Bites on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 03:30:28 PM EST

These forums are not going to be televised, (3.00 / 2)

the ones just popping up.  They aren't.  Only the rest of the diaries/forums listed in Plouffe's memo.  Which is a very smart move, indeed.


by iamready on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 03:32:50 PM EST

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 5)

Hello all. I have been reading my Mydd for a while. I have never commented until now. I am truly discouraged and astonished at the hatred towards Sen. Obama and Sen. Edwards by the people on this website. I will let it be known I am an Obama supporter. I love to see debate from all sides but this is crazy. You can disagree with the man but name calling is childish. There are people who shall remain nameless who constantly disrespect and bash Mr. Obama on this site when they live in glass houses. I sense some of it could be racial. I am African American so I see things through the lens my own experiences so I hope I am wrong. People, no one should have the nomination handed to them. They are not entitled to win the nomination due to family legacy. They earn it.  If people are offended that Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards dared to run for president then go in to trenches register people to vote and get your candidate elected.


John McCain: Drill, Drill, Surge!!!!!
by TennesseeGurl on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 04:21:33 PM EST

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

just ignore the anti-obama clowns.


by JaeHood on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 04:37:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 3)

some Hillary supporters here are tolerable but the vast maority seem to be taking orders that make them sound like a cult. They seem to take pleasure in trying to make Hillary as unlikeable to the democratic netroots as she is is with half the counrty. Hillary the person has some very good qualities and is being done a huge disservice by the crap that's being spewed on here.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 04:44:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

You have a very good point, I never thought racial.  But it is up to this site administration to do its job, and that has not been done.  Most of these abusers should banned, they have brought the discourse of this site down.  And I am totally upset by front page authors, participating in this manner.  Very disappointed, indeed.


by caroline becker on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 06:13:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

The site administrator shares the anti-obama sentiments.  Don't look for any fair and balance from Jerome.  He seems to have a very strong negative opinion of Senator Obama and doesn't seem to mind the nastiness written about him in here.


by Jalenth on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 12:08:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 2)

I would love a constructive debate with anyone on the issues, but people and their hate make this forum intolerable.


John McCain: Drill, Drill, Surge!!!!!
by TennesseeGurl on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 04:59:23 PM EST

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

I really went over the line to prove a point about this place. We all can contribute to bringing this forum back to what it was however it's going to have to start with the the hatchet type diary titles.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Sat Aug 18, 2007 at 08:46:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

If you want a constructive convo you need to write up your own diary. Don't expect these others to do it for you. And I rated you three.


by bruh21 on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 10:40:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (3.00 / 1)

Sept +Oct + Nov +Dec= 16 weeks

8 debates.

Basically, he will 'theoretically', be in a debate every other week until the year is up.

And, this is a problem, becuase?


by rikyrah on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 12:42:09 AM EST

Re: Obama To Limit Debates (none / 0)

Rooktovan,

Did you know that abuse of troll rating will get you banned?


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 01:01:02 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.