BREAKING NEWS: McCain SUSPENDS HIS CAMPAIGN (merged)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Did McCain said he wanted to pass on the debate? I'll answer that for you: He didn't. He said he wanted to delay it. Of all the the debates, McCain wants the one on foreign policy and national security. By asking for a delay, he's only hurting his chances. However, it does jibe with "Country First".

Make no mistake. This move is solely about postponing the debates and trying to prop himself up in the polls. This has nothing to do with solving the economic crisis. McCain and his staff know full well that you can still continue the presidential campaign and debate schedule and address the economic crisis.

You'll have to excuse me if I have a hard time believing the guy who readily admits he doesn't know the first thing about the economy and enlists the help of a financial advisor to his campaign that suggests America is merely whining about the economy. PLEASE. This is the same guy who not two weeks ago suggested that the "fundamentals of the economy are strong." So now we're approaching a crisis that calls for a suspension of the political process?

BS.

-Pop
 
The way I see it, there's two different rules here. One for Democrats like Obama, another for Republicans like McCain.

Democrats can have their charismatic, revolutionary, appealing candidate who is relatively inexperienced, but Republicans can't.

Sarah Palin doesn't have the same experience as Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty. That wasn't the point.

BTW, wasn't it Barack Obama who, before entering the race, cautioned about running in 2008, saying he was in fact too inexperienced to be President?

McCain established the rules for him to be judged upon.
 
Do you really believe that? I would make a wager she was vetted by McCain's staff for more than 15 minutes. Newsflash: candidates don't do their own vetting. It's done by professionals. Obama had an advisory board of three people, including the former CEO of Fannie Mae and Caroline Kennedy-Schlossberg.

Conservative Ire Pushed McCain From Lieberman

WASHINGTON — In the end, the choice of his running mate said more about Senator John McCain and his image of himself than it did about Sarah Palin, the little-known governor of Alaska whose selection has shaken up the presidential race.

For weeks, advisers close to the campaign said, Mr. McCain had wanted to name as his running mate his good friend Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, the Democrat turned independent. But by the end of last weekend, the outrage from Christian conservatives over the possibility that Mr. McCain would fill out the Republican ticket with Mr. Lieberman, a supporter of abortion rights, had become too intense to be ignored.

With time running out, and after a long meeting with his inner circle in Phoenix, Mr. McCain finally picked up the phone last Sunday and reached Ms. Palin at the Alaska State Fair. Although the campaign’s polling on Mr. McCain’s potential running mates was inconclusive on the selection of Ms. Palin — virtually no one had heard of her, a McCain adviser said — the governor, who opposes abortion, had glowing reviews from influential social conservatives.

Mr. McCain was comfortable with two others on his short list, Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts. But neither was the transformative, attention-grabbing choice Mr. McCain felt he needed, top campaign advisers said, to help him pivot from his image as the custodian of the status quo to a change agent like his Democratic rival, Senator Barack Obama.

Not least, Mr. Obama’s decision to pass over Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as his running mate opened the possibility for Republicans to put a woman on the ticket and pick off some of Mrs. Clinton’s supporters.

At 11 a.m. on Thursday, at the McCain vacation compound near Sedona, Ariz., Mr. McCain invited Ms. Palin to join him on the ticket. He hardly knew her, and she had virtually no foreign policy experience, but Ms. Palin was a “kindred spirit,” a McCain adviser said. Mr. McCain was betting, the adviser said, that she would help him reclaim the mantle of maverick that he had lost this year.

The selection was the culmination of a five-month process, described by Mr. McCain’s inner circle and outside advisers in interviews this past weekend, and offers a glimpse into how Mr. McCain might make high-stakes decisions as president.

At the very least, the process reflects Mr. McCain’s history of making fast, instinctive and sometimes risky decisions. “I make them as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can,” Mr. McCain wrote, with his top adviser Mark Salter, in his 2002 book, “Worth the Fighting For.” “Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.”

Mr. McCain began the search for a running mate shortly after he secured the Republican nomination, with some 40 names on a list. By early spring he had cut it to 20, including, a top adviser said, at least five women: Ms. Palin; Meg Whitman, the former chief executive of eBay; Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice; Carleton S. Fiorina, the former chief executive of Hewlett-Packard; and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas.

Mr. McCain cast the process, at least in those days, as orderly and said that the last thing he wanted was the kind of rushed decision that President George Bush had made in 1988 in selecting his running mate, Dan Quayle, then a senator from Indiana.

But it was not until the last few weeks that Mr. McCain winnowed his list to five or six finalists. They included, a McCain adviser said, Mr. Pawlenty, Mr. Romney, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Palin and Tom Ridge, the former governor of Pennsylvania who also supports abortion rights. Ms. Palin, unlike the others, was barely mentioned in news media speculation.

The finalists, including Ms. Palin, were vetted, a campaign adviser said, and Mr. McCain then asked his inner circle — Mr. Salter, Rick Davis, Steve Schmidt and Charlie Black — to provide him with assessments of each. “He said, ‘Give me plusses and minuses on each of these people,’ ” Mr. Black said.

One of Mr. McCain’s closest friends, Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, weighed in as well, pushing so hard for Mr. Lieberman — Mr. McCain, Mr. Graham and Mr. Lieberman are longtime traveling companions — that he vexed some of the other advisers. Others in the inner circle favored Mr. Pawlenty or Mr. Romney. Ms. Palin had no strong advocates in the group, an outside adviser said, but she had no detractors, either.

Last Sunday, 24 hours after Mr. Obama announced his running mate, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, Mr. McCain met with his senior campaign team at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Phoenix. By then, campaign advisers said, the group had long decided that Mr. McCain’s “experience versus change” argument against Mr. Obama had run its course, to the extent that it had worked at all.

At the same time, Mr. Obama’s coming acceptance speech before a stadium of about 80,000 people (and what turned out to be a television audience of nearly 40 million) loomed large. As much as the campaign was publicly dismissing Mr. Obama as a celebrity in a rock-star setting, the concern was that his command of such a large crowd on the last night of the Democratic convention would give him the aura of a president.

In any case, one campaign adviser said, Mr. McCain hated running as the wizened old hand of experience. Despite his embrace this year of President Bush and many of the administration’s policies, Mr. McCain, a campaign adviser said, still saw himself as the maverick who delighted in occasionally throwing political grenades at his own Party.

Ms. Palin, and not Mr. Pawlenty or Mr. Romney, would reinforce Mr. McCain’s self-image, an adviser said. She had a reputation as a reformer in Alaska, she hunted and fished, and she had once belonged to a union. Just as crucial, Ms. Palin, 44, was beloved by the party’s religious base but did not come off as shrill. “She’s conservative,” Mr. Black said, “but she’s not an ideologue.”

After Mr. McCain contacted Ms. Palin, Mr. Schmidt and Mr. Salter met with her on Wednesday in Flagstaff, Ariz. It was not until the following morning that she traveled to Sedona to meet with Mr. McCain, who then sat down with her for his only interview of a potential running mate.

Within hours if not minutes after the interview was concluded, Ms. Palin had the job.

Over the next weeks, Ms. Palin will be prepared by Mr. McCain’s foreign policy staff, led by Randy Scheunemann, for the vice-presidential debate with Mr. Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who moves easily among heads of state.

Introducing Ms. Palin at a rally Saturday in Washington, Pa., Mr. McCain praised her and spoke about her selection.

“You know, I had a lot of good people to choose from, and I want to thank Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani,” said Mr. McCain, referring to his rivals for the Republican nomination. “And,” he added, “it’s with great pride and gratitude I tell you I have found the right partner to help me stand up to those who have corrupted Washington.”

For her part, Ms. Palin still sounded surprised to have been picked. “Well, I know that when Senator McCain asked me to be his running mate, he had a short list of highly qualified men and women,” she said. “To have made that list at all was a privilege. And to have been chosen, it brings a great challenge.

“I know that it will demand the best that I have to give, and I promise nothing less.”

Elisabeth Bumiller reported from Washington, and Michael Cooper from Pittsburgh and Washington, Pa.

Source: NYT
 
McCain established the rules for him to be judged upon.

So did Obama, and he's gotten a pass.

FWIW, Palin has more executive experience as a mayor and governor than Obama does. The only reason why his experience as a community organizer is being bought up is his resume is paper thin.
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

Which of the two looks presidential? You put that as though you feel it is objectively obvious. It, of course, entirely depends on one's bias and how one perceives the move. If you see it as a desperate stunt, Obama looks more presidential by default (McCain looks less so..."desperate stunt" and "presidential" don't fit together, to me). If you see it as McCain nobly putting nation above politics, McCain looks more presidential.

Only those with biases out beyond six sigma wouldn't view McCain's move as more presidential.

Which, ultimately, is why I don't think this really flips the script much. It's really a move that is likely to further entrench people. I don't think it changes perception of McCain; I think it makes people who already liked McCain cheer him and those who didn't like him deride the move.

It hardly matters as far as the campaign goes. Those who prefer him will assume or act like he believes it. Those who don't prefer him will assume or act like it is a stunt. It's like all political rhetoric...what if they really mean it? Great...but it's all going through a political filter with each person.

As of today, 18% of the electorate considers themselves "undecided". These kinds of moves matter.

Yes, I know you believe it. I don't, at all. There is no lack for highly religious, extremely conservative Republicans. You don't have to tap a small town mayor / unknown governor to get that.

Okay, name one that doesn't come with all kinds of negatives. Romney? He was pro-life when he ran for Governor of Massachusetts. Huckabee? He's too populist for McCain. Pawlenty? He was okay, but didn't energize the base. Jindal would have been the optimal choice, but he pulled himself out of the running. McCain's theme is reform. He found a Governor who took on her own party.

What is much less common is an extremely conservative female Republican politician. I don't disagree at all that McCain wanted someone to rally the radical right. But his choice of Palin over a much better known, more experienced radical conservative was due to her sex, in my opinion. That was also hailed as a "when you're losing, change the rules." And everyone on the right congratulated themselves on success when there was a bump following the RNC. Well, the bump is gone and Palin is looking like a bit of a liability.

And on this we disagree. Was the fact she is woman a help to her? Sure. Was it the primary driver? Nope. It was about energizing the base that didn't like him at all. As for the polls, he's still higher than he was before and he's moved a few states that were battlegrounds (MT, ND, NC) solidly into his camp as well as appealing to PA and OH voters.

We'll see how this "change the rules" gambit works. McCain is playing like he's got no hope except for a Hail Mary. I think that's far from true, given the right-ward slant of the nation, so I think these moves actually hurt him.

These moves are an indication of how McCain would govern. Obama's responses indicate how he'll handle surprises as well. I find the difference in decision-making processes interesting.
 
It is pretty easy to decipher what he meant based on his platform. Now if he wants to say Palin is better than Biden/etc., that is one thing, but he still didn't put country first.

Okay, who should he have picked? It's easy to nitpick, but who was the "most qualified" and why?
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

Only those with biases out beyond six sigma wouldn't view McCain's move as more presidential.

Right, and I'd say the opposite. Only those with biases beyond three standard deviations wouldn't view McCain's move as a political stunt. Also, this "great presidential move" seems inconsistent with his, and your, views. He's the one who said that the fundamentals of the economy were strong, and you agreed with him. If so, is emergency work by a senator who's admittedly not the strongest on economics really the necessary tonic?

Apparently, we disagree on this. I'm surprised. ;)
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

Right, and I'd say the opposite. Only those with biases beyond three standard deviations wouldn't view McCain's move as a political stunt. Also, this "great presidential move" seems inconsistent with his, and your, views. He's the one who said that the fundamentals of the economy were strong, and you agreed with him. If so, is emergency work by a senator who's admittedly not the strongest on economics really the necessary tonic?

Apparently, we disagree on this. I'm surprised. ;)

Because he tried to pass oversight on Fanny and Freddie in 2005, and now congress is talking about spending and putting us in hock for $1T, it's a pretty big deal.
 
Make no mistake. This move is solely about postponing the debates and trying to prop himself up in the polls. This has nothing to do with solving the economic crisis. McCain and his staff know full well that you can still continue the presidential campaign and debate schedule and address the economic crisis.

That's a ridiculous proposition. McCain's campaign pushed for the foreign policy debate to be first because they knew it was McCain's strong suit. As for whether or not you can do both, I fall on the side of doing one at a time. This bill is going to have to take a lot of negotiation and he's going to have to get up to speed on a lot of complex issues. Having worked on Wall Street for a bulge-bracket bank in CMBS, there are still things I don't know about the liabilities faced by these firms. How much do you think a Senator without a financial background knows? If Obama thinks he's so smart that he can grasp these issues while campaigning, then he's kidding himself.

You'll have to excuse me if I have a hard time believing the guy who readily admits he doesn't know the first thing about the economy and enlists the help of a financial advisor to his campaign that suggests America is merely whining about the economy.

Sen. McCain was being modest. He was the chair of the Senate Commerce Committee. My guess is that as little as McCain may think he knows about the economy, he knows more than Obama. In fact, given my friendship with Obama's Chief Economic Advisor, I know that to be true.

As for Phil Gramm, he had a point. To win a political campaign, one party has been talking us into a recession. And we're not there. The term "recession" has a specific definition and it hasn't been met. We have become a country of whiners. Shut up and get to work.

PLEASE. This is the same guy who not two weeks ago suggested that the "fundamentals of the economy are strong." So now we're approaching a crisis that calls for a suspension of the political process?

BS.

-Pop

The credit market aside, the fundamentals of the economy have been strong, especially when compared to historical precedents. Few saw this credit crisis coming, so yes information can change in as short a period of two weeks.
 
Make no mistake. This move is solely about postponing the debates and trying to prop himself up in the polls. This has nothing to do with solving the economic crisis. McCain and his staff know full well that you can still continue the presidential campaign and debate schedule and address the economic crisis.

You'll have to excuse me if I have a hard time believing the guy who readily admits he doesn't know the first thing about the economy and enlists the help of a financial advisor to his campaign that suggests America is merely whining about the economy. PLEASE. This is the same guy who not two weeks ago suggested that the "fundamentals of the economy are strong." So now we're approaching a crisis that calls for a suspension of the political process?

BS.

-Pop

Perhaps McCain doesn't have the energy anymore that he might of had in his youthier days to handle all of this.

I'd be very wary if I was Obama of suspending my campaign. I can just see the friday headlnes: "Obama Suspends Campaign, Hillary Steals Democratic Nomination".

The fact that McCain is asking Obama to suspend advertising, tells me that the McCain campaign is starting to run low on money, and can't keep up with Obama.

If Obama was smart, he would move his campaign to the DC area, campaign in Virginia, do the senate work in D.C. and then have them fly to MS on friday for the debate.

The strategy by McCain here is to avert the economic crisis, so there is more focus on the foreign policy debate. If they debate on Friday, even if Obama waffles, it will be overshadowed by the economic crisis. If they pass the bailout bill, and then debate, and Obama waffles, it could cost Obama 2-3 points in the polls. While either way, if Obama pulls even with McCain in the debate, he probably will have delievered the final knock out bow needed.
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

Right, and I'd say the opposite. Only those with biases beyond three standard deviations wouldn't view McCain's move as a political stunt. Also, this "great presidential move" seems inconsistent with his, and your, views. He's the one who said that the fundamentals of the economy were strong, and you agreed with him. If so, is emergency work by a senator who's admittedly not the strongest on economics really the necessary tonic?

Apparently, we disagree on this. I'm surprised. ;)

I'm not saying it's not a tactic, but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about how it will be perceived. It can be perceived as both smart politics and the right thing to do. There's overlap on the Venn diagram.

And the credit market aside, the fundamentals of the economy are sound. Given what we've faced, the fact we haven't been in a deep recession points to the resilience of the economy, and its fundamentals.
 
The strategy by McCain here is to avert the economic crisis, so there is more focus on the foreign policy debate. If they debate on Friday, even if Obama waffles, it will be overshadowed by the economic crisis. If they pass the bailout bill, and then debate, and Obama waffles, it could cost Obama 2-3 points in the polls. While either way, if Obama pulls even with McCain in the debate, he probably will have delievered the final knock out bow needed.

This is exactly right. McCain wants to delay the foreign policy debate so that foreign policy is discussed instead of the credit market bailout. McCain is stronger on foreign policy than is Obama, and he needs to make this one count.
 
As for Phil Gramm, he had a point. To win a political campaign, one party has been talking us into a recession. And we're not there. The term "recession" has a specific definition and it hasn't been met. We have become a country of whiners. Shut up and get to work.

To be fair, you can't tell if we're currently in a recession or not. The economic data isn't complete, nor really is last quarter's since they can and usually do revise it.
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

Because he tried to pass oversight on Fanny and Freddie in 2005, and now congress is talking about spending and putting us in hock for $1T, it's a pretty big deal.

I think McCain is doing the right thing, but I don't see how he is going to influence anything. He's just one of 100 senators, and many others are more experienced and have more understanding in these sorts of issues. How much help is he going to be? His aides and advisors will be doing most of the work, anyway. I also don't see why this would interfere with the debate. Move the debate to DC. Surely, McCain could spare two hours for the American people.

I laugh every time Real turns EVERY thread into a referendum on Sarah Palin.
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

I think McCain is doing the right thing, but I don't see how he is going to influence anything. He's just one of 100 senators, and many others are more experienced and have more understanding in these sorts of issues. How much help is he going to be? His aides and advisors will be doing most of the work, anyway. I also don't see why this would interfere with the debate. Move the debate to DC. Surely, McCain could spare two hours for the American people.

I laugh every time Real turns EVERY thread into a referendum on Sarah Palin.

His message is the peoples' work before the campaign.

And he is being paid to be senator, he really should do his job :)
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

I'm not saying it's not a tactic, but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about how it will be perceived. It can be perceived as both smart politics and the right thing to do.

It can be. And my point is, how it is perceived depends on your biases (I have my own biases, of course...this isn't an accusation). I think those already favourably disposed to McCain will generally see it as some combination of smart politics and the right thing to do and those who aren't favourably disposed toward McCain will see it as a stunt.

And the credit market aside, the fundamentals of the economy are sound. Given what we've faced, the fact we haven't been in a deep recession points to the resilience of the economy, and its fundamentals.

Maybe. I'm not arguing whether he was right or wrong. But whether you want to talk about McCain's real beliefs or perceptions of him, on the one hand saying "The fundamentals are strong" (implying that things should turn around on their own accord and there's nothing major to worry about) and then putting his campaign on hiatus and rushing back to Washington to fix this disaster looks, justifiably, inconsistent. Either he undersold the issue previously (making the criticism he received over the comment justified) or he's grandstanding now over an issue likely to work itself out.
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

Because he tried to pass oversight on Fanny and Freddie in 2005, and now congress is talking about spending and putting us in hock for $1T, it's a pretty big deal.

I'm really surprised he hasn't made this a bigger issue.
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

I laugh every time Real turns EVERY thread into a referendum on Sarah Palin.

This whole election is being turned into a referendum on Sarah Palin.
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

This whole election is being turned into a referendum on Sarah Palin.

I think this entire web site is a referendum on Sarah Palin.
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

His message is the peoples' work before the campaign.

And he is being paid to be senator, he really should do his job :)

yeah, that's why I think he is doing the right thing. i mean, if the president is out of the country and there is an earthquake, you expect him to come home, right? even though there's nothing he can do at home that he can't do from abroad? It is all about appearances, but I mean that in a good way. People expect their leaders to lead, and part of that is to be a pillar or stregnth when there are problems that need to be addressed. Why does a president visit a disaster area, give a little speech, and say "the government is here to help?" same thing.
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

It can be. And my point is, how it is perceived depends on your biases (I have my own biases, of course...this isn't an accusation). I think those already favourably disposed to McCain will generally see it as some combination of smart politics and the right thing to do and those who aren't favourably disposed toward McCain will see it as a stunt.

That's changing the discussion. The discussion was how it would be perceived. And I think the majority of Americans, regardless of bias and regardless of whether or not they felt it was a "stunt" or "tactic" would view going back and doing your job in a time of crisis than continuing to campaign about what you would like to do.

Maybe. I'm not arguing whether he was right or wrong. But whether you want to talk about McCain's real beliefs or perceptions of him, on the one hand saying "The fundamentals are strong" (implying that things should turn around on their own accord and there's nothing major to worry about) and then putting his campaign on hiatus and rushing back to Washington to fix this disaster looks, justifiably, inconsistent. Either he undersold the issue previously (making the criticism he received over the comment justified) or he's grandstanding now over an issue likely to work itself out.

I took his "the fundamentals of this economy are strong" comment as a response to those who keep saying that we're in a recession. And the thing about economics is that little moves can snowball and become bigger things in an instant. The meltdown of the credit markets are such an occurance.
 
So does this mean we will see less of the MILF Palin the next few days? :(
 
I love how GOP supporters can't accept criticism of Palin's experience without trying to compare her to Obama, or Obama and McCain. The reason her experience is even brought up is because "experience" was McCain's main talking point up until he picked her. Remember the 947584505 "...but is he ready to lead?" ads?

We are allowed to criticize his choice because it was hypocritical. Obviously, as Obama supporters, we don't value "experience" as much as McCain wants us to, so telling us how inexperienced Obama is isn't going to make us care about what you say very much. And "experience" isn't the reason we don't like Palin, so trying to exaggerate her past experiences is also not going to get us to care, either.

Picking Palin was a political move made by McCain's campaign, it was the exact opposite of putting "country first". And if McCain really did believe that Palin was ready to step in, like he suggested, then he wouldn't be trying so hard to keep her away from the media.
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

yeah, that's why I think he is doing the right thing. i mean, if the president is out of the country and there is an earthquake, you expect him to come home, right? even though there's nothing he can do at home that he can't do from abroad? It is all about appearances, but I mean that in a good way. People expect their leaders to lead, and part of that is to be a pillar or stregnth when there are problems that need to be addressed. Why does a president visit a disaster area, give a little speech, and say "the government is here to help?" same thing.

On one level, he's simply doing his job as senator. This is a HUGE deal that's going to bury us for the whole next presidency and beyond. $1T? That's $200B/year for 5 years to crowd out spending on your favorite welfare program (or whatever).

On another, he's demonstrating the very kind of leadership you talk about.

It really pisses me off when a senator runs for president and doesn't resign from his senate seat so someone can be appointed to actually do the job.
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

It really pisses me off when a senator runs for president and doesn't resign from his senate seat so someone can be appointed to actually do the job.

:check:
 
Re: McCain wants to postpone Friday's debate

That's changing the discussion. The discussion was how it would be perceived. And I think the majority of Americans, regardless of bias and regardless of whether or not they felt it was a "stunt" or "tactic" would view going back and doing your job in a time of crisis than continuing to campaign about what you would like to do.

I don't think it's changing the discussion. I am talking about perception. You generally only get credit for "doing your job" and "doing the right thing" if people feel you're doing it genuinely, and not to try and get good PR. So, I think whether it is seen as a "stunt" or not is entirely germane.
 
Just like I suspected. Obama says exactly what I expected him to say:

"It's my belief that this is exactly the time when the American people need to hear from the person who in approximately 40 days will be responsible for dealing with this mess," Obama said.

He added, "I think that it is going to be part of the president's job to deal with more than one thing at once."

Well played, Senator. Well played.

-Pop
 
So does this mean we will see less of the MILF Palin the next few days? :(

Probably a good thing.

Her detractors have to get tired of pulling the trigger so many times.
 
hahaha he is suspending his advertising "pending an agreement with obama".

he is getting killed and trying desperately to gain any advantage possible. good for him, although this could just as easily blow up in his face.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top