POLL - If AMERICA was attacked tomorrow

[kad7777]

Poll question: POLL - If AMERICA was attacked tomorrow

Who would you want sitting in the oval office ?

[Hydra]

1. Why? Did the order get sent out for Iran?

:evilgrin:

[ColbertWatcher]

5. 9/11!

http://wikiality.com/Since_nine_eleven

[1corona4u]

2. Great question Kad...

although, I don't expect some to be honest about it, they'll just say their candidate regardless of their lack of qualifications, and knowledge of the world...

[kad7777]

4. I agree, but hopefully some will think seriously

about who America needs as their Commander-in-Chief

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUC8LeZ1hM4

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

3. Same person I'd want if America WASN'T attacked

DK.

But, since he's such a long shot, the vote goes to JE.

Vote? I don't have a primary vote, I'm in MI.

[Kucinich4America]

7. If we had someone like Dennis in the White House

Nobody would have a reason to attack America.

And that assumes there was any truth to the official story of 9-11, in the first place. Which is a huge assumption, without much evidence to back it up.

[Marrah_G]

103. That's a bit of a stretch

It's going to take alot more then a few years to fix the problem and no matter who gets into office there will still be a chance of another attack. That is the reality of the world we live in. There are real bad guys out there and I want a president who realizes that AND has the wisdom to deal with the situation without the reflexive need to bomb the crap out of someone.

[1corona4u]

11. And, what is it that you think JE has that

makes him so special to handle an event of that caliber?

Be specific please, because I see him as unqualified for the highest office in the land, coupled with the fact that he was a 1 term senator.

What is his foreign policy? What is his experience with world leaders? What do you think he has done, in his career that signals his ability to lead at all?

I'd prefer not to have cut & paste text from his site as well.

[kad7777]

6. Actually, this question

should be posed to the whole country.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUC8LeZ1hM4

[jillan]

50. KAD -great question! AND

I love your sig line - woot!

[MonkeyFunk]

8. Do you think

a supporter of one candidate would choose a different candidate for this poll? It's just another way of saying "who do you support?"

[kad7777]

10. I fully believe that most who respond to the poll

will just choose their candidate. Just hoping the question makes them think a little.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUC8LeZ1hM4

[1corona4u]

12. Not if everyone was being honest....

and I will give Hillary some credit here, because at the very least, she has Bill, and she also knows world leaders.

[rjones2818]

15. You assume that everyone would want a neo-lib

answer to an attack.

I don't.

[1corona4u]

20. I'm not assuming anything.....

I stated my opinion of it. You don't have to like it, or agree.

[DCKit]

65. Personally, anyone who would go after the responsible parties....

and not use the attack to fulfill a personal agenda would be nice. In that regard, any of the Democratic candidates would foot the bill.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

9. Where's the John Kerry choice?

Damn it!

[babylonsister]

26. I second that! nt

[asdjrocky]

13. That's a repug question if I ever heard one-

Just keep em scared.

[kad7777]

16. A question that must be thought of.

imho.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUC8LeZ1hM4

[asdjrocky]

23. Please don't expect me to respond to fear based questions.

It's un-American.

[kad7777]

38. .....uh....ok

[Froward69]

69. so you aren't for

vigilance either?

The question is not about fear it is about forethought.

[oasis]

71. Give our regards to the rest of the ostriches down there.(eom)

[1corona4u]

90. AHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAhahaha ahahahahahaha

Thanks for the humor, I really needed a laugh today!!

[1corona4u]

19. Actually it shows that there are other things......

that are just as important, if not more. I guess it depends on what your priorties are....

Being an Independent, I think our credibility and relationships in the world, should be priority one. After that, then the domestic issues should be addressed. As I have said many times, Joe's already out in front in that regard. Not much of a challenge for him to get that done right away....the others...well, they have to build some trust throughout the world before that can happen...who knows how long that will take.

[asdjrocky]

22. Sorry I don't agree-

Being an American, the most important thing to me is Americans, and how we're doing. First, bring the Americans home that are in Iraq, as quickly as possible, and at the same time, start the necessary changes in domestic policy. It's not impossible to do two, or even three things at once.

And seriously, who is going to attack us? We might be hit by terrorism, but that is not an attack, in the ilk of a declaration of war. I don't worry about another country attacking us, nearly as much as I worry about giving up our freedoms based on fear.

So that's why I say that's a repug question. If your afraid all the time, you never leave your house, which is perfect for oppressive regimes.

I don't respond well to questions based on fear.

America:
Land of the free
Home of the brave

[1corona4u]

24. I'm not afraid....

I simply don't think Edwards has anything to offer this country. I really don't. I want a strong leader, not a wanna be leader. I specifically asked before for someone to point out to me, what John has done in his life, that shows HE is ready to be leader. I'm still waiting.

We're not talking about giving up our freedoms, based on fear, we're talking about WHO would be best to DEAL with anything serious in this country. But I'm not surprised you twisted that into a right wing talking point.

America, Land of the free, home of the blind.

PS. It doesn't escape me that our ability to be happy in the USA is largly dependent on our standing in the world.(unlike what you suggested)

[asdjrocky]

25. We're talking hypothetical here.

As far as what Biden has to offer? My opinion is, not much, and that seems to be the opinion of almost everyone else in America. And that very important state of Iowa? I'm not sure he even shows up on the polls.

As far as the stupid question, "Who should be in charge if we're attacked?"

We elect a President to be a Representative of the american people. I'm not looking for the myth of the "strong leader," because I've never been fooled by that.

Perhaps the plank is in your eye?

And good luck to your candidate, boy dose he need it.

[1corona4u]

28. I think he will do a lot better than you think...

because, in reality, he is stronger. No myth about it.

John doesn't represent my best interest. I much prefer the down to earth person, who actually lives a middle class lifestyle.

This convinced me against JE a long time ago;
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/MutualFunds/EdwardsMakingHisMillionsGrow.aspx
(dated, but factual)

Now, I'm all for making money, but when you throw it out there, like you have something against big corporations, you need to walk the walk....he's loaded, because he invest in big business.

[asdjrocky]

32. Well,

Good luck to ya.

Your argument is always ad hominem, and since you're not on the witness stand, it carries no weight with me. I wonder at bit, at your agenda here. If you think your going to de-construct my support for John Edwards with your clumsy, blunt attempts, then you sadly underestimate me. That is of little consequence, people often do that, it's understandable. But I think you're trying to convince other people here, through your constant harassing of my candidate, and that is not too bright my friend.

I gotta tell ya, I think if they lined up everyone here for an IQ test, I'd be right at the bottom. If you're that transparent to me, just imagine how other people see you oafish attempts.

[1corona4u]

33. On the contrary...

I know exactly where your head is, and I have no intention of trying to change that position. I'm not harassing your candidate, simply pointing out what I don't like about him, which is my right to do. I'm not calling him a slimeball, or a liar, or a con artist, or anything of the sort. I'm pointing out why I will not be voting for him, and why I don't think he is right for this country, at this point in time. People are free to make up their own minds. If I had no candidate in the race, I'd still feel the same about him.

Perhaps you should stop reading my post and put me on ignore if they bother you.

Facts are facts. You can deny them all you like. John is rich because he invest in big business. That's a fact. Look at his 46 page(!) financial statement submitted to the FEC. It tells the tale.

[asdjrocky]

35. You responded to something I said, and that's how-

this always starts with you. Take a look. If you don't want me to reply to you, then don't reply to me. Simple. In fact, this all started, because I replied to the OP (not you). Again, feel free to take a look.

As for putting you on ignore? Don't be silly, I believe in free speech, and I'll never put someone on ignore. Um, we're just typing here. Dialog is the key to freedom.

Again, take a look at your motives please, if you don't desire discussion with me, then stop stepping in. Dose it occur to you that we would not be having this little conversation now, if you had not started it?

[1corona4u]

36. Spin, spin, spin...

I never said anything to you about not replying to me. I said if what I said bothered you, to put me on ignore. I think I was crystal clear about my motives, despite your spin on them. I'm not shying away from a dialog with you or about your candidate.

Yes, dialog is the key to freedom of speech, and I will say what's on my mind.

I'm just hanging out waiting for the answers to several questions I asked hours ago....

[asdjrocky]

42. These answers-

Do you expect them from me? Because if you can show me where you asked me a signal question, I'll eat my hat.

Now if you expect me to answer questions, I'd be happy to have a civilized conversation with you. But first, you have to ask me a question. Is this difficult for you to understand? And second, this should be fair, I'm happy to try to answer questions you have, if you will grant me the same privilege. But I don't play fetch.

And you have the nerve to talk about spin. Do I have to show you, where throughout this entire process, you did not ask a question? So I guess it's not me you're waiting on right? Who is trying to spin here?

Man, you make this too easy.

[1corona4u]

44. I don't expect jack from you...nor were they asked of you....

I merely mentioned that I was hanging around to see if they were answered....feel free to take a pass on my questions. I'm sure someone has the answers...perhaps the person I asked to answer will eventually give them to me.



I'm bored with you now...I much prefer substantive conversations...not this tit for tat crap.

[asdjrocky]

45. Typical, you start a fight, that you can't finish, and you blame me.

Like I always say, don't give tit, if you don't want tat. Better luck next time junior.

[Froward69]

70. so in short

"Being an American, the most important thing to me is Americans, and how we're doing."

to you we aren't a world community of humans. thats very right wing of you.

Looking out for everyone should be the priority. you sound like you have no care for anyone but yourself... like your candidate.

[LSK]

78. wasnt it the basis of the Bush Campaign in 2004???

[ginchinchili]

92. Asking this question and scaring Americans are two very different things.

Democrats often find themselves on the losing end of political battles because they refuse to consider questions like these. Asking questions about national security--which should always be a primary concern--is not fear mongering. Threatening America with mushroom clouds is. Know the difference.

[monmouth]

14. If Biden were in office, doubt we would even be attacked....n/t

[gateley]

37. I agree. I believe one of the first steps Biden would take as President is

re-establishing relationships with the other world leaders. And, since he's got a dialogue going with most of them, they'd probably be more inclined to work with him before it got to the point they (whoever "they" is) would attack us.

[MethuenProgressive]

17. By Mars? Dennis Kucinich!

By Canada? By Mexico? By Cuba? Who is gonna "attack" us? :shrug:

[no name no slogan]

18. NIXON

He's kicked foreign ass before, and would do so again.

[Hippo_Tron]

30. Nixon would've nuked Moscow during the Cuban Missile Crisis unlike that pansy Kennedy

:evilgrin:

[no name no slogan]

39. Damn straight.

He would've nuked Hanoi, too, if not for those godless Democrats in the Senate

[JDPriestly]

21. John Edwards, because he would unite the country behind him

and fight back without compromising American values.

[Inuca]

43. I am curious

what exactly in Edwards' positions or history makes you think of him as a uniter? Question asked without any snark whatsoever. It is just that I do not see it this way, and I would be interested in seeing arguments to the contrary.

[JDPriestly]

47. I think you will find out in the Iowa primaries.

Edwards is uniting voters by opening the voters eyes to the fact that they are being duped by the big corporate interests into focusing on unimportant and necessarily very private issues like abortion and prayer in schools. Edwards was the first to challenge people to focus completely on issues like changing our trade agreements, achieving energy independence and providing health care for all. These are issues that unite all Americans. Edwards was the first of the candidates to propose a plan for health care and, I believe he was the first to also propose a comprehensive plan on the environment.

Edwards also unites us because he understands how the corporate influence in D.C. seeks to divide and weaken us. When you look at issues like religion, abortion, school prayer, gay marriage and the like, you soon realize that the candidates who capitalize on the divisions between Americans on these issues are also those that rely the most on corporate money. That is no coincidence. If you want to unite the American people, you must rely on them and they must be able to rely on you. John Edwards is the candidate that ordinary Americans can rely on to have their interests and only their interests, the interests of America and only the interests of America, not those of multinational corporate funders, in mind at all times.

Edwards' focus on the issues that matter to Americans -- like opportunity for all, rebuilding the economy, stopping the bleeding of American jobs, energy independence, and that unites us. Edwards' focus on these issues has strongly influenced the Democratic primary. It's the issues on which Edwards was the first to propose plans that are in the forefront in the Democratic primary race.

[Inuca]

62. Thanks for the reply

The reasons you gave are the reasons you and many liberals favor Edwards. IMHO though, it is overly optimistic to assume that these reasons are shared or even fully understood by a large percentage of the population at large, hence I do not think that they make Edwards a "uniter".

[1corona4u]

91. Yeah, I don't see it either....

especially when said candidate preaches about big business, and he makes millions off of them. How's that going to work? I wonder if he's going to cash in on all of his big business investments if he becomes the nominee? I don't think so....

[MattSh]

64. You mean these values??

The ones that, according to Dick Cheney, are "non-negotiable"?

Sorry, I like Edwards, don't know yet if I'd vote for him (or have the chance to). But the reason we were attacked in the first place were these "American values" that we've been shoving down other nations throats for 50+ years.

[2rth2pwr]

85. Edwards unite the country? He can't even unite his own supporters. nt

[AndyTiedye]

27. DK Would Be Most Likely to Find Out Who Hit Us Before Hitting Back, Instead of Just Hitting Someone

[Zorra]

46. He was 100% correct about Iraq, that's for sure. n/t

[Hippo_Tron]

29. Honestly I think any of them would do a good job

Who would handle it the best is, IMO, impossible to tell. Everybody doubted JFK's abilities because of his youth but he saved the world from complete destruction during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

[Dawgs]

31. Interesting that the one who leads is the same one who failed miserably last time.

I hate to say it, because I like him in a way, but Edwards has fooled way too many of you people.

[1corona4u]

34. That's what I'm saying....

[Froward69]

72. Here Hear!!

you are spot on... Edwards is a used car salesman.
:pals: :yourock: :applause: :applause: :applause: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: I am glad a few of us here aren't fooled by Edwards' populist rhetoric.

[Perry Logan]

40. Too bad Wesley Clark isn't running.

[1corona4u]

41. I liked Clark....

very much.

[elleng]

58. corona,

I'm glad to hear it.

[elleng]

56. Its the worst

thing that the Dems have done, IMO.

Without Wes, tho, Joe Biden is an excellent second. He appears to know as much as Wes does, have good instincts and the ability to move quickly, and may know more about the workings of govt than any others.

This is truly a bitter-sweet election for many of us.

[Blue-Jay]

48. Godzilla!

[TheWatcher]

49. Tom Brady!

Because, by gosh, if he can be undefeated in the NFL, which, let's just be honest with ourselves, is THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE FACING THIS COUNTRY RIGHT NOW, he can be undefeated against those drrty turrists!

:sarcasm:

[mrigirl]

51. You have something against Brady? This New Englander likes both football AND politics!

I'm sorry but you and the rest of the country have got to accept that we have the "Joe Montana" of our time playing for us. I myself am enjoying this party while it lasts! I remember the old days of 1-13. Go pats!

Biden 2008!

[TheWatcher]

57. I'm sorry, but I don't have to "accept" anything.

I could care less about the Patriots, or the NFL for that matter.

At the same time, I am glad that you are enjoying their season, and really don't have anything AGAINST Tom Brady or Football. Both are totally irrelevant to me, but if it brings you enjoyment and entertainment, that is good for you, and more power to you for it.

I do find it interesting however, the utterly ridiculous level of importance, attention, and priority that people are putting into a football game, and even more disturbed that those not going along with the party are getting berated because they are focusing on vastly more important things.

It's even more disturbing how our leadership can behave like brave, unyielding Superheroes and can
bravely stand up to make sure a Football game gets broadcast, but when it comes to the things that matter, they can do little more than enable a criminal administration to keep a Death Grip on this country, and keep pushing forward, virtually unimpeded.

And yes, I know you don't want to hear it anymore. I know you just want to feel good, and feel powerful, and be entertained, and bask in the power and deep meaning of the tribalism that comes with being a Sports Fan. You don't want to be bothered.

But please understand that many of us don't want to come along for the party.

Sorry if I offended.

On Edit: And I hate to burst your Bubble, But your beloved Tom Brady is a Bush Supporter, for the war, and he's a Republican. I have nothing against the Patriots, but as for having something against Brady, Oh, Guilty As Charged. No apologies there. He's a problem all his own.

[mrigirl]

63. I'm not offeneded. I have known that Brady is a Repub for a while now

I like Brady for the player that he is, not his political beliefs. Frankly, I'm quite disappointed that he supports Bush and as a woman also disappointed w/ the whole baby thing. Doesn't set a good example for our youngsters. But that's Brady's own personal life- on the field is where my feelings towards him count. His own life is his own business.

I also completely agree w/ your statement about how the legislators got this game televised and made such a stink about it and got it done. And they can't get important shit done. Our priorities are indeed a little backwards.

At least I can seperate the sports world from real life and I know what's important. The Patriots for me every Sunday is for fun, my escape from work, etc.

I bet you that if Brady's name was on a ballot for President how many fools would actually vote for him? I hate to say this but a majority of us Americans are quite shallow and don't care about what's going on and what this Administration has done to our country. This is why I got involved in politics- because I'm sick of it and want to see a change.

I respect that you're not a football guy. that's fine with me. And like I said I agree w/ a majority of your post. Have a safe and happy New Year!
Biden 2008!

[Onlooker]

74. Brady is not a Bush supporter

He's on record as an independent, and at least one friend described him as a moderate Democrat. Plus, his girlfriend, Giselle is quite liberal -- remember, she said she wants to be paid in Euros, not dollars. Also, Bill Belichick (Pats' coach) is a Democrat whose done volunteer work in prisons; and Bob Kraft (Pats owner) has given far more money to the Democrats than to the Repuglicans.

[mrigirl]

93. I'm not too sure. I've heard form many people that Brady is Repub and I live in Mass.

We're a Democratic State. We couldn't make this shit up. Disappointing, yes. Who cares, he's a hell of a quarterback!

[Onlooker]

98. Here's a link!

People believe that he's a Republican because he accepted Bush's invitation to attend the State of the Union speech a few year ago. Frankly, I think most people would be tempted to accept such an invitation. (FYI, I live in Massachusetts, too)

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/04/60minutes/main1015331_page2.shtml

KROFT: Lonie Paxton said he had to drive to New York, and you did nothing but play an audio version of Bill Clinton's book. (LAUGHTER) He thought it was some kind of torture.

BRADY: Did he? See, he should have been learning some things. I figure all that dead time in the car, I mean the book's like 600 pages, it'd be a good time to listen to it. That was a great story.

KROFT: You a republican or a democrat?

BRADY: You know, I'm actually independent. I'm actually an independent, and I have been for some time. There's no doubt this world needs a lot of help.

http://www.zimbio.com/TOM+BRADY-GISELE+BUNDCHEN+RELATIONSHIP/articles/36/Tom+Brady+Parties+Bill+Clinton

TOM Brady was seen celebrating his record six touchdown passes with his supermodel girlfriend, Gisele Bundchen, at Prime 112 in South Beach, where Bill Clinton introduced him to his party as “the greatest quarterback in the world.”

http://www.hollyscoop.com/gisele-bundchen/tom-brady-fights-poverty-in-africa_10528.aspx

[mrigirl]

100. Ok- You're right! So much for what you hear.Thanks, cuz

I'm glad he isn't. I would still support him on the field but now I can love him a little more off it!

[Marrah_G]

104. I love Brady !

Just another reason why living in Mass is so damn great!

I'm in Foxboro right now!

Woooo GO PATS!!

[lumberjack_jeff]

52. I have a better question

If... hypothetically of course... america were to suddenly find itself;
- with $10 trillion in debt
- fighting a holy war with fraudulent basis
- having ceded the power to the president to wiretap and torture you
- suffering under a second decade of double-digit healthcare inflation
- experiencing a doubling of fuel prices
- dealing with a crippling debt crisis caused by a mortgage melt-down
- facing a 10 degree global temperature rise
- wondering what to do when peak oil hits

Who would you want sitting in the oval office?

Answer: any of the above.

[Yuugal]

53. Me.

This way I'd be completely sure the president wasn't gonna use the attack as an excuse to wipe their ass with the Constitution.

[emlev]

54. Well, I said DK, but if the Oval Office Itself were attacked, I'd want GWB!

[IndianaGreen]

55. Tough call, but I know I wouldn't want Hillary in the White House

I wouldn't want a woman that thinks that in order to show strength one has to be as testosterone-driven as the men that have plunged our country into so many wars.

Bush invaded Iraq because he thought Gawd wanted him to. Hillary will bomb Iran because she wants to outdo men in doing the worse things that men are capable of.

Chris Dodd would be the best choice! Dodd is a man of good intellect and solid background. A former Peace Corps volunteer, Dodd has a feel for the Third World that some of the other candidates lack. Dodd is also a man with humanistic principles. He won't bomb a country in order to satisfy a blood lust or revenge. He would be cautious, yet firm.

Biden would be a close second, but I give Dodd the nod on the basis of his principled stand against Reid's FISA telecom amnesty bill.

[Steely_Dan]

59. Great Question...

...with an obvious answer.

Biden!

-Paige

[killbotfactory]

60. Obama

The others are more likely to retaliate against the wrong country.

[Prophet 451]

61. If America were attacked tomorrow...

...you'd be under martial law by sundown. W is literally drooling over the prospect.

[ecstatic]

66. If all heads of state were women

I think we'd have less war, more understanding.

[youthere]

67. No contest. Joe Biden.

[youthere]

101. Kicking

[nyc 4 Biden]

68. That was an easy one. Biden. n/t

[Caseman]

73. This poll doesn't make any sense...

...What experience does John Edwards have in foreign relations? People are picking their candidate out of loyalty rather than common sense.

[kad7777]

75. That's obvious

Yet, with the assassination of Benazir Bhutto today, there is cause to really think about who we want to lead the free world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUC8LeZ1hM4

[kad7777]

76. kick

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUC8LeZ1hM4

[youthere]

77. kicking

[David Zephyr]

79. Al Gore and Howard Dean.

.

[K Gardner]

80. Very strange timing on that poll, KAD.. downright creepy. n/t

[youthere]

81. KICK.

[bunnies]

82. Biden. No doubt. nt

[Steely_Dan]

83. And Biden is Considered Unelectable...

How sad.

-P

[youthere]

84. It's a head scratcher...

isn't it?

[Steely_Dan]

86. Kick n/t

[harmonicon]

87. America is being attacked every day by this administration and its' congressional enablers

I think the really question should be, who is taking part in these attacks and who is trying to stop them?

[FlyingSquirrel]

88. Here's a better question:

***WHEN*** America is attacked next October in an attempt to sway the election (I'm sure OBL will not just content himself with another video this time), WHICH Democratic candidate will have the best shot against the Repugs and WHO should their RUNNING MATE be?

[youthere]

89. Biden and his running mate should be..

any of the other candidates.

[alphafemale]

94. If we were attacked "Tomorrow?" Well wishing aside I'd guess W would still be President.

And the rush-bots would still blame Clinton.

[Catherine Vincent]

95. GWBush. Then it would be his fault again. nt

[Hieronymus]

96. I voted for Edwards. Biden is running for Secretary of State for years.

[Two Americas]

97. one thing for sure

One thing I know is that there is no one I would rather have acting as secretary of state in that circumstance than Joe Biden. I mean no disrespect by that. We need many to contribute in many capacities.

As Sam Adams said - "It is a very great mistake to imagine that the object of loyalty is the authority and interest of one individual man, however dignified by the applause or enriched by the success of popular actions."

There is no good purpose in arguing over which "one individual man" is needed - we will all be needed. Who can call all of us to the work?

A couple of questions that I would consider before I would consider the question in the OP:

In the presidency of which candidate would the country be least likely to be attacked to begin with?

In the presidency of which candidate would the the strength of the country - not merely the military strength, but the moral strength and the character and health and well being and courage of the people top to bottom - be the greatest?

[youthere]

99. Kicking again.

[skipos]

102. I want BIDEN no matter what. Terror doesn't change my vote. nt

[youthere]

105. Ditto that.

[ThomWV]

106. I don't know who'd be in the office but I want Wesley Clark standing next to them

[youthere]

107. Oh yeah. I want my Wes. Biden and Clark.

[kad7777]

108. Just kick'n for Joe

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUC8LeZ1hM4

[youthere]

109. Kicking