Phillies Issues Defense Policy Statement

From Phillies 2008:

Libertarian Presidential candidate George Phillies today issued a core policy statement on defense policy. “We need an adequate military,” Phillies said, “not the bloated military of the Bush Republican War Party. George Bush’s absurd overspending impoverishes our people, weakens our industry, and in the long run leaves us weaker and less secure.”

Core Phillies positions include:

*The Cold War is over. Most world military spending is by America and its friends. After leaving Iraq, we can and should safely deploy a far smaller army.

*Our navy is far more powerful than all the other navies in the world put together. Lost of those other navies belong to our friends. Large parts of the navy should be mothballed.

*New military technologies imply radical changes in effective ship and aircraft types. We should emphasize research, development, but only limited deployment of novel ship types.

*State militias should be returned entirely to the states, so when disaster strikes your National Guard is ready, not half the world away.

*The use of mercenaries by our government is an unAmerican abomination that should be ended.

*Electronic warfare against Americans, notably warrantless wiretaps, is a Federal crime that should be vigorously prosecuted.

*The primary terrorist threat to the United States is the domestic threat of religious extremists who attack abortion clinics and minority religions.

242 Responses to “Phillies Issues Defense Policy Statement”

  1. Ruwarchy! Says:

    George Phillies is a neocon statist who would use force and fraud to tax people to fund an evil military.

    Mary says “I personally don’t support the idea of a tax-supported military.”

    Ruwarchy 1, Statist Phillies 0.

  2. Ruwarchy! Says:

    George Phillies, will you use the military to protect Amercian companies and people stupid enough to travel overseas? Mary won’t:

    “While aggressor nations might be deterred from invading the borders of a non-aggressive nation, seizing American assets abroad would still be tempting. How would we, as a nation of non-aggressors, defend our interests abroad?

    At times, our troops have been sent into a country when property of U.S. companies have been threatened by aggressors. The American citizenry has been forced at gunpoint, if necessary to subsidize the protection of profits when companies have taken the risk of locating in an unstable area.

    If our neighbor George opened a convenience store in a high-crime area, we’d expect him to hire extra guards to protect it and pass the costs on to his customers by raising prices. No one would be forced at gunpoint to subsidize his business or his profit. We should expect American companies operating abroad to adopt the same non-aggressive approach.”

    She’s a pacifist, like all good anarchists should be. You, sir, are a warmonger neocon.

  3. Joseph Marzullo Says:

    Doesn’t matter. Both candidates will get ignored by MSM.

  4. Jerry Baner Says:

    Both Ruwart and Phillies are lightweights.

    The Libertarian party fails at becoming serious because they nominate joke candidates like those two.

    If the Ls want to jump up past the label of “third party” to “major contender,” they need to nominate someone like Barr or Gravel. Nominating anyone else, despite their Libertarian credentials, will make the party look like a joke, once more.

  5. Dave Williams Says:

    I could vote for this guy. Very rational policy.

  6. Ruwarchy! Says:

    Jerry, Joseph and Dave are statists. They support policies which use government force or candidates who promote the use of government force.

    Mary will get tons of media because anarchist America wants to hear the anarchist message.

    No government! No military! No taxes in any form! No government roads! No post office! No age of consent laws!

    This is the message America will listen to.

    Ruwarchy rocks!

  7. Denver Delegate Says:

    I think the use of mercenaries is both very American and very Libertarian, although I agree that the current use of military contractors needs better oversight and transparency. Privateers should also be bonded for collateral damage they may cause.

    Michael Badnarik spoke from the 2004 National Convention stage of Letters of Marque and Reprisal, which were issued by the U.S. government in its early years.

    For a taste of American privateering, see
    http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=738

  8. Ruwarchy! Says:

    Denver Delegate,

    Who would pay for the mercenaries? If the money comes the government, it is a statist plan that uses the force of government guns aimed at US citizens to pay for it.

    If the money comes from a private source like Ron Paul’s plan, that is great. America loves Ron Paul’s plan and it is on TV every day and in the newspapers, too. Mary Ruwart’s plan will be on national tv just as much as Ron Paul’s privateering plan.

    Ruwarchy rocks!

  9. Dave Williams Says:

    Ruwarchy,
    You butt munching NAMBLA supporter…if being a statist is such a bad thing, why haven’t you hung yourself yet, or committed suicide by cop? You’re part of the current statist system, so therefore you are a supporter. You and those like you will never get your way. It is a complete exercise in futility to think that Americans will descend into your delusional world…ever!

  10. G.E. Says:

    Dave – Don’t be a moron. Ruwarchy is a troll.

  11. Ruwarchy! Says:

    Dave Williams, If I want to munch butt and the person I’m with wants his butt munched it’s consensual. This is what Ruwarchy! is all about.

    If I’m so delusional, why does Mary have tons of support? People like Tom Knapp, R. Lee Wrights, Susan Hogarth and other radical people love Mary and they will bring the Libertarian Party back to hating neocon statists again. They will make the LP the biggest party in America with Mary as the presidential candidate.

    Mary will make America free!

  12. Ruwarchy! Says:

    G.E., are you a statist, too?

    I am not a troll, I am a Ruwarchist. I believe in the same things Mary Ruwart does.

    No government! No military! No taxes in any form! No government roads! No post office! No age of consent laws!

    Are you a statist or do you believe in these same things too?

  13. G.E. Says:

    “The primary terrorist threat to the United States is the domestic threat of religious extremists who attack abortion clinics” = WOW.

  14. G.E. Says:

    Do I believe in those same things?

    I don’t believe in responding to trolls. This is the last response you will get from me.

  15. Ruwarchy! Says:

    G.E. must be a statist because a true Mary Ruwart loving anarchist wouldn’t be afraid to debate ideas.

  16. Ruwarchy! Says:

    George Phillies is a statist because he wants to use government force to protect abortion doctors. Not that abortion is bad, but it should be private abortion, just like the good old days.

    Mary Ruwart loves aborting babies, too:

    “Since the embryo in the early stages of pregnancy can’t live outside its mother, it is truly part of her body and not a separate individual. During this time period, a woman having an abortion is exercising property rights over her body, not killing a being separate from herself. She is the individual with rights. The embryo, at this point in time, is not an individual.

    “Once the embryo is old enough to live outside the womb, the woman is still under no moral obligation to carry the child to term. She can invite people to her house, change her mind, and ask them to leave. She can invite an embryo to grow inside of her body, change her mind, and ask it to leave.”

  17. former disinter fan Says:

    Anarchy, oh my God. Murray Rothnard must be back from the dead and on the computer. Shit, he is better then Houdini.

  18. SovereignMN Says:

    “The primary terrorist threat to the United States is the domestic threat of religious extremists who attack abortion clinics and minority religions”

    Hilarious and downright pathetic. Care to post numbers to substantiate that claim Dr? How about all the street gangs that prey on the innocent in our streets? They are organized, dangerous and heavily armed. Sounds like a terror group to me.

  19. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    Ruwarchy, I agree with you about the wrongness of using our taxes to get rid of mercenaries, but like Dave I am a proud statist, though I believe that statism must be reformed through the Obama Revolution and the Progressive Alliance Strategy. Dave is one of my greatest critics so far, but with his posts on this thread, I think he is coming around to the Obama Revolution. Joseph and Jerry, I agree that George Phillies and Mary Ruwart can’t do much at this point, but if they’d endorse the Fringe Alliance strategy there is a possibility for them to achieve greatness.
    Please pray for Barack Obama on this difficult night for him, as he tries to withstand the trogledytes who support the Clinton/McCain/Bush/Nader conspiracy, and most tragically of all the Catholic heretics who do not support Obama.
    Glory to God in the highest and peace to god’s people on Earth.
    I will keep posting on every thread that Ruwarchy! posts on, in retaliation against him and in order to drive Dave Williams into perplexity.

  20. Ruwarchy! Says:

    Murray Rothbard is cool because he made the LP a lot purer than it was by forcing a bunch of the statists out of the party. Mary and her followers will force a lot of people out of the party too. Maybe Mary can do better than Rothbard and get them all out of the party.

    Finally, Susan Hogarth will have political power if Mary is the nominee and the the Libertarian Party can have principles once again.

  21. Steve Newton Says:

    This position by George Phillies is the most reasonable and most plausible position put forth by any potential Libetarian Presidential candidate. He addresses the key immediate steps that an American government could take to step back from empire.

    Read the sentence on mercenaries closely; Phillies is against the American government using mercenaries instead of citizen soldiers. You can’t stop any citizen from going abroad to offer his/her services to the highest bidder, but (a) you damn sure don’t have American taxpayers pay for them and (b) they forfeit any obligation on our part to defend them when they fall into the shit.

    OK, I’ll admit the last sentence was a little kooky, but he’s trying to make a point about the overstated threat of domestic terrorism. . . .

    See

    http://delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/search?q=obama+mccain+clinton+phillies+ruwart+bases

  22. Trent Hill Says:

    “The primary terrorist threat to the United States is the domestic threat of religious extremists who attack abortion clinics”

    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
    How many people have died from Abortion clinic bombings? Maybe 20?

  23. disinter Says:

    The primary terrorist threat to the United States is the domestic threat of religious extremists

    Like the Constitution Party nuts?

  24. Eric Dondero Says:

    Biggest night in politics in weeks, and here you all talking about policy issues.

    Turn off the computer, and turn on CNN, or Fox News. Hillary Clinton just clobbered Islamo-Fascist Barack Obama in Pennsylvania.

    Why?

    Reagan Democrats across the State. They hate racist America-hating Obama.

    And this after Hillary said today that she would “Obliterate” Iran if they attacked Israel.

    You all should be talking about how it is Libertarians are going to reach Reagan Democrats who are moderate to conservative on social issues, fiercely Patriotic, Pro-Strengh in Foreign Policy, and blue collar on economics.

    Instead, you all aren’t even talking Pennsylvania tonight. Are you all that clueless as to mainstream American politics???

  25. disinter Says:

    Turn off the computer, and turn on CNN, or Fox News.

    So we can become brainwashed zombies like you? No thanks.

  26. disinter Says:

    Hillary Clinton just clobbered Islamo-Fascist Barack Obama in Pennsylvania.

    Why?

    Because she was selected many, many years ago to win. There is nothing spontaneous about this scam.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iW5kOB1pmg

  27. Wes Benedict Says:

    I just think it’s so wonderful there are so many wonderful Libertarian Party candidates for President. I just reserved a wonderful room at the Denver convention hotel and I’m getting there early so I can have plenty of time to think about all of this. Although it was a little humid, by and large it was a beautiful day in Texas today. How were things where you are?

    Also, I bought wonderful new printer today from Office Depot. It’s wonderful. Probably made in China but I’m OK with that. I don’t think China has too many illegal aliens and that’s wonderful, although I like the illegal Aliens we have in Texas. They’re quite wonderful.

    Did anybody else go to Reggae Fest last weekend? The one here in Austin was wonderful. There were lots of Libertarians there and they were wonderful.

  28. disinter Says:

    They selected a drug addicted closet case name Bareback Hussein Osama as her “opponent”. The joke is on you.

  29. Dave Williams Says:

    Ruwarchy! Says:
    April 22nd, 2008 at 6:55 pm

    “Dave Williams, If I want to munch butt and the person I’m with wants his butt munched it’s consensual.”

    I agree. However, the person you want to munch butt with should be of a legal age and mentally stable.

    Just because a perv like you walks into a kindergarten and finds a five y/o who agrees to hold your balls doesn’t make it right jackass. Same would go if you waltzed into a state mental ward and found some mentally handicapped old person willing to do the same.

  30. disinter Says:

    Wes, you forgot to disclose what you ate for lunch. We are dying to find out.

  31. George Phillies Says:

    Eric,

    Actually, there is excellent coverage of the primary on Daily Kos. Well, it’s a Democratic election, so Democratic sites will cover. The vote % is 54-46. An 8 point lead, converted to delegates, gives Clinton a modest positive shift, but only a very modest shift, because Democratic primaries are typically proportional and by district. The expectation in advance was that Clinton wanted a double-digit win, and Obama wanted no worse that a mid-single-digit loss.

    Neither of them got their wish. (8^((

    Oh, and McCain won the Republican primary.

  32. disinter Says:

    So Clinton and McKook won…. it will be one neocon vs another in the general.

    I’m shocked! SHOCKED I tell you!!

  33. disinter Says:

    “So, they hope, with McCain also nominated, there will be Democracy—an all-neocon election, with sure victory for the warmongering fascisti. This, btw, is entirely unlike the elections in communist countries, where the regime cannot lose.” – Lew Rockwell

  34. Eric Dondero Says:

    Actually George, Hillary just busted the all-important 10 point margin according to Politico.com. So, it’s now a blow-out. A huge win for Reagan Democrats and Moderate Centrist. A huge loss for the “Ned Lamontian” Anti-War/Daily Kos crowd.

    Oops!! Just heard Greta announce that IT’S A BLOWOUT FOR CLINTON DOUBLE DIGITS BY 10 POINTS!!

    She made it!!

    I don’t normally like Democrats, but tonight I’m a “Reagan Democrat” in spirit. It would behoove more Libertarians to get a little dose of Reagan Democrat/Blue Collar style too. And stop being such policy wonkish Nerds!!

  35. George Phillies Says:

    And in the Mississippi 01 Congressional District, which is an R+10 district,

    Travis Childers (D): 32,376 votes (49 percent)
    Greg Davis®: 30,923 (47 percent)

    99% reporting, which leads to a runoff between these two people. Yes, that’s an R+10 district in which the D candidate almost won without a runoff, and leads by several point with other D primary opponents nibbling at the vote.

  36. Eric Dondero Says:

    BIGGEST LOSERS OF THE NIGHT FOR LIBERTARIANS:

    1. Justin Raimondo & Anti-War.com

    2. Lew Rockwell & all his nutty followers

    3. Eric Garris & all those San Francisco/America-hating Leftist Libertarians

    4. Leftist Libertarian wing of the Libertarian Party

    5. Ron Paul and all his kooky followers

    6. Bottle-nosed glasses wearing Policy Wonker Think Tank libertarians who are completely out of touch with Middle America

  37. Eric Dondero Says:

    BIGGEST WINNERS OF THE NIGHT:

    1. Mainstream libertarians

    2. The Republican Party & John McCain

    3. Working class Libertarians

    4. Pro-Defense Libertarians

    5. Anti-Islamo-Fascist Libertarians

  38. Eric Dondero Says:

    So George, are you actively rooting for Democrats to win Congressional races around the country now?

    Would that include Tom McClintock in California? Allan West in Florida? Woody Jenkins in Louisiana?

  39. disinter Says:

    6. Neocons
    7. Israel
    8. Military-industrial complex

  40. Eric Dondero Says:

    George, who was the third candidate in that MS race, a D or R?

  41. Wes Benedict Says:

    I got a late start today and skipped breakfast, but for my first lunch I had a Hungry-Man brand Salisbury Steak with Mushroom and Onion Gravy, Mashed Potatoes, Green Beans and a Brownie.

    The directions say microwave on High for 4 minutes, then carefully remove the brownie and set aside. Does anybody really do that? I always eat the brownie right away. Too wonderful to set aside. I hate when I burn the roof of my mouth.

    My Toyota Tundra “check engine” light came on so I got a new air/fuel sensor for 411.52. That seemed a little steep, but it seems to be working wonderfully and I’m delighted to have the new sensor on my team.

    After all that I had a second lunch at the nearby McDonald’s wing of the Tiger Market Exxon station. The Quarter Pounder with cheese meal (small with Diet Dr. Pepper) was wonderful.

    All-in-all a wonderful day for this Libertarian and I am skipping dinner to work on some Libertarian Party work. Still 2 hours left till the days over and I plan to keep on working tomorrow starting tonight.

  42. disinter Says:

    Ron Paul at 16% in PA:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21229229

  43. Ruwarchy! Says:

    Eric Dondero is a statist because he loves the war machine. I don’t think disinter is a statist. Disinter, do you support anarchy and Mary Ruwart or are you a statist? Wes Benedict is a statist because he ate at corporate McDonalds and got gas at fascist Exxon.

  44. Dave Williams Says:
    1. Catholic Trotskyist Says:
      April 22nd, 2008 at 7:36 pm

    “Ruwarchy, I agree with you about the wrongness of using our taxes to get rid of mercenaries, but like Dave I am a proud statist, though I believe that statism must be reformed through the Obama Revolution and the Progressive Alliance Strategy. Dave is one of my greatest critics so far, but with his posts on this thread, I think he is coming around to the Obama Revolution. Joseph and Jerry, I agree that George Phillies and Mary Ruwart can’t do much at this point, but if they’d endorse the Fringe Alliance strategy there is a possibility for them to achieve greatness.
    Please pray for Barack Obama on this difficult night for him, as he tries to withstand the trogledytes who support the Clinton/McCain/Bush/Nader conspiracy, and most tragically of all the Catholic heretics who do not support Obama.
    Glory to God in the highest and peace to god’s people on Earth.
    I will keep posting on every thread that Ruwarchy! posts on, in retaliation against him and in order to drive Dave Williams into perplexity.”

    1.) I’m no statist, I believe in individual rights, free enterprise, and strictly limited government. I’m a libertarian (just not an anarchist). I believe this following premise to be true. “Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.” Goldwater

    2.) Click, click…BOOM! Oh no BHO, there goes another toe!
    Let’s see…

    A) Doesn’t hold hand over heart during national anthem because he’s not proud of his country.
    B) Was a Muslim & now is a Christian, so he’s a target for assassination by Muslim extremists.
    C) Sits in a church for 20 years and swears he never heard any anti-American or racially motivated hate speech come from pastors mouth. Even though the religion is based on Black Liberation Theology and harbors remnants of the BLA. If he were a white man associated with the KKK, he would not have gotten shit for votes and rightly so.
    D) Understands why folks are bitter & ‘clinging’ to their guns, god and anti-immigrant sentiment. What a fucking idiot.

    And you blame ‘Catholic heretics’?! hahaha This assholes digging his own grave. I thought the GOP was in trouble a few months back when MaCass won the nomination…now I’m starting to see things different. Why? Gun owners. HRC won 60% of the gun owner vote in PA. She will not get that in November, that was a protest vote against your commie.

    3.) And uh, you aren’t ‘driving’ me anywhere pole smoker.

  45. Ruwarchy! Says:

    Dave Williams,

    According to Mary Ruwart, a five year old can be asked to leave:

    “Once the embryo is old enough to live outside the womb, the woman is still under no moral obligation to carry the child to term. She can invite people to her house, change her mind, and ask them to leave. She can invite an embryo to grow inside of her body, change her mind, and ask it to leave.”

    She thinks children should be able to make their own decisions:

    “The laws are very consistent in their disdain for our young people—and their lives. That’s why so many from Generation X are becoming libertarians!”

    Mary also believes in consensual activities between people.

    She might take the anarchist NAMBLA position on sex with the 5 year old you mentioned. You will have to ask her.

    Ruwarchy!

  46. Wes Benedict Says:

    Benedict Issues Defense Policy Statement:

    Ruwarchy is either a wonderful liar, or a wonderful ASS-U-MEr. He (or she/it) says I got gas when in fact I did not get gas. I had not intention of getting gas, never contemplated getting gas, never even passed gas. But it was a wonderful day.

  47. George Phillies Says:

    Eric,

    I’m just reporting the numbers.

    There were four other candidates, each at 1% of the vote. Two were an Independent and a Green, and I gather one was a Democrat. I see nothing about the fourth.

    http://www.djournal.com/pages/election2008.asp may have updates.

    Given that next time there are not a bunch of other primaries, the crystal ball has been put in the closet.

    George

  48. Ruwarchy! Says:

    Dave Williams, That was a tough question to answer for Mary Ruwart. Whew. I just found one answer to your question about sex with a 5 year old.

    “I was easily won over to anarchy,” wrote Ruwart.

    This means that Mary doesn’t believe in any laws or any government.

    This means that Mary doesn’t think there should be a law against anything.

    This means that Mary wouldn’t have any law which makes it illegal to have sex with a 5 year old, or even a fetus.

    Ruwarchy means no laws against sex with 5 year olds. Vote for Mary!

  49. Ruwarchy! Says:

    My apologies to Wes Benedict then. Maybe he is an anarchist, too.

    Wes, do you believe that we should have laws outlawing sex with 5 year olds?

    By the way, you should probably pass gas some time, or you will eventually explode. Unless you are a statist. It’s cool when statists explode.

  50. Wes Benedict Says:

    Benedict Issues Confession Statement:

    Some of you may at this point, have become aware of the following statement made by me:

    “I never even passed gas”

    I may have misspoken. Or maybe I didn’t. The burden of proof is on you. As far as I’m concerned, if you smelt it, you dealt it. Furthermore, why don’t you just keep your nose out of my aspirin bottle.

    Have a wonderful day.

  51. disinter Says:

    2. Lew Rockwell & all his nutty followers

    Hmm, Lew Rockwell appears to be FAR more popular than the typical neocon rags:

    http://siteanalytics.compete.com/lewrockwell.com+pajamasmedia.com+redstate.com/?metric=uv

  52. Wes Benedict Says:

    I find it highly disappointing that some of you can take such a wonderful day and turn it into complete garbage. That is what’s wrong with the Libertarian Party. No matter what, all you can see are the negatives.

    I want some ice cream.

  53. Ruwarchy! Says:

    Wes Benedict, I will respect your property rights and keep my nose out of your ass-pirin bottle, unless you consent to it.

    Ruwarchy rocks!

  54. Wes Benedict Says:

    This is turning out to be one of the worst days of my life! I have had it up to here! And I mean with all of you! Let this be fair warning that I’m threatening to never visit this sight again! And I mean it! I’m threatening! You don’t believe me!!??

  55. Wes Benedict Says:

    This whole election thing is a Joke! And I mean Joke with a capital J. Joke. JOKE!

    WHATEVER???

    Libertarians are a capital
    J

    O
    K

    E

    JOKE

    I want some Doritos.

  56. Ruwarchy! Says:

    Wes Benedict, as your alter ego I command you to get ahold of yourself in the name of the our savior Mary Ruwart.

    Ruwarchy!

  57. Wes Benedict Says:

    Breaking news coming from Austin. Breaking news!

    Stay tuned. I’ll be back from 7-11 shortly.

  58. disinter Says:

    They sell crack at 7-11 now?

  59. disinter Says:

    Breaking news!

    Milnes and Catholic Trojan Horse have formerly announced their Fringe Alliance Strategy plans to take over the universe?

  60. David F. Nolan Says:

    Did someone put a massive dose of LSD or something similar in the water supplies across the USA? This has got to be the weirdest set of comments I’ve seen in a LONG time! We’ve got Dong-derro rooting for Hillary, Ruwarchy trolling like crazy (and I do mean crazy) and earnest discussions of butt-munching. Beyond bizarre! Hillary’s win in PA is a victory for “working class libertarians” ?? Has everyone here lost their mind?

  61. disinter Says:

    Has everyone here lost their mind?

    Its the fluoride. Or maybe the chemtrails. No, probably the fluoride.

  62. Ruwarchy! Says:

    Hey, I didn’t make that last Ruwarchy! post. This means we are a movement, now.

    Maybe we can get enough Ruwarchists to spam blogs across the country to tell everyone the gospel of Ruwarchy. It worked for the statist Ron Paul so it can work better for us. Anarchistic victory is in sight now.

    No government! No military! No taxes in any form! No government roads! No post office! No age of consent laws!

    Ruwarchy rocks—lets go tell the world.

  63. Stefan Says:

    David Nolan, thank you for your sanity here. All these off topic posts are of the lowest “standard” one has ever seen. It should be a discussion on the interesting
    comments of Dr. Phillies., with which one can mostly agree. One does detect a swipe at a possible candidate in the LP race though. One wonders whether there should be a discussion if it is a religion at all (paganism) and how to “handle” it in the military context.
    Wish one could return to discussing Dr. Phillies interesting and relevant policy release. Perhaps he could elaborate a bit more on a few issues and how to contrast this with not fellow LP politicians, but with the two major parties and Independents, from which the LP has to attract votes, exposing their weakness.

  64. disinter Says:

    A man applies for a job at the Post Office. The interviewer asks him, “Are you allergic to anything?” He says “Yes, caffeine.”

    “Have you ever been in the service?” “Yes,” he says. “I was in Iraq for two years.”

    The interviewer says, “That will give you five extra points toward employment,” and then asks, “Are you disabled in any way?”

    The guy says, “Yes 100%..an IED exploded near me and blew my testicles off.”

    The interviewer tells the guy, “O.K. In that case, I can hire you right now. Normal hours are from 8 AM to 4 PM. You can start tomorrow at 10:00 – and plan on starting at 10 AM every day.”

    The guy is puzzled and says, “If the hours are from 8 AM to 4 PM, why don’t you want me to be here before 10 AM?”

    “This is a government job,” the interviewer says. “For the first two hours we just stand around drinking coffee and scratching our balls. No point in you coming in for that.”

  65. Wes Benedict Says:

    Benedict UNLEASHED! (left, and safely returned)

    I’ve now taken some time off and that’s done wonders for me and if you’re serious about politics, then you’ll take some time off too, like I just did. Otherwise, you’re just part of the Libertarian debate society, which is wonderful, but still that’s what you are, which is wonderful, but what you are.

    I apologize for any negativity (and crudness) and want to reiterate my renewed positivity, not just with Libertarian politics, but with Toyota, HP, 7-11, Office Depot, Exxon, McDonald’s, Hungry-Man, all of it together. We’re all in this together, and that’s wonderful.

    We really really really do have a wonderful slate of candidates for President. All of them are wonderful and I am inspired by that. While some are just kind of wonderful, some are really really wonderful! Wow!

  66. Stefan Says:

    Dr. Phillies: A practical idea: I think the LP could add (focus) on the role of high tech scannong can play in ensuring security without invading people’s personal sphere and liberty, for instance with airport security.: the physical searches should be totally done away with an high tech equipment and sensors can be used to detect substances or items not detected up to date. There are technologies available to detect dangerous “liquid” with a system, so that people are allowed to carry water and other liquids along safely. (I do not want to advertise for companies here, but as example I can refer to a company ID detection systems www.iddetectionsystems.com People feel harrassed by ceertain security measures and restrictions, and by using smart ones, there is no or not much invasion into the privacy and liberty of the citizen and at the same time providing security.

    One could also discuss the issue of the 2nd amendment and airport security: if the airline industry were allowed to have their pilots or personnel carry weapons on the aircraft, a situation like 9/11 could have been avoided…

    I think the electorate would love this liberty with security smart appeal, as a huge difference. The LP stress the privatization and taking government out of people’s everyday lives as much as possible, and use competition and private and public companies to compete for the best solutions, instead of the government deciding.

  67. Dave Williams Says:

    lol

  68. Dave Williams Says:

    ooops…lol to this:

    “This is a government job,” the interviewer says. “For the first two hours we just stand around drinking coffee and scratching our balls. No point in you coming in for that.”

  69. disinter Says:

    I think the LP could add (focus) on the role of high tech scannong can play in ensuring security

    I think Stefan needs “security” from himself.

  70. Wes Benedict Says:

    Breaking news from Austin, Texas released:

    I suppose we should take all (notions?) of objectivity and throw them out the window now based on this breaking news:
    http://wesbenedict.com/

    Benedict issues denial:
    “I know how this looks, but I really, really, really don’t know what I’m doing. Honestly!”

    Benedict responds to detractors:
    “Seriously. I don’t know! We’re gonna have an event. I hope it’s wonderful. Some sausage will be had. That’s all it is. A wonderful event! We’ll do some learning. I have nothing to hide! Yes, maybe I’ll vote for Root but I haven’t decided. Maybe not. I hope to learn something! Maybe I’ll vote for Barr, Ruwart, Kubby (probably not likely Phillies).”

    Benedict’s denials back him further into a corner:
    “Seriously, why are you saying I’m saying something that I’m not saying? That’s wrong!”

    Benedict’s detractor’s ask important question:
    “Are you, or are you not, a Rothbardian anarchist?”

    Benedict responds:
    “I don’t know. Leave me alone!”

  71. Nigel Watt Says:

    Seriously, what the hell?

  72. Less Antman Says:

    For the record, I am the owner of the site at www.ruwarchy.com, which is not affiliated with nor approved by any member of the Ruwart campaign (as the home page makes clear). I don’t know the identity of the person posting here under the name Ruwarchy! (although he has every right to use any name he wants).

    I would urge people who want to know Dr. Ruwart’s views to read Dr. Ruwart’s writings, such as her answers to questions at www.askdrruwart.com, and not rely on what I or anyone else claims are her views on any issue.

    Based on her writings, I have no reason to believe that Dr. Ruwart is a pacifist. That doesn’t mean that her supporters don’t include some sincere pacifists. Or some nuts (I will admit to seeing some squirrels eye me hungrily after reading some of my personal writiings).

  73. Trent Hill Says:

    “Woody Jenkins in Louisiana?”

    Dondero—are you suggesting that Jenkins is one of these “Moderate libertarians” you quack about? He’s opposed to gay marriage, 100% pro-life, associated with the Council for National Policy, he was involved in the campaigns of both Tony Perkins and David Vitter, and is a prominent member of Eagle Forum…

    Oh—and he put the Constitution Party on the ballot in Louisiana in 2000 and 2004.

  74. Stefan Says:

    dister:
    no, I’m just following a balanced, realistic view of the world in order to enhance personal freedom and reject intrusion, while adhering to general international security regulations and laws. Or do you think it is a good thing that people continue to be strip-searching and the security checks taking countless time and money and do you think they like it if their water and other liquids are confiscated?
    I’m offering a practical, hi tech solution that would enhance liberty in the light of international security regulations.

  75. Stefan Says:

    Eric D: Ron Paul has broken through the 10% and achieved 16% plus, more than 3 times the percentage predicted by reason.com and others and all this with NO media coverage. He has beaten Huckabee, who was also on the list. I would say this is a relative success for Ron Paul. How one earth can you say he is a loser.

    And with regard to kooky and crazy, none is as crazy as those who suggest bombing Mecca, asking what is to extremist off the charts about this suggestion and then at the same time mention you are friends with moderate Muslim leaders. What will they say if they hear that? The answer is obvious to any thinking person. You are setting new standards regarding kookiness. Compared to 911 insider job conspiracy theorists, you win the prize for kookiness by far with such Tancredo-like statements. Threatening to obligerate Iran or destroy Jerusalem are in the same order, and suggests totalitarianism, which is the opposite of any libertarian philosophy.

  76. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    As the metaphorical left-wing younger cousin of Eric Dondero, I agree with him that the Democratic and Republican races are much more important than what was being discussed here. I was too depressed to post here for the last few hours, through my disappointment of the betrayal of Barack Obama by the Reagan Democrat trogledytes who don’t realize that an anti-American Christian socialist is exactly the kind of president we need. However, as George Phillies pointed out, Clinton wanted a double-digit lead, and 10 points is just barely enough for that. The Obama Revolution will continue and it will prevail. He still has the strong delegate lead, he still has the moral right, and he still has the blessing of all people who listen to the voice of the Lord. I agree with Dave Williams that the government should support freedom as much as possible, but what he and Ruwarchy and Dondero do not realize is that Obama is the person who will give us that freedom; it’s just that social freedom and non-intervensionism is more important than economic freedom. Fortunately, another catalyst for this social freedom is the Fringe Alliance Strategy.

    More government regulation! More taxes! More unity in society!
    Glory to God in the highest, and peace to God’s people on Earth.
    Now more than ever, please pray for Fernando Lugo (the new Catholic communist President of Paraguay), please pray for the pope, and please pray for Barack Obama.

  77. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    And yes, Ron Paul’s 16% is very impressive. Hopefully his supporters will be working that hard for the Fringe Alliance Strategy soon.

  78. Midwestern Independent Says:

    Ron Paul’s showing tonight proves that his Revolution and the older ideas of liberty are alive and well in this country. If Dondero were sane enough to read Paul’s new book, he would find that the Good Doctor lays out a very cogent argument against religious-based motivations for suicide attacks using research from people actually involved in the CIA. It’s funny how everyone likes to talk about how Ron Paul’s supporters are insane and unreasonable. Yet, we have a guy on here who dares to call someone else a “kook” when he is behind a sickening war that the vast majority of the nation regards as madness.

  79. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    Someone should check back in the archives of this site. Does anyone remember around the end of 2007, when Eric was talking about being a libertarian for Giuliani, and someone said that one day Eric would be talking about being a libertarian for Clinton? I thought this might come true, but I doubt anyone thought it would happen this soon.

  80. Michael H. Wilson Says:

    Little early morning humor for those of us on the west coast, but maybe we can someday get the LP to issue a pamphlet on defense as George has done. And George thanks for making the trip out here this past weekend.
    MHW

  81. GQ Says:

    Dondero may be kooky and over the top on some stuff, but I don’t see where he hates all Muslims argument that guy Stefan mentions. Dondero’s website has an interview with on it with some guy who heads Muslims Against Sharia. Cut his some slack on thi

  82. Stefan Says:

    The think (know) Hillary Clinton’s threat to completely destroy Iran is what did the trick for Eric to describe her as a “libertarian” and “Reagan Democrat”. Funny thing is though she was a Goldwater girl, she completely changed at university and she was always against Reagan, except in 1964. As a matter of fact, she blasted Obama earlier this year for making a positive remark about Reagan. McCain has described himself as a Reagan Republican, do not know if he was a Democrat officially, but he is much closer to them and Hillary Clinton than the traditional GOP (which is now the LP to a great extent). He worked for “libertarians for Lieberman”, the crucial thing for him is to be anti-Islam and pro-Mecca offense: that is the hallmark of a “libertarian” in his “delusional” brain.

  83. Clark Says:

    GEORGE PHILLIES AND/OR HIS SPEECHWRITERS WROTE:”*The Cold War is over. Most world military spending is by America and its friends. After leaving Iraq, we can and should safely deploy a far smaller army. (END)

    ..firstly George, “America” is a concept/label..and as any ‘realist’ understands, concepts/labels don’t have ‘friends’.. (fallacy of reification..common/pervasive in Republicratdom..)

    ...This seems tepid, bland, etc. to me, George..

    ..These stinking, warmongering, busybody, etc. Republicrat fools have ringed the planet with “mercenaries” (btw, THEY ARE ALL “MERCENARIE$,” Republicrat mule lopers!)..they have ringed the planet with A COUPLE DOZEN MAJOR MILITARY BASES CAPABLE OF FACILITATING THE SWIFT KILLING OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE/FOREIGNERS….hundreds of “military installations” around the planet…swarms of spies..selling/proliferating arms-tools for killing, terror around the planet..actively and CONTINUALLY seeking to affect/disrupt political outcomes around the planet..etc. ad nauseam..

    ..AND THIS IS THE THIN GRUEL WE GET FROM YOU, GEORGE?

    ..Btw, ERROR DUNDERO, IT’S NOT “AMERICA” PEOPLE HATE, YOU APPARENT GD REPUBLICAN FOOL!..IT’S YOUR STINKING REPUBLICRAT THINKING..AND YOUR PHONY, STINKING REPUBLICRAT POLITICIANS..

    (Btw, as a mind exercise for DUNDERO, etc. Republicrats..please understand that had Obama’s ?”Rev. Wright” merely substituted the phrase “GODDAMNED REPUBLICRAT POLITICIANS” for “AMERICA” in his “GD AMERICA,” etc. rants, he’d have struck the perfect note/chord..) (try it, you fools) ;o)

  84. GQ Says:

    Where has he said he wanted to blow up Mecca? I can’t find it here or his Blog.

  85. Jose C. Says:

    “For the record, I am the owner of the site at www.ruwarchy.com, which is not affiliated with nor approved by any member of the Ruwart campaign (as the home page makes clear). I don’t know the identity of the person posting here under the name Ruwarchy! (although he has every right to use any name he wants).”

    So are you saying Mary does not support the view that six year old girls should have the right to have sex with a 50 year old man or that four year olds should be able to take crack Cocain?

    If so someone should challenge Ruwarchy because he says those are her views. If so count me out.

  86. LifeMember Says:

    So are you saying Mary does not support the view that six year old girls should have the right to have sex with a 50 year old man or that four year olds should be able to take crack Cocain?

    I think Ruwarchy makes a very valid point, and one which would be asked repeatedly if Ruwart wins the nomination. Assuming that Ruwarchy is correct that Ruwart is an avowed anarchist, how will she deal with questions from the media about sex with and drugs for children?

    How will Ruwart respond to this Sean Hannity-type question: Dr. Ruwart, as an anarchist, you support the repeal of all laws. You would eliminate laws which protect five year olds from 50 year old perverts. You would get rid of penalties for selling crack cocaine to grade school kids. The anarchist point-of-view would allow for my nine year old daughter to be turning tricks on the street corner. Why would any loving parent or any red-blooded American vote for you?

  87. GQ Says:

    Anarchists are just like Oscar Wild’s cynics. They know the price of everything and know the value of nothing.

  88. Steve LaBianca Says:

    LifeMember, Ruwarchy! is a troll. Secondly, even with such “laws” today this bad stuff happens; thus this “analysis” by the troll is a strawman . . . these laws have little effectiveness, if any, and the “analysis” assumes that without the coercive presence of government and laws, there would be absolutely no protection for children. A strong case could be made that in several ways this type of thing would be LESS likely to happen, one (of many) being that people would be more likely to take an interest in their neighbors acitivities. They wouldn’t expect the “authorities” to take care of everything, thus the attitude of “why stick my nose where it doesn’t belong” would be much less prevalent. There are others, and probably better ones at that.

    If law can’t prevent this, why do we uphold these laws as “preventative”? Why do we assume that if we”just pass a law” all is resolved and well. IT is a false sense of wellness, IMHO. These laws simply take names and “punish” the bad guys, after the fact.

    The assumption that government coercion is the last resort to prevent rights violations, is the assumption that the government own all of us by ultimately having the right. or delegated authority to oversee everything that we do. Like I said, this is a false sense of security, and we should not sell our souls and rights down the river for it. BTW, these things, as what happened in Texas are absolutely horrible, but the false sense of security from government is not a solution, nor much of a deterrent, if any.

  89. LifeMember Says:

    LifeMember, Ruwarchy! is a troll. Secondly, even with such “laws” today this bad stuff happens; thus this “analysis” by the troll is a strawman . . . these laws have little effectiveness, if any, and the “analysis” assumes that without the coercive presence of government and laws, there would be absolutely no protection for children.

    Troll or not, the question raised is valid and I stand by my “Sean Hannity” question—which you didn’t answer in a way that would convince many LP members, much less voters watching whatever national TV coverage Ruwart might get.

    If Ruwart is nominated, she will be attacked for her anarchist views. This delegate wants to know how she will respond to these attacks.

  90. Old Whig Says:

    I don’t know what Wes is on, but I want some. I’ll pass on whatever CT and Ruwarchy are ingesting.

    Stephan. I’d rather be strip searched than have them spy on me without my knowledge. When my rights are being violated, I at least want to know it’s happening.

    O.W.

  91. George Phillies Says:

    Life Member,

    There is a record here, from Ruwart’s book Short Answers to the Tough Questions, page 43. Ruwart asks:

    How can a libertarian argue against child pornography?

    Ruwart: Children forced to participate in sexual acts have the same rights and recourse as a rape victim. We can and should prosecute their oppressors.

    Children who willingly participate in sexual acts have the right to make that decision as well, even if it’s distasteful to us personally. Some children will make for choice is just as some adults do in smoking and drinking to excess; this is part of life.

    What we outlaw child pornography, if the prices paid for child performers rise, increasing the incentives for parents to use children against their will.

    Phillies: I would give a quite different answer.

    The notion that a five or ten-year-old child can give meaningful consent to participating in sexual acts is absurd. Children don’t have the knowledge or experience to make adult decisions. That’s why parents protect their children. That’s why legal jurisdictions set ages of consent. That’s why some jurisdictions have processes for establishing emancipated minor status.

    Children are unable to give informed voluntary consent because they don’t understand what is being asked of them. Furthermore, most children cannot give voluntary consent to most adults. Children are sufficiently habituated to doing what they are told, even when the request is punctuated by “Please” and phrased as a question, that they will interpret nominal requests as binding orders

    To protect children, countries around the world make it a crime for adult perverts to prey upon children. These laws correctly identify as these acts of sexual predation as crimes against people who are unable to protect themselves.

    It’s your call. Which message do you want in front of the voters?

  92. Jose C. Says:

    “How can a libertarian argue against child pornography?

    Ruwart: Children forced to participate in sexual acts have the same rights and recourse as a rape victim. We can and should prosecute their oppressors.

    Children who willingly participate in sexual acts have the right to make that decision as well, even if it’s distasteful to us personally. Some children will make for choice is just as some adults do in smoking and drinking to excess; this is part of life.

    What we outlaw child pornography, if the prices paid for child performers rise, increasing the incentives for parents to use children against their will.”

    Checkmate.

    Mary Ruwart should not be our nominee.

  93. Ruwarchy! Says:

    Jose is a statist, too. Mary Should be our nominee. She is an anarchist and a purist who will put the LP on the front page of every newspaper in the country.

    Ruwarchy rocks!

  94. Dave Williams Says:

    “Troll or not, the question raised is valid and I stand by my “Sean Hannity” question—which you didn’t answer in a way that would convince many LP members, much less voters watching whatever national TV coverage Ruwart might get.

    If Ruwart is nominated, she will be attacked for her anarchist views. This delegate wants to know how she will respond to these attacks.”

    Good luck getting a reasonable answer at all outta that prick…

  95. Dave Williams Says:

    “It’s your call. Which message do you want in front of the voters?”

    Absolutely the later George. Children are vulnerable, period. The ‘sane’ general public will not accept the rubbish being presented by Ruwarchy.

  96. disinter Says:

    how will she deal with questions from the media about sex with and drugs for children?

    Where the hell are the parents?

    Does the state have to be everyone’s nanny?

  97. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    Yes, the state does have to be everyone’s nanny.

  98. ElfNinosMom Says:

    I have to say, I am absolutely stunned that Mary Ruwart made those statements with regard to sexualizing children. I simply find it astonishing that anyone – especially a woman – would ever think children have the maturity necessary to give informed consent when dealing with a sexual predator.

    I’m trying very hard to be polite about this, but her position is just outrageous. We all are living in the real world, not some kind of nonexistent libertarian paradise. In the real world, there are a lot of extremely dangerous people who prey upon children. Yes, parents have the responsibility to protect their children, but sexual predators are extremely skilled at avoiding detection. To pretend otherwise, or especially to suggest that a child would be or even could be (much less should be) responsible for their actions when being manipulated by an adult sexual predator, is an unforgivable failure of logic and common sense in a presidential candidate.

    Her position with regard to late-term abortion is equally absurd. If a fetus can live outside a woman’s body, it is a person in its own right, and has an inalienable right to life in our society, pursuant to the Declaration of Independence. While I do not normally have a stance on the abortion issue, I do take issue with her stance, and especially her failed analogy.

    We all know how babies are made, so a fetus is not an “uninvited guest”. It may be an “unexpected guest”, but the fetus was invited when the man and woman engaged in unprotected intercourse (or if contraception failed, since we all know contraception has failure rates).

    Of course, the invitation may be rescinded if the woman decides the visit of a predetermined length inside her womb is not going to work out (abortion). However, if the woman has not rescinded the invitation prior to the point when the fetus is viable outside the womb – at which point it has inalienable rights of its own which naturally trump her right to remove it from her body through killing it with an abortion – then she has by tacit omission invited the “guest” to stay for the duration. This is therefore yet another failure of logic, not to mention a complete misunderstanding of the basic ideals upon which this country was founded, on Mary Ruwart’s part.

    Do we really want a presidential nominee with a history of those kinds of statements? I think not.

    Now, back to the thread’s point, namely George Phillies’ defense statement …. I agree with his defense policy. I think it is logical, I think it is sound, and I think it is workable in a real-world setting. I especially agree that the National Guard should be kept within the states, so the states have their militia when and if it is needed. I’m not sure I’d agree with his last assertion about abortion clinics, but his point – that the danger of domestic terrorism lies primarily in extremists within our own society, and not from foreign sources as the government would have us believe – is very well taken.

    Great job, Dr. Phillies. Mary Ruwart (and a lot of other LP candidates) could learn a lot from you about how to present libertarian ideas, without making us all look like wackjobs.

  99. Dave Williams Says:

    “Great job, Dr. Phillies. Mary Ruwart (and a lot of other LP candidates) could learn a lot from you about how to present libertarian ideas, without making us all look like wackjobs.”

    Agreed.

  100. Eric Says:

    Aaaggghhh….

    As a recent defector from the Republicans and a new member of the Libertarian Party, I am alarmed by this exchange.

    Is everyone whose politics are not at the very top pinnacle of the Nolan Chart, a statist who must be shunned…?

    Is the convention that I’ll be attending in Denver going to amount to nothing more than a cat fight…? Sheesh. The state convention seemed so reasonable.

  101. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    Since the libertarians here haven’t answered, I will answer and actually defend them. The Ruwarch person is an isolated troll. In my five months or so looking at this site, I have found libertarians to be very reasonable. Like any small organization they have more factional infighting than the larger ones, but it’s not as bad as this thread makes it seem.

  102. Clark Says:

    RUWARCHY, i’m afraid a state of “anarchy”.. (‘without rule’).. will not/cannot occur..

    ...it appears, in the absence of ‘rule’ by Beavis Kennedy, Butthead Bush, etcetercrats galore, some other stinking, ignorant people will QUICKLY fill any/the ‘void’..maybe your local chapter of the Hell’s Angels, maybe a collection of local Republicrat pigs, etc. ad nauseam..

    ...people exercising/initiating “FORCE” (i.e. “GOVERNMENT”) is a given..especially given the intellect of the many people who readily vote for/affirm the likes of Beavis Kennedy, Butthead Bush, (yes, apparently Boob Barr too!) etcetercrats galore!.. ;o)

  103. Brian Miller Says:

    As usual, many of the LP folks evaluating the Dem race from afar would do themselves a favor to refrain from their “meta analysis.” Especially Dondero, considering that Clinton won a solid base of support from the working class in Pennsylvania by pledging to end his precious Iraq War faster than Obama would.

    The reason Clinton won is simple—she connected with working class and everyday voters in a downright humble way. Out of character for her, perhaps. But she blew away the Obama-who-knew-better and referred to the Pennsylvania riff-raff as “bitter” for owning guns and such.

    Many Libertarians are of the Obama variety—negative, willing to explain to the stupid rest of us how things “ought to be,” and completely tone-deaf about the needs and priorities of everyday Americans. They’re the people who yammer on endlessly about the gold standard and ending the Federal Reserve when working class people ask where their next job is going to come from.

    Candidates like George are focused on the real concerns of everyday Americans, delivering Libertarian solutions in areas that 99% of the world cares about—the economy, environment, international relations, crime (especially victimless crime), the deficit/debt, taxes, and civil liberties—rather than spending all his time on the 1% of the issues that nobody outside of LP wankfests focuses on such as the gold standard, ending the Fed, ad nauseum.

  104. Tom Bryant Says:

    There’s a big difference between a 5 year old consenting and a 16 year old consenting (illegal in most states), although both are considered children by the law. I don’t think that someone magically is able to make adult decisions when they hit the age of consent – especially when the age of consent ranges from 14 to 18 depending on the state.

    I think we’d all agree that a 5 years cannot consent, but it gets a bit blurry when you get into the teenage years. People mature at drastically different rates, both physically and mentally.

    I believe that is what Mary is talking about, the 16 year old child not the 5 year old child.

  105. Old Whig Says:

    Clark

    Your punctuation is eccentric, but your reasoning is sound.

    I agree.

  106. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    Yes Brian, libertarians and Obama Democrats are very much in common, which is why Obama should be nominated as the Libertarian candidate, thus driving right-wing libertarians to the Constitution Party, and kick-starting the Obama Revolution.

  107. David Macko Says:

    The logical dividing lines in a free society are puberty and age of majority.
    Puberty is easily identifiable. The age of majority is an arbitrary distinction. If a woman between the age of puberty and the age of majority wishes to serve the pleasure of a man (of any age) and her parents approve there should be no state intervention. Under the age of puberty there is an interest for the state to intervene to protect the child.
    In a free society there should be a mechanism by which a person who has reached puberty but not the age of majority should be able to emancipate himself or herself but it should be difficult and the interests of the parents should have great influence.

  108. pijfxst sfmlbvjo Says:

    iorzbwv xuwisach ymofj vioqk xoudhqj jnwimgl ivhqej

  109. com Says:

    knraogj dzwq zuxeb

  110. com Says:

    smabvl stdzh

  111. com Says:

    wxzyl nwyt

  112. com Says:

    ipgr pcrk afve

  113. com Says:

    umrxqa tdvbu fkvdmj dmzxiqa

  114. com Says:

    bexwg wokqn

  115. com Says:

    hmfa

  116. lyrics Says:

    odftqjh vncm jumsqnr

  117. lyrics Says:

    eqcj pequns qkdxlf

  118. lyrics Says:

    lezjxd ktdvpyi stefjcx smyjbxv

  119. hotel Says:

    vdhsfqc trgjezw mrdwn qtgd

  120. hotel Says:

    igszdve orpm vbrw lxsvb

  121. hotel Says:

    nhwpk vfanq jdqye

  122. com Says:

    wiqvzl

  123. com Says:

    pxtdz

  124. hotel Says:

    froei

  125. hotel Says:

    jtmyh ekaqct pzdf

  126. hotel Says:

    cadoept ewyqo jchvp

  127. com Says:

    ofytnek iulc vrpmdnb

  128. com Says:

    xhfsgk jwilegq

  129. com Says:

    eloapk jqivt gowb

  130. com Says:

    svawixp eqdom xjowpld azisngf

  131. com Says:

    hiawsz jqsm pjiubqn ubfsoec

  132. com Says:

    guls olzims weac kzmagvw

  133. com Says:

    fkadng xzdi

  134. com Says:

    nlbc

  135. com Says:

    eowc

  136. the Says:

    lenzrk gelzh

  137. the Says:

    wltg xpysc ephgjm

  138. the Says:

    yvze ghimeb yjsvmn lhgf

  139. the Says:

    mize fuyl

  140. of Says:

    rzkxb jtfb sbwe qafxtyu

  141. a Says:

    tfzys drwziov yicmbj

  142. com Says:

    gepv urohg fpzmc ucrz

  143. hotel Says:

    bltgv uvpaftj btlmuc

  144. hotel Says:

    lptdse egdp iupm

  145. hotel Says:

    wjlgd qamk saecw yeonp

  146. hotel Says:

    uenltyv rjwdezt mdoibal aeqot

  147. com Says:

    ciys

  148. com Says:

    wclvjzx tubo

  149. lyrics Says:

    fogkq kmed

  150. com Says:

    oyaenc yqnrs lfpgqke ofuwpeq

  151. com Says:

    gjsc ngpekx uoazs secblty

  152. hp Says:

    ervf

  153. hp Says:

    jwex vxqdbw vgqiysn

  154. hotel Says:

    poebvfs gyipr onvi xdrsyp

  155. john Says:

    nzvrdej xrtnkz

  156. picture Says:

    ostlwb ibpmlr zqtel

  157. of Says:

    wbgr rbqevsc

  158. of Says:

    soaiwhj jdfyhe

  159. picture Says:

    kwgjfd jnomlwd zhseu

  160. in Says:

    nsbv yuvhesb vpyh zygxf

  161. of Says:

    vjcdr ertabg lgqjc

  162. in Says:

    uafgsr

  163. i Says:

    ewfzyp ohwk qtix nflwtgk

  164. i Says:

    kqas zfdklxc obfqnm gtilofc

  165. of Says:

    klrc mdonlkh wprf hlunj

  166. david Says:

    skwcpd

  167. hotel Says:

    oxwian izmrp lcramw

  168. hotel Says:

    wpydlav povbcn

  169. hotel Says:

    vsaihw byqe

  170. hotel Says:

    sjuiept

  171. of Says:

    fqpe krfhvi vkfsrq

  172. of Says:

    qulp

  173. air Says:

    zekxg wnsv ubrnj ovfxqcu

  174. air Says:

    ntejg

  175. air Says:

    ybozrti

  176. the Says:

    csghonq mgwc miksxe

  177. the Says:

    blhtwe twgxbr mtaxcye poqz

  178. free Says:

    lomjw apietw xobve

  179. silver Says:

    thykqa knjdz vcgwqe

  180. hotel Says:

    dhnvk zdptqbx

  181. apartment Says:

    xdiz ieygz

  182. apartment Says:

    dxobp

  183. language Says:

    csxzdqy

  184. language Says:

    bhucg

  185. language Says:

    stvfyr ptukl tqar cvin

  186. language Says:

    femgton tsdbkl kfawb duvyga

  187. language Says:

    vohisj emdc

  188. language Says:

    uzojbip oxysbg

  189. st Says:

    ygob

  190. st Says: