October 2009 Archives

How agitated are Ventura voters?

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 

Are Ventura voters so agitated that they will reshuffle the city council with newcomers, or are they mostly satisfied and reelect the incumbents?

One would have to suspect that in this political climate, anything is possible. The flagging economy woke many people up from their civic slumber and now the traditional political calculus is no longer reliable. The city council, struggling to make ends meet, resorted to some ill-advised policies that may come back to haunt them.

For starters, there was the 911-fee fiasco. You could pay the monthly fee or you could opt out and pay almost $18 if you were dumb enough to call 911 after that. The money -would go to the fire and police. Credit Neal Andrews for being against this fee. His reward is to be pummeled by the police unions.

While we're speaking of unions, we might as well talk about Measure C, the measure that would stop Wal-Mart from...oh wait, nevermind.

Then there's Measure A, a half-cent sales tax increase that the council supports (minus Andrews again--pattern?) The challenge here is that the city is dying for more money, but raising taxes is politically unpopular, so the council hopes that voters will approve the sales tax measure whilst not voting them out of office.

It will find out Tuesday. Ventura voters may very well be in the mood to clean house, but they should be careful not to throw any good incumbents in their haste.


Liberal Republican Scozzafava drops out of race in NY-23

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 
Sorry for yet another NY-23 update, but this news is huge.

Last week, conservative bloggers called for Dede Scozzafava, the liberal Republican running for Congress in New York's 23rd Congressional District, to drop out of the race, triggering a stampede of prominent conservatives to endorse conservative Doug Hoffman's campaign.

Today, Scozzafava bowed to the pressure and announced that she is suspending her campaign, just three days away from the election.

Just think of the heat that had to be generated to get an establishment-backed candidate to drop out 72 hours before an election, which is why I labeled it as a coming-of-age of conservative bloggers.

Dede Scozzafava's ill-fated campaign will make all establishment Republicans look over their shoulder at the conservatives they are leaving behind, conservatives that have grown rapidly in strength. 

Gingrich stresses pragmatics amid NY-23 criticism

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 
Newt Gingrich is out doing damage control after his endorsement of a liberal Republican in New York's 23rd Congressional District angered many conservatives. In an interview yesterday on RedCounty.com he stood his ground, stressing that although he's still a conservative, pursuing a right-wing-only agenda will ensure that Pelosi, Obama, and Reid will stay in power forever.

In every group that shares a common goal, there exists factions that differ on how to best achieve that goal. Often, they break down along lines of those that will negotiate and compromise, even if it means sacrificing principle, and those stand on ideological purity and refuse to budge, even if it means the goal is never achieved.

The Republican Party is no different; it has the same types of factions--the practical and the ideological. The more astute members that have been able to deftly hop back and forth on either side of the rift when necessary, toeing the party line when it's called for and meeting the demands of their constituents when they call for it.

However, thanks to the conservative backlash against illegal immigration, corporate bailouts, stimulus packages, and Obama's radical policies, the rift is growing ever wider and some Republicans are finding it more difficult to hop over to both sides of the chasm without falling into it, particularly in New York's special congressional election in the 23rd District.

There, the party establishment nominated a liberal Republican, Dede Scozzafava, to increase their chances that they would not lose this seat to the Democrats. But conservatives, feeling left out in the cold, rallied behind a political newcomer, Doug Hoffman, who was forced to run under a Conservative Party ticket. 

Practical, meet ideological. 

After the conservative blogosphere went nuts (and let's be honest, practical Republicans trying to win elections are easy targets for bloggers who don't have the burden of trying to execute their ideologies in the real world), the rift suddenly broke wide open, forcing prominent Republicans to leap one final time to one side or another. 

Palin, DeMint, Pawlenty, and friends chose to leap to the conservative side. Huckabee was able to find a place where the rift wasn't so wide, and though he has both feet firmly planted on the conservative side he's keeping his hand on the establishment side just in case. 

Only Newt Gingrich stood his ground with the establishment and refused to jump.

It's not that Newt's not a conservative, he still is. But Newt holds the very reasonable position that if you stick solely to your ideological guns, you will lose every single election.  He asked Red County's Chip Hanlon:

"If you're saying to me do I want a Republican who is only going to be with us eight times out of ten, and two times out of ten not going be with us,or would I rather throw the seat a way to a Democrat who is going to be against us ten times out of ten?"

And that is a very good argument. If the Republican vote is split and the Democrat wins, we can all feel very good about not sacrificing our values while Pelosi and Obama run roughshod all over our Constitution.

On the other side of the coin, though, is what's the point of even opposing the Democrats if we become just like them in order win an election?

"..she would have supported the stimulus," Hanlon said of Scozzafava, "she would be a vote for card check--the feeling is that it's on crucial bills and those very marginal votes where an Arlen Specter or an Olympia Snowe or someone else potentially kills us. To us, Dede Scozzafava strikes us as one, that in a crucial hour, at a crucial vote, will let us down."

Newt's reply? "She might."

But a Democrat definitely will, so Newt is simply taking his chances and choosing the lesser of two evils, a very practical thing to do.

Newt's position shouldn't be ignored. He's been through the wars, and he assembled a Republican majority in 1994 and guided it to reelection in 1996, and he did it by moderating. 

But many of those that participated in the Contract With America became so enamored with winning elections that they became part of the problem from the perspective of ideologues. 

And so, we're back to the age-old debate. Practical versus ideological. But this time, the debate takes on new meaning as some fear an outright Republican civil war, especially as Sarah Palin, an ideological favorite, is out there somewhere planning something. 

While Republicans takes sides, the debate rages on, there is still one question that remains unasked in light of massive Tea Parties, unprecedented growth in government, and the worst economy since the Great Depression.

Is a temporary window in history opening where it's practical to be ideological?

Conservative bloggers come of age during the "battle for the soul of the GOP"

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 

Military historians generally regard the Battle of Saratoga, where the ragtag Continental Army surrounded and defeated General John Burgoyne's well-trained and professional British troops, as the turning point in the Revolutionary War. Within days of hearing news of the surrender, the French King Louis XVI, now seeing that the rebels were capable of victory, formally entered into an alliance with them, sealing the fate of British rule in the New World.


Sixty miles away and 232 years later in New York's 23rd Congressional District, conservatives hope for a similar watershed victory in a fight that is being billed as the battle over the soul of the GOP. And just as the 18th-century superpowers France and England used the American colonials as proxies in their storied rivalry, opposing political forces are descending upon the quiet, rural district in upstate New York, setting the stage for a pitched battle that may very well alter the field of presidential candidates in 2012. But before this battle got under way, a cadre of conservative bloggers fired the opening shots they may have already proved decisive.


The proxies in this particular fight are Democrat Bill Owens, liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava, and Conservative Doug Hoffman. It's the latter's candidacy that's heightened the importance of a race that's already significant as an early public opinion bellwether of President Obama's young presidency. Obama and the Democrats are pouring massive resources into this race to prevent an upset that would trigger a stampede to the center by 2010 Democratic congressional candidates. A resounding victory in the 23rd would allow Obama to reassure his party that his radical policies enjoy support with mainstream America, something the Republican Party will do everything in their power to stop--including running Scozzafava, a candidate that is further to the left than her Democratic opponent.


Which brings us to Hoffman's significance. Hoffman is a lifelong conservative Republican who was forced to run as an independent after his party decided Scozzafava had a better chance of winning. An outcast conservative pitted against a moderate Republican establishment isn't anything we haven't already seen in the last year--just look at the grassroots Tea Party movement that was borne out of conservative frustration at George W. Bush and John McCain for supporting stimulus packages and corporate bailouts.


But what is new is that those very same conservatives are impacting a federal election, thanks in large part to a group of bloggers who raised such a hue and cry that it's captured the attention of politicos across the country.


Consequently, if Hoffman wins the election on Tuesday, we may look back at a day two weeks earlier as the day when the conservative blogosphere came of age.


That's when I was sitting in a sushi bar in Huntington Beach listening to Chip Hanlon, CEO of the conservative blogsite Red County, describe his idea to coordinate the efforts of twenty or so influential bloggers to simultaneously call on Scozzafava, who a few days earlier didn't win any friends by calling the cops on the Weekly Standard, to drop out of the race the following day. He said it was an experiment to see what kind of heat the blogs on the right could generate by concentrating their firepower on a particular target. Hanlon, with the help of Quin Hillyer, rounded up their blogging brethren, each of whom agreed to hold their fire until exactly noon.


Then at noon, Eastern Time, on Thursday, October 22nd, they unloaded simultaneous broadsides that are still ringing in the ears of Dede Scozzafava. What started with conservative blogs such as Red County, Red State, Michelle Malkin's Hot Air, Breitbart's Big Government, and The American Spectator spread to the conservative pundits like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, then led to big-name conservative politicians lending their support to Hoffman. Even Sarah Palin emerged temporarily from self-imposed exile to endorse the third-party candidate, potentially tipping her hand for 2012. And while Mike Huckabee declined to officially endorse either candidate, he "proceeded to profusely praise Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman," according to Talking Points Memo


Meanwhile, rumored 2012 candidate Newt Gingrich is still under withering fire from bloggers for endorsing Scozzafava, particularly from Red State's Erick Erickson who said that Gingrich effectively destroyed his chances of winning the presidency by abandoning conservatives in this crucial race, a race that Dick Armey described as "the eye of the storm", adding, "This country is at a crossroads."


Today, Ventura County's hometown-hero-turned-Congressman Tom McClintock also announced his support for Hoffman, who saw his war chest double virtually overnight and his poll numbers rocket past his opponents.


If Hoffman emerges as the winner of the three-way race on Tuesday night, both parties may be forced to dramatically adjust their positions for next year's congressional elections and the outcome might influence who will run against Obama in 2012--in short, it may ultimately affect the direction of the entire nation.


Not a bad day's work for a handful of conservative bloggers.

Conservative comedian performs in Ventura on Thursday

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 
Are "conservative" and "comedian" mutually exclusive? Admittedly, it's not normally our strong suit. But Evan Sayet, billed as the "top conservative comedian in America", might change some minds during his Right to Laugh tour this week at the Ventura Harbor Comedy Club after a sold-out run at the New York Underground Comedy Festival.

Sayet.jpg
Evan Sayet at a universal healthcare protest in Thousand Oaks in August

He's spent years deciphering how liberals think, ultimately building a comedy routine from his observations that he's now performed at multiple Heritage Foundation addresses. No doubt much of his material comes from working with Hollywood types for so many years.

Sayet's burgeoning career was given a boost when Letterman noticed his stand-up comedy and gave him a spot on a special episode featuring young talent.  He transitioned to television and wrote for The Arsenio Hall Show, Win Ben Stein's Money, and Politically Correct with Bill Maher. He even wrote and produced the highest-rated documentary in Discovery's The Learning Channel's history. 

During that time he was a "typical screenwriting liberal", until the attacks on 9/11 woke him up and he realized his colleagues were coddling tyrants and blaming America for terrorism.

"It wasn't so much the terrorists' attacks that surprised me," Sayet said. "I knew enough  about geopolitics to know that the same people who were murdering the Jews of Israel for no other reason than that they were the closest infidels would, when they could, come and attack the world's biggest infidels. No, what surprised me was the response of so many of my liberal friends and colleagues in Hollywood. The notion that we deserved to be attacked - that it was somehow 'the chickens coming home to roost' - and that the way to prevent further attacks was to be nicer to the terrorists. This just opened my eyes."

He decided to stop writing for others and resume the stand-up career he left behind fifteen years earlier--but now with a conservative edge. He's earned acclaim from some heavy hitters along the way. "Evan Sayet is simply the best political comedian working in America today," states David Horowitz on the comedian's website, alongside glowing compliments from Ann Coulter, Tammy Bruce, and Larry Elder

Don't be fooled into thinking Sayet is all talk. The guy is seriously passionate about his country and he walks the walk. I met him while covering a healthcare rally in Thousand Oaks, where he gave a firebrand speech against universal healthcare. When an unstable man charged a fellow speaker, Sayet was all over him. Let's just say you don't need undercover protection at a protest when he's around.

Sayet's performance is October 29th at 8:00 p.m. at 1559 Spinnaker Drive. Tickets can be purchased at the Ventura Harbor Comedy Club's website

Tea Party people will also be gathering nearby the club prior to the show for a "Tea Party at the Harbor."

Re-examining the fashionable "fascist" label

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 

Godwin's Law is a tongue-in-cheek observation about ad hominem attacks in the Information Age, and how the improper use of them harms all of us by diluting the original meaning of the intended insult. It states that the longer an online discussion continues, the "the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." Godwin felt that the overuse of these words gradually desensitizes people so that their impact is diminished. I believe you can substitute "fascist" and the law will still apply, because that personal attack is so overused against conservatives that few stop to realize that not only do these terms not apply to conservatives, but that they are almost polar opposites of the true nature of those that are saddled with this pejorative.

Prior to World War II, fascism was a recognized political movement, even gaining a following in the United States. After seeing millions of people die fighting fascists, however, the term became synonymous with evil and tyranny. While the new definition was deserved, it nevertheless served to obscure its real meaning for the last six decades.

"Fascists and Nazis (and there are important differences) are generally cited as Right," said Dr. Herb Gooch, political science professor at California Lutheran University, "because the models they espouse phrase themselves as in terms of the glories of the past (resurrection of the Reich & Roman Empire) and their anti-intellectualism and authoritarianism.  

"But many forget that they arose out of socialist backgrounds--Mussolini had been a socialist newspaper editor and Hitler joined the National Socialist party.  Rather than class, they emphasized the corporatist and the racial bases (respectively) of states.  But they both, like socialism, stressed the activist role of the state as the supreme representation of the body politic."

It would seem that modern-day "big government" liberals have more in common with the fascist governments of the 20's and 30's than small-government conservatives, for example:

  • Fascists advocated nationalized businesses
  • Fascists emphasized the group over the individual
  • Fascists emphasized racial conflict
  • Fascists forbade opposition to the fascist government
  • Fascists were anti-capitalist
  • Fascists advocated abortion
  • Fascists increased spending on social welfare and healthcare
  • Fascists were wary of organized religion
Do any of the above sound like your typical tea-partying conservative? 

One needs to look no further than the nationalization of industries. Fascists were not opposites of communists--they were more like cousins. Whereas communists advocated that the state assume complete control over the economy, fascists believed the corporations should do it--nationalized corporations. Does Government Motors, Amtrak, or the bulk of our financial sector sound like fascist policies, using its original meaning?

What about the race issue--a favorite branding iron from the left used to mark those on the right? Aren't poor race relations a hallmark of the right, just like it was Antisemitism with Hitler and Mussolini?

Before you say yes, consider what the following people from the Left have said about Jews: Jeremiah Wright, Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, and Jesse Jackson. That's not to say there are no race problems on the Right, just that race problems are not the exclusive domain of the Right, by far.

Now, I'm not advocating that we start redirecting the fascist epithet toward the Left. On the contrary, I think we should be very judicious with the use of the phrase, lest we rob it of its true meaning. Only use it when a policy is truly unique to fascism (such as nationalization of industry), and don't hurl it at individuals or you'll merely inflame passions and stifle debate, like the word "racist". 

Now there's another interesting word to examine...

Analyzing politics in the context of history

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 
The present is the past rolled up into a moment for action; the past is the present unraveled in history for our understanding. -Will Durant

Politics is history in motion. Political passions bubble continuously like magma, unseen beneath our feet, molten by economic pressures and social frictions. Every so often an event, a person, or an idea catalyzes the cauldron and it erupts onto the surface, oozing its way into the consciousness of the people. Like the glowing edge of a flowing stream of molten lava, politics is fiery, unpredictable and fluid. After cooled by air in the absence of geological pressures, it loses its fire and hardens, taking shape and permanence.

History is the landscape left behind after political fires are cooled by time.

But it's the molten red-orange trim of politics that always catches our eyes as it dramatically cuts its way through the terrain. But what a puny thing politics is when seen in context of the vast historical landscape through which it flows!

Yet historical context is exactly what is missing when analyzing contemporary politics. There is a plethora of news of the day - the people and events that temporarily contrasted with their environment long enough for the media to take notice - yet there is a dearth of understanding of the "newsworthy" when contrasted with the record of mankind's complete experience.

A complete contextual analysis of contemporary political events would include everything from the macro-level understanding of the aggregate actions of entire civilizations to the micro-analysis of individuals that operated in similar circumstances to that which we are analyzing, but at a different time and in a different place.

This blog will attempt to do just that - provide historical context to contemporary political news. Of course, the reader will undoubtedly find gross oversimplifications and oversights contained in my commentary, but I will do what I can to present history accurately from my inadequate perch at my desk. I relate to Durant when he said, "I feel like a droplet of spray which proudly poised for a moment on the crest of a wave, undertakes to analyze the sea." 

But like Durant did with his writings, I will attempt to distill whatever knowledge I have of history, economics, and philosophy into the articles I post here, and I hope that I will not mislead the reader in their search for truth and understanding.

Surgical coalition won't support healthcare legislation

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 

A coalition of 20 surgical organizations recently sent a letter to Max Baucus, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, notifying him that it will not support the America's Healthy Future's Act of 2009.

The organizations do not feel that the act "provides the necessary provisions to secure a solid foundation on which to build comprehensive health reform" and advised the following:

  • Reform Medicare payment system
  • Preserve surgeon reimbursements
  • Tort reform
  • Don't create Medicare Commission
  • Don't make the problematic Physician Quality Reporting Initiative mandatory
  • Don't create duplicate Physician Fee Schedule

I saw a panel of physicians address healthcare recently and most of them said that 20 percent of their overhead is for malpractice insurance. It doesn't seem that any real healthcare improvements can occur without tort reform. 

The entire letter to Baucus is here: Doctors - ACS response to Baucus Bill.pdf


Former Clinton Labor Secretary outed as "deather"

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 
We all know that those crazy whackjobs that believe that government-run healthcare will result in rationing and then so-called "death panels" will have to choose who lives or dies are completely insane and not even worth listening to, like Sarah Palin. I mean, these "deathers" just need to be completely dismissed because of the unbelievable paranoia of these nutjobs, right?

Take former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich. I know, he seemed like a good, normal, common-sense Democrat for most of his life. A real progressive and visionary. Made a lot of sense. But then, he suddenly lost his mind and became a "deather", out of nowhere! Completely out of the blue. He threw in with those "fearmongers", those "fanatical, looney conspiracy theorists" and started saying crazy things like the government was going to let old people die because their medical bills are too expensive. Can you believe that?

In a speech he gave in the right-wing stronghold of Berkeley, CA in 2007, he must have suddenly snapped in front of all those frothing, gun-toting extremists and he told them what a presidential candidate will never say--but should say--about healthcare policy. He said a candidate SHOULD say:

Thank you so much for coming this afternoon. I'm so glad to see you and I would like to be president. Let me tell you a few things on healthcare....

What I'm going to do is try to reorganize it to be more amenable to treating sick people but that means you, particularly you young healthy people, you're going to have to pay more...And by the way, we are going to have to, if you are very old, we are not going to give you all that technology and all those drugs for the last couple of years of your life to keep you maybe going for another couple of months because it's too expensive. 

So we're going to let you die.

Ha "let you die"...that language isn't in the health care bill! Silly little Robert Reich. His transformation into a right-wing radical is complete. Now, we must dismiss him and his baseless conclusion that the government is going to "let" people die because he is quite clearly one of "them"--he is a deather.

Weird...he gave that speech in 2007, yet endorsed Obama in 2008...It must have been temporary insanity. He became an insane fascist deather for just a little while before he reverted back to good 'ol Robbie Reich and endorsed the right candidate, the one that is going to use the government to fix healthcare.

In fact, here's proof that he still supports the public option. See! The government isn't going to ration anything. Everything will be fine, just let the government take care of it all. Try not to think too hard.

Although, he hasn't come out and said his previous wild allegations were wrong...it's almost as if he's avoiding the issue. I mean, if a tape surfaced of me spouting crazy conspiracy theories that I no longer believe in, I'd want to refute it right away! Yet his blog is strangely silent on the issue...

You don't think...Nah, can't be. You don't think he still *gasp* BELIEVES that nonsense, do you? 

Because if he did, then all those crazy teabaggers wouldn't be so crazy, would they?

Hannity mentions my Boxer article

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 

Sean Hannity mentioned my Barbara Boxer article on his show on the Fox News Channel today. The conservative commentator cited the article and paraphrased that only three of Senator Boxer's sponsored bills have been enacted by her colleagues--a 99 percent failure rate over her 17-year career.

Hannity didn't have time to mention this, but of the three bills that did get enacted, two were of the "naming bridges after people" variety. The reason why almost 400 of Boxer's bills have been ignored is because she is too liberal even for members of her own party, which my article articulates.

See a clip of Hannity referencing my article on YouTube.

Boxer's legislative record packs very little punch

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 

There aren't many competitions where you can lose 99 percent of the time and still be considered a leading contender, but somehow Barbara Boxer is pulling it off. Arecent Field Poll has her with a 14-point lead over her closest Republican rival. However, her colleagues in Washington have seen fit to only enact three of the nearly 400 bills the three-term senator has sponsored since she was elected in 1992, raising questions of why the popular liberal icon--who set a record for the most votes received in a California election--has failed so spectacularly to land any punches.

The answer may be found in the mishandling of Boxer's own Cap-and-Trade bill. The California senator might be too liberal even for some of her allies in Congress.  Last month, a group of eight coal-state Democrats wrote her an open letter asking for language pertaining to carbon capture sequestration to be inserted into the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act--the official name of Cap and Trade--and were promptly ignored. Read more...

Crisis pregnancy center is the opposite of Planned Parenthood

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 

Planned Parenthood is more than happy to help young, scared, pregnant women through an abortion. School counselors can refer pregnant students to the omnipresent non-profit organization, which services them through clinics in almost every community.

There is a lesser known organization that reaches out to the same set of girls. But this group is the anti-Planned Parenthood--it counsels them through the entire pregnancy and birth as an alternative to abortion. It's called the Avenues Pregnancy Clinic. Read more...

Women's club will feature dynamic speaker and author at next meeting

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 

Eric Golub jokes that he has three fatwas against him: one from a Palestinian group, one from the Daily Kos, and one from the National Organization for Women. Fortunately for him, this dynamic individual's next speaking engagement is not with NOW, but instead at the Conejo Valley Republican Women Federated at their next monthly meeting. Read more...

You've heard from politicians, now hear from physicians

Share: Share on Facebook submit to reddit StumbleUpon Toolbar
 

How will the doctor-patient relationship change if the government runs healthcare? That's one of the questions that will be answered tonight at a healthcare forum in Newbury Park--but this isn't your typical politician-sponsored event.

Instead, seven doctors (six of them surgeons) from both sides of the debate will discuss what effects a public option would have on their practices. An insurance expert is also on the panel. The audience will have the opportunity to ask questions. Read more...

IngeMusings
Topic
This blog attempts to add perspective and context to local and national politics, through a variety of disciplines, such as history, economics, and philosophy--all tempered with common sense. About the author

Eric Ingemunson's commentary has been featured on Hannity, CNN, NBC, Inside Edition, and KFI's The John and Ken Show. Eric was born and raised in Ventura County and currently resides in Moorpark. He earned a master's degree in Public Policy and Administration from California Lutheran University. As a conservative, Eric supports smaller government, less taxation, more individual freedom, the rule of law, and a strict adherence to the Constitution.
  • gucci outlet store: Find Out More read more
  • JOxdHLSAXb: buy azithromycin zithromax rxlist - zithromax online bestellen zonder recept read more
  • Lucien Ugalde: ________________________________ read more
  • xLvuhvkMwZ: fluconazole 200 mg side effects of diflucan in children - read more
  • InsofsFrese: A familiar comprar viagra would belly miss your horror man's read more
  • IGTWCWXUvf: zolpidem 10 mg ambien 4 years - ambien in early read more
  • TVrSnLpnKS: buy diazepam buy valium 90 pills - valium like drugs read more
  • ELEYPoqUCY: redirected valium for travel anxiety - purchase valium overnight read more
  • longchamp shoes chicago: Yes! Finally something about %keyword1%. read more
  • christianlouboutinoutletuk: I was recommended this web site by my cousin. I'm read more