<< ENVIRONMENTALISTS HORRIFIED ~ MAIN ~ ME FOR A DAY >>

IT’S HAPPENING AGAIN

“If only we could vote for the next US president,” wishes the UK Telegraph’s Simon Heffer:

Many Britons will feel it would be rather nice to have a vote, too. Well, maybe not a whole vote: I would settle for one worth 50 per cent of those cast by American citizens.

After all, since we are a strategic colony of the US, it would be nice to have even a marginal say in how the empire chooses to dispose our goodwill and our blood and treasure. Such considerations were explicit in the founding of the US, and what’s sauce for the goose…

Whoa! This could lead to a 2008 version of Operation Clark County! Although, being of the right, any Heffer-driven campaign would presumably target Democrats; possibly with the same unanticipated negative results. He must be stopped. Although a similar Belgian campaign might again assist Republicans:

American presidential elections are not “home affairs.” American decisions have repercussions all over the globe. The American mortgage crisis affects banks in Europe. The insatiable American demand for oil makes the Arabian sheiks rich. The American refusal to care for the environment causes the North Pole ice to melt and coastal areas in Asia to flood. A weakened dollar and an immense budget deficit affect the global economy.

Hence, the world should be given the right to vote. Because the current situation is a blatant case of taxation without representation, against which the Americans rebelled in 1776.

More letters from Europe. Just what Ohio needs.

Posted by Tim B. on 01/06/2008 at 11:41 AM
  1. Shouldn’t the Belgian’s be more concerned about not having the right to vote for who runs the EU? I know I am.

    Posted by Ross on 2008 01 06 at 12:02 PM • permalink

  2. Hence, the world should be given the right to vote. Because the current situation is a blatant case of taxation without representation, against which the Americans rebelled in 1776.

    Ummmm… What?  I’m not aware of any tax revenue flowing into the US from foreign lands.  I do seem to recall that one whole hell of a lot of American tax money flows out in the form of “foreign aid”.

    Did I miss a memo?

    Posted by fclark on 2008 01 06 at 12:04 PM • permalink

  3. If they feel that strongly about it, are they willing to start paying taxes to Washington?

    Posted by Damian P. on 2008 01 06 at 12:08 PM • permalink

  4. #2

    Did I miss a memo?

    Yes, fclark, you did.

    Since, as it seems clear, they believe they’re not getting what they consider their fair share of America’s largess, the perceived shortfall is, therefore, a tax.

    See?

    Posted by Spiny Norman on 2008 01 06 at 12:11 PM • permalink

  5. Uh…the Europeans who wanted to live in a free world and have the right to elect their government have already sailed to the New World.  Over the last 300 years.  They are called Americans.

    Posted by Diggs on 2008 01 06 at 12:18 PM • permalink

  6. Are they willing to let Americans vote in their elections? Or is this a one-way street?

    Posted by Evil Pundit on 2008 01 06 at 12:18 PM • permalink

  7. causes the North Pole ice to melt and coastal areas in Asia to flood.

    The coasts of Asia are notoriously lower than the coasts everywhere else, sometimes several feet below sea level.

    Posted by rhhardin on 2008 01 06 at 12:21 PM • permalink

  8. The insatiable American demand for oil makes the Arabian sheiks rich

    ????? And the EUropeans and Chinese and the ROTW don’t want opil?

    Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2008 01 06 at 12:24 PM • permalink

  9. > After all, since we are a strategic colony of the US,

    The first step is to become a “territory” of the United States, like Guam or Puerto Rico.  The immediate benefit to you is every right of an American citizen *other* than voting, but from that point you merely get all your fellow territoryists to campaign for admittance into the union.  Sorta like Hawaii.

    Try it.

    > I would settle for one worth 50 per cent of those cast by American citizens.

    Until then, how about you settle for Fuck Off.

    Posted by zeppenwolf on 2008 01 06 at 12:40 PM • permalink

  10. #8 Wimpy Canadian

    The insatiable American demand for oil makes the Arabian sheiks rich

    ????? And the Europeans and Chinese and the ROTW don’t want oil?

    Of course they do, but it isn’t their money that makes the Arabian oil ticks rich… even though reality is quite different: America’s “insatiable demand” is actually making Canadians, Mexicans, Nigerians, and Venezuelans Emperor Hugo “rich”. Those are where the great majority of America’s oil imports come from.

    Of course, if one is paying attention, it’s pretty clear that a substantial proportion of the jump in oil prices over the last few years has been caused by commodities speculators driving up the price. Increased demand by China makes up most of the rest.

    Posted by Spiny Norman on 2008 01 06 at 12:48 PM • permalink

  11. Man, this is a red meat post if I ever saw one !Mister Heffer is being sarcastic ,I guess. Seems a little heavy handed to me.It was interesting reading some of the comments on the telegraph site. They weren’t as anti-American ,generally, as I expected. More along the lines of , maybe we should get our house(UK)in order before we presume to dictate to the Americans.

    I would be interested to hear Australian reaction to the idea of European participation in Australian elections.I’m going to make a wild guess and say it would be something along the lines of “Bite Me”.

    Posted by greene on 2008 01 06 at 12:55 PM • permalink

  12. The Belgians want to to vote in the US election because they are incapable of electing a stable government of their own -the French speakers and Dutch speakers hate each other -and as was rightly pointed out, they have no voice in electing the EU government.

    Posted by Son of a Pig and a Monkey on 2008 01 06 at 01:02 PM • permalink

  13. I’d be interested in seeing the results of a vote like that.  The leftoids might be surprised that the masses might not go their way…actually they wouldn’t be surprised at all, given how they feel about allowing referenda on their own treaties.

    Posted by trainer on 2008 01 06 at 01:08 PM • permalink

  14. As I stated elsewhere…The only decent thing from Brussels ends with the word Sprouts.

    Posted by El Cid on 2008 01 06 at 01:12 PM • permalink

  15. Attention Non-Americans Wanting to Vote in Our Elections: Piss off.

    That is all.

    Posted by mojo on 2008 01 06 at 01:25 PM • permalink

  16. Many Britons will feel it would be rather nice to have a vote, too.

    Hmmm… reminds me of

    Monty Rushmore (Harvey Korman): And now, we take you to the fifty-first state, Great Britain!

    Americathon (1979)

    Yeah.  And that line was shortly followed by Elvis Costello singing “Crawling to the USA.”  (Don’t blame me; I just calls ‘em as I remembers ‘em.)

    Posted by Apostic on 2008 01 06 at 01:30 PM • permalink


  17. I think that I’ll go for the historical approach: If anyone in Britain really wants to make yet another attempt to subvert this country(think War of 1812 and the American Civil War) then they’re welcome to try.And I hope that they receive the same result.

    Posted by Blue Hen on 2008 01 06 at 01:52 PM • permalink

  18. I can’t outdo this. Here’s a sample:

    Earth to Europe: go pound sand.

    Posted by rightwingprof on 2008 01 06 at 01:55 PM • permalink

  19. As zeppenwolf quite rightly points out, there is an avenue by which Britons (and, indeed, anyone) can gain a vote in our elections: petition for admission to the Union. I could quite fancy a United States of the North Atlantic—

    In the case of Britain itself, the result would be four states: England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. The latter would be rather small, but Rhode Island and Providence Plantations gets along fairly nicely. A quick estimate suggests that the result would aggregate fifty or sixty Electoral College votes, a definite strong voice; someone should do the actual arithmetic, both with and without an expansion of the House of Representatives.

    Britain already has “...a republican form of Government.” No U.S. State uses the parliamentary structure, but there’s no law against it. Representatives to the national House would have to be chosen according to the U.S. Constitution, of course.

    There remains the problem of the nobility and the Queen. If the proposal were seriously considered, I think most Americans would be willing to go along with an Amendment granting States accustomed to such things a ceremonial nobility without political power.

    Details, many thorny, remain to be worked out, but with goodwill and a little imagination the barriers wouldn’t be insurmountable. We could even preserve the Royal Navy—Texas has one, after all. I don’t think we could keep the pound, which might be psychologically insurmountable.

    I leave enumerating the advantages and disadvantages to others. It could work, though. Belgium? Hmm… might be tougher.

    Regards,
    Ric

    Posted by Ric Locke on 2008 01 06 at 02:02 PM • permalink

  20. If anyone in Britain really wants to make yet another attempt to subvert this country(think War of 1812 and the American Civil War) then they’re welcome to try.And I hope that they receive the same result.

    What you want us to burn down Washington again? I can see why that would be appealing.

    Posted by Ross on 2008 01 06 at 02:12 PM • permalink

  21. Speaking as a former Marine, I wouldn’t mind a re-match at Bladensburg (town outside Washington DC). I also wouldn’t mind watching British regiments thrown away in futile frontal assaults after hostilities ceased (New Orleans). I would like to see an invading Royal Navy turned back once again at Baltimore. And then being forced to admit that they no longer had the right to stop foreign ships at sea,kidnap foreign nationals and force them into servitude (impressment). I also want to see Britain being forced to clean up the mess they made when they outfitted Confederate ships, sheltered Confederate diplomats and tried to destroy the United States. This incidentally, caused no small amount of furor when the working classes of Britain learned that they were now being forced to support a pro-slavery rebellion.

    There’s a certain amount of appeal there. That is, if Britain wishes to return to its old ways. If they’d rather remain in the 21st century, that would be fine too.

    Posted by Blue Hen on 2008 01 06 at 02:26 PM • permalink

  22. “After all, since we are a strategic colony of the US, it would be nice to have even a marginal say in how the empire chooses to dispose our goodwill and our blood and treasure.”

    Crap.  If that was the case, then the USA could have commanded the resources of the UK when we were fighting in Vietnam, but because the UK is a free and sovereign nation, and not an American colony, they were able to opt out of that war, and save their blood and treasure.

    The author of this piece is an ass.

    And, needless to say, isn’t going to get a vote in American elections.

    Posted by Dave Surls on 2008 01 06 at 02:31 PM • permalink

  23. #20 I leave enumerating the advantages and disadvantages to others. It could work, though. Belgium? Hmm… might be tougher.

    Belgium?  No problem.  We actually could use the landfill space.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2008 01 06 at 02:37 PM • permalink

  24. Further to my previous—

    The population of the U.S. is around 300 million, that of the U.K. about 60 million divided up as
    England 50 million
    Scotland 5 million
    Northern Ireland 2 million
    Wales 3 million

    Presuming an enlargement of the House of Representatives, this would result in the new States being represented as
    England 72 Representatives + 2 Senators = 76 electoral votes
    Scotland 8 Representatives + 2 Senators = 10 electoral votes
    Wales 4 Representatives + 2 Senators = 6 electoral votes
    Northern Ireland 3 Representatives + 2 Senators = 5 electoral votes
    Total for the UK = 87 Representatives, 8 Senators, for a total of 95 electoral votes out of 630. Quite a nice little bloc for candidates to work with.

    Presuming no enlargement of the House, Northern Ireland only gets 2 Representatives and Scotland 6. This gives the UK 84 Representatives and 8 Senators, for 84 electoral votes out of 543 (the Senate has to be enlarged regardless).

    Not shabby. Shall we start a Movement?

    Regards,
    Ric

    Posted by Ric Locke on 2008 01 06 at 02:43 PM • permalink

  25. Sorry—the “no enlargement” case ends up with the UK having 92 electoral votes, of course. I failed to add in the Senators for that.

    Regards,
    Ric

    Posted by Ric Locke on 2008 01 06 at 02:46 PM • permalink

  26. Short version of American response:  Fuck you

    Long version of American response:  Fuck you in the ass with a stick

    Posted by chunt31854 on 2008 01 06 at 02:50 PM • permalink

  27. If any Euroweenies want to secede the European Union, join the US of A, pay taxes DIRECTLY into our coffers, integrate their armed forces into a real military*, and in general develop a backbone, sure, they can vote.

    Otherwise, they can fuck off and die with a rusty bayonet.

    =================================

    *: Apologies to Britain, which has the closest thing to a real military in Europe.  Also, most of the Euroweenie Ministries of Defense (or whatever) are a collection of wusses.  So if this goes forward, we only get the tactical military units.  The administrators and managers will be permanently banished to Brussels.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2008 01 06 at 03:18 PM • permalink

  28. Blue Hen,

    I’m on your team, but the occasional kidnapping of foreign nationals (Saudis, Pakistanis,  Egyptians, etc.) can be excused, where necessary.

    Posted by Son of a Pig and a Monkey on 2008 01 06 at 03:19 PM • permalink

  29. Real_Jeffs,

    That would carve out Belgium, whose army has a great band and losts of barbers, but not many soldiers.

    Posted by Son of a Pig and a Monkey on 2008 01 06 at 03:20 PM • permalink

  30. As an American (“Yank”) sympathetic to the plight of our British colonies, I am prepared to propose granting the UK Home Rule.  I envision allowing the British to form their own Parliament.  I would even allow them to elect their own Prime Minister.  I furthermore propose that US citizens and their leaders be denied the right to cast votes or exercise veto power over these electoral acts in this version of “British Home Rule” that I envision.  Please do not call me a foolish dreamer.

    Mathematically, numbers can be positive and negative.  Thus, it is manifest that Britons are indeed paying foreign aid to their imperial master in the form of taxes times negative one, a quantity which our oligarchs euphemistically call “foreign aid.”  I propose that we end the hypocrisy by eliminating that deceitful factor of negative one.

    Home Rule for the UK!

    Posted by Ricardo on 2008 01 06 at 03:46 PM • permalink

  31. Aack, PIMF.. “manifest that Britons are indeed paying taxes…

    Posted by Ricardo on 2008 01 06 at 03:47 PM • permalink

  32. Many Britons will feel it would be rather nice to have a vote, too. Well, maybe not a whole vote: I would settle for one worth 50 per cent of those cast by American citizens.

    After all, since we are a strategic colony of the US…

    It will give Phat Adams much joy, I suspect, to know that his stale ideas are being plagiarised on the other side of the world.

    Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2008 01 06 at 04:15 PM • permalink

  33. > There remains the problem of the nobility and the Queen. If the proposal were seriously considered, I think most Americans would be willing to go along with an Amendment granting States accustomed to such things a ceremonial nobility without political power.

    What problem?  We already have/tolerate Kentucky Colonels.

    Posted by Andy Freeman on 2008 01 06 at 04:29 PM • permalink

  34. Re #30, yup, SoaPaaM, that describes the Belgian Army to a “t”.  That was nearly their state of affairs when I was stationed in (then West) Germany in the early 1980s, and the place has only gone downhill since then.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2008 01 06 at 04:32 PM • permalink

  35. #25 Ric -

    Not sure where you’re posting from (hopefully not the UK, or else I might be about to start a BIG fight), but I think the good people of the US might not necessarily welcome the UK’s admission to the Union.

    Oh, and Blue Hen #22 (hoping I’m not about to hit a genuinely raw nerve and piss you right off…) -

    I also want to see Britain being forced to clean up the mess they made when they outfitted Confederate ships, sheltered Confederate diplomats and tried to destroy the United States

    I dunno - most of the Americans I know are from the south.  The ones who have a view on the subject at all somehow wish Britain had thrown rather more into the fray than just the CSSs Alabama and Shenandoah!

    [trots away out of range (hopefully) whistling “Dixie”]

    Posted by Renegade Lawyer on 2008 01 06 at 05:04 PM • permalink

  36. Letting foreign devils into the union would be a nice thing to do. But, you have to remember, there’s no way in hell that a congressional committee could ever agree on a new pattern for the star field on our flag.

    So, it aint gonna happen.

    Seriously though. We already have enough commies, neocommies, idiot socialists and multi-generation welfare lumps as it is.

    Besides, the plans for the Olde England Medieval Theme Park and Nottingham Adventure Forest are already in place and bids are being solicited for construction.

    We are just waiting on the formalities. Once the current owners relinquish their claim, we can clean the place up, shave it to the ground and build it up all nice and wonderland pretty.

    Posted by Grimmy on 2008 01 06 at 05:04 PM • permalink

  37. Grimmy…..Your congressional committee negotiating on the star field made me start thinking of someway to compromise. Now having thought about it for a few minutes. I’ve come to the conclusion that you are correct.

    Now, imagine that the Brits insisted on an extra stripe or two.It’d be congressional Armageddon.
    Great idea for UK Disney too. Maybe Blair’s resident wags could contribute names for the rides inside the Olde England Medieval Theme Park.

    Posted by greene on 2008 01 06 at 05:52 PM • permalink

  38. Yeah, let ‘em pay us taxes, give up socialized health care, and allow concealed carry permits.  Then they can join us.

    Posted by Mike G on 2008 01 06 at 06:07 PM • permalink

  39. #14 El Cid, Brussels sprouts are gross, and I say that as a Seppo that likes “yeast extract.”

    Posted by reese on 2008 01 06 at 07:20 PM • permalink

  40. #40 I’m definitely with you on that Reese. Brussels sprouts are nasty, but Vegemite is delicious!

    Posted by Ash_ on 2008 01 06 at 07:40 PM • permalink

  41. #39, they’ve also got to start enforcing Free Speech and libel laws that make sense.  I would accept part of their court system, like short trials and lawyers that rotate between prosecution and defense.
    They also have to accept self-defense in the home, the 2nd Amendment, Freedom of Religion (get rid of the subsidies for the Anglican Church) and so forth.

    Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2008 01 06 at 08:08 PM • permalink

  42. So authors and uni lecturers are rehashing the world government story to relieve world oppression.

    I thought that was running a far away second to global warmongering as the clarion call for the government funded artys, bureaucrats and unemployed of the world.

    Posted by mehaul on 2008 01 06 at 08:17 PM • permalink

  43. China sneaks under the radar yet again.
    What else would you expect from these willfully blind cowards!?

    Posted by Brian on 2008 01 06 at 08:29 PM • permalink

  44. “I would settle for one worth 50 per cent of those cast by American citizens.”

    Actually, he will settle for one worth 0%.

    Posted by blogagog on 2008 01 06 at 09:11 PM • permalink

  45. Obviously relations between Europe and America have improved. They now assume you can read.

    Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2008 01 06 at 09:46 PM • permalink

  46. for the uk to be accepted as part of our great nation (in addition to the excellent ideas commented above) i have my own list. get rid of all asylum seekers, get rid of council housing, get rid of the dole for healthy people, get rid of paying single mothers not to work, get rid of the nhs, get rid of the labour party.  i am sure i can come up with more.
    keep the public transportation system.  keep the highlands, the lake district and the north yorkshire moors. keep the small independent pubs. bring back that fine tradition of fox hunting. 

    #40 & 41,
    just for that, i am going to spread marmite on my brussels sprouts!  mmmm

    Posted by missred on 2008 01 06 at 09:58 PM • permalink

  47. I can just see the eurosmugness oozing from those letters of October 2008:

    You’d better vote for the black candidate or you’ll look like the racists you really are to the rest of the world…

    You’d better not vote that warmongering [Republican candidate] in. Us Europeans, who live in a post-warfare society without the barbaric death penalty, with nary a care not taken care of by our government from cradle to grave, have found a much better way to live than you archaic philistines. So vote Obama…

    Posted by Tommy Shanks on 2008 01 06 at 10:14 PM • permalink

  48. Dear Europe,

    Twice in the last century, my countrymen have crossed the Atlantic and died by the tens of thousands at the hands of Europeans: each one a martyr to your inability to govern yourself in a civilized manner.

    Given the frequency with which you let mass-murdering lunatics assume power, you have no cause to criticize anyone’s politics: in particular, the citizens of the world’s oldest republic.

    When you become as good at peaceful self-governance as we are, give me a call. In the meantime, please take your suggestion and stick it where the sun don’t shine.

    Sincerely yours ...

    Posted by Urbs in Horto on 2008 01 07 at 12:48 AM • permalink

  49. All he has to do is become a citizen of Mexico, then sneak into the US and vote.It’s pretty simple.

    Posted by zefal on 2008 01 07 at 01:15 AM • permalink

  50. Son of a pig and a monkey. I don’t care what you say, I just laugh every time I see your name. It never wears off.  There I go again.


    and again….

    Posted by mehaul on 2008 01 07 at 06:08 AM • permalink

  51. When you become as good at peaceful self-governance as we are, give me a call. In the meantime, please take your suggestion and stick it where the sun don’t shine.

    Sincerely yours ...

    Gold.

    Posted by surfmaster on 2008 01 07 at 06:19 AM • permalink

  52. Heifer should be more concerned about giving the Poms a referendum on the EU.

    Posted by blogstrop on 2008 01 07 at 06:27 AM • permalink

  53. #51 - could he be the son of two cricket players?

    Posted by blogstrop on 2008 01 07 at 06:28 AM • permalink

  54. Actually the number of Representatives is Constitutionally fixed, so unless we could push through an amendment we’d just have to redistribute them to the new states of England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.

    But it’s a lot simpler, as others here have noted, that those who want to vote in the US emigrate and apply for citizenship.  Problem solved.  We already have plenty of whiny lefty wienies over here as it to, we really don’t want to be bothered with their European analogues, which I bet would be even more smug and annoying.  I guess being an insignificant appendage to history makes you like that, though.

    Posted by Steve Skubinna on 2008 01 07 at 06:49 AM • permalink

  55. #54 Anymore of that and you’ll be in front of the best human rights commission that cricket can muster.

    That would be a bunch of Canadian Indians*.

    * the curry munching version; non le indigene

    Posted by mehaul on 2008 01 07 at 07:14 AM • permalink

  56. The Poms are also engaged in a war on Israel. This is by passive means (avoidance of engagement on questions like Egypt’s perfidy) , or by harbouring and pandering to Israel’s enemies. UK universities voted to black-ban Israeli ones. The piss-weak UK churches look like doing the same, if they have not already.

    Posted by blogstrop on 2008 01 07 at 07:16 AM • permalink

  57. Hmmmmm.

    Isn’t the whole EU nonsense supposed to create a super-state that can equal the USA?

    Or was someone shining a turd when the EU was first proposed?

    Posted by memomachine on 2008 01 07 at 11:51 AM • permalink

  58. Hmmmm.

    Personally I’m in favor of annexing Alberta.

    Quebec on the other hand, not so much.

    Posted by memomachine on 2008 01 07 at 11:55 AM • permalink

  59. The ‘nobility’ of Britain is a deal breaker. Especially since the poster boy/girl will be Charles and Fergie. Pass.
    Also, they will have to institute our Constitution and I’m guessing that’s a deal breaker for the British gov’t. They like having control of their subjects, thank you very much.

    As for “taxation without representation”,they have “defense without taxation” as we keep the peace around the world and get squat from the EUnuchs except whining. Most of the EUnuchs are not doing what they promised in Afghanistan. Sure, they’ll send troops, but they won’t let them fight.

    Britain, of course, doesn’t slack the way most of EUnuchstan does in that area, but we do spend a crapload of time and money policing the world.

    Posted by Veeshir on 2008 01 07 at 12:28 PM • permalink

  60. It’ll never work.  The Brits will have to learn to spell in the American manner, and learn the proper terminology for spanners and bonnets and other oddities.

    Who will pay for the new textbooks?  It’ll have to be them, because their per-capita GDP has now surpassed ours.

    Those obstacles might be surmountable.  Driving on the right would not be.

    Posted by MarkD on 2008 01 07 at 12:30 PM • permalink

  61. The lovely thing about Americans: we really, truly don’t give a good crap what the rest of the world thinks of us.

    Man, that pisses ‘em off, too…

    Posted by mojo on 2008 01 07 at 01:37 PM • permalink

  62. Well, now, first you find a shipload of tea ...

    Posted by Achillea on 2008 01 07 at 03:05 PM • permalink

  63. memomachine, don’t forget British Columbia, as well.  Vancouver BC might be a hot bed of moonbats, but the rest of the province is way cool…...and it’ll give us US territory all the way to Alaska.  Yeehaw!

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2008 01 07 at 03:07 PM • permalink

  64. TRJS
    You just want the BC Bud, and the mushrooms.

    Cheers

    Posted by J.M. Heinrichs on 2008 01 07 at 03:42 PM • permalink

  65. And the problem is?

    If they try another Clark County operation in 2008 it might bring Puce out of hiding.

    Posted by Michael Lonie on 2008 01 07 at 09:13 PM • permalink

  66. Quoth Ross:

    What you want us to burn down Washington again? I can see why that would be appealing.

    Just give us time to save the Smithsonian Institution and the Library of Congress, then bring it on!  :-P

    Posted by Mary in LA on 2008 01 08 at 03:08 PM • permalink

  67. Dear Brit:

    You’ve ruined your own empire. Please leave ours alone.

    Warmest regards,
    A. Seppo

    Posted by brett_l on 2008 01 09 at 10:08 AM • permalink

  68. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.