Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » World Watch » A Letter to Mitt (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: A Letter to Mitt
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Response to A Letter to Mitt

Card seems to have a huge blind spot on immigration.
quote:
You know and I know that this is not just a political decision. It's a moral one, and it comes right from the core Mormon beliefs that you and I share. It's in the Second Article of Faith: We believe it's wrong to punish children for their parents' or ancestors' offenses. Period.
Actually, we believe it's wrong to punish children for the sins of their parents. Children are punished for their parents' offenses all the time.

If a parent steals a bike and gives it to their child, the bike is returned to the lawful owner (if the criminal is caught of course).

If a parent commits a felony, they are imprisoned, and if it's both parents the child will go into foster care.
quote:
Young adults who did not enter this country by their own volition, who have studied hard or served our country, do not deserve to be thrown out and sent "back" to a dangerous country they may never have lived in or barely remember, where they will have few or no opportunities.
An illegal alien who enlists in the military, violates the law and when found out will have a dishonorable discharge. Legal aliens have their citizenship applications fast-tracked. Illegal aliens are thrown out.


But of course, if I present this I'm a racist or a xenophobe. Thanks for that one.

[ June 25, 2012, 06:48 PM: Message edited by: emarkp ]

Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
An illegal alien who enlists in the military, violates the law and when found out will have a dishonorable discharge.
So a child who was taken to this country and, upon reaching adulthood, serves this country as a soldier, should be dishonorably discharged? Can you explain why?
Posts: 20585 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bad comma placement on my part. When a person enlists in the military, they have to declare their immigration status. If they aren't legal they aren't allowed to enlist. If they lie and provide forged documents, then why should they have an honorable discharge?
Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Are you suggesting that we should kick liars out of the military? Because there are some very highly decorated liars with a star or two. [Smile]
Posts: 20585 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JShope
Member
Member # 6657

 - posted      Profile for JShope   Email JShope       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The letter to Mitt should be to NOT get sucked into this argument. The Democrats are framing the argument so that they can attack any position Mitt takes.

Mitt should NEVER agree to continue a policy of ignoring the statutes already on the books, regardless of the reasoning. Executive Order should NEVER be abused to this degree, regardless of the intent.

Obama is making a claim that Americans are so heartless that we would deny citizenship where it is sensible to do so, to such a degree that our benevolent leader must step in and take unilateral action. I am shocked that OSC would succumb to these pandering lies.

The only thing Mitt should say is that we will continue to enforce the laws as they stand, support our agents defending our borders, and allow as many people as possible to immigrate into this country. He can also offer to work with Congress and ALL interested parties to address any deficiencies in our current system.

Posts: 13 | Registered: Mar 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JShope
Member
Member # 6657

 - posted      Profile for JShope   Email JShope       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A much less complex analogy of Obama's actions:

I stole a loaf of bread that I could afford to buy, to give it to a starving child.

If I get charged with a crime, it is because you want children to starve!

If I don't get charged, it gives permission to steal, as long as I can supply a good reason.

Posts: 13 | Registered: Mar 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Where do you get the "could afford to buy" part?

quote:
Obama is making a claim that Americans are so heartless that we would deny citizenship where it is sensible to do so, to such a degree that our benevolent leader must step in and take unilateral action.
Aren't we?
Posts: 1988 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JShope
Member
Member # 6657

 - posted      Profile for JShope   Email JShope       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
Where do you get the "could afford to buy" part?

quote:
Obama is making a claim that Americans are so heartless that we would deny citizenship where it is sensible to do so, to such a degree that our benevolent leader must step in and take unilateral action.
Aren't we?
Your belief is that we are not already providing citizenship where it makes sense to do so. Apparently you want to remove the borders, and allow free passage to everyone who can get here.

Try drinking from a fire hose. Or even from a garden hose at full force, pointed right into your mouth.

It is a knee-jerk reaction that anyone who doesn't support amnesty programs is racist, nationalist, or isolationist. In fact, I prefer to export America's freedoms and ideals so that there is a wider distribution of the umbrella of what makes 'America' so attractive. But, I have no problem with accepting as many immigrants as is sustainable - through the front door.

Posts: 13 | Registered: Mar 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
But, I have no problem with accepting as many immigrants as is sustainable - through the front door.
Which is some number less than the number of immigrants we have already accepted through the back door and are currently using to provide cheap labor, yes?
Posts: 20585 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JShope
Member
Member # 6657

 - posted      Profile for JShope   Email JShope       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:
But, I have no problem with accepting as many immigrants as is sustainable - through the front door.
Which is some number less than the number of immigrants we have already accepted through the back door and are currently using to provide cheap labor, yes?
Not necessarily. Don't you think we could get more through the front door if we weren't constantly dealing with the ones abusing the system or the constant threat of mass increases through amnesty?

The "cheap labor" argument also presupposes that most illegals are being exploited by otherwise honest citizens. It is demeaning to truly honest citizens, and just one more argument FOR enforcing the border laws.

Posts: 13 | Registered: Mar 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JShope:
Your belief is that we are not already providing citizenship where it makes sense to do so. Apparently you want to remove the borders, and allow free passage to everyone who can get here.

Do you understand the difference between your first sentence here and your second one and how the second doesn't actually follow from the first?
Posts: 1988 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Don't you think we could get more through the front door if we weren't constantly dealing with the ones abusing the system or the constant threat of mass increases through amnesty?
No, I don't.

quote:
The "cheap labor" argument also presupposes that most illegals are being exploited by otherwise honest citizens.
Yes, it does. This is in fact overwhelmingly the case, based on all known evidence. Except that I'm not sure that many of those citizens are in fact "otherwise honest;" the kind of businesspeople who hire dishwashers at $2.50 an hour and peach pickers at $5 an hour are not the kind of people who religiously observe all the other regulations placed upon them.
Posts: 20585 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JShope
Member
Member # 6657

 - posted      Profile for JShope   Email JShope       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
quote:
Originally posted by JShope:
Your belief is that we are not already providing citizenship where it makes sense to do so. Apparently you want to remove the borders, and allow free passage to everyone who can get here.

Do you understand the difference between your first sentence here and your second one and how the second doesn't actually follow from the first?
I do understand. And this is the point where DISCUSSION starts.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Mar 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, no. You aren't asking or discussing. You are making statements about what I want with no evidence at all that those statements are true. That is not a good place to start a discussion.
Posts: 1988 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Are you suggesting that we should kick liars out of the military? Because there are some very highly decorated liars with a star or two.

Do you actually want to have a discussion? Or will you just keep kicking up strawmen?

I have simple desires re: immigration. Have laws, and then enforce them. It's pretty simple. In 1986 we tried not enforcing them, and things haven't gotten better.

Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Do you care what the laws are? Or just that whatever the law, it is enforced?
Posts: 1988 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JShope
Member
Member # 6657

 - posted      Profile for JShope   Email JShope       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
Do you care what the laws are? Or just that whatever the law, it is enforced?

Both.
If there are bad laws, repeal them. If we need to alter the law, let's do it. Let's stop making every person a law unto themselves, as long as it fits some national narrative.

Posts: 13 | Registered: Mar 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Would you have considered the Dream Act a good law?
Posts: 1988 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Do you actually want to have a discussion? Or will you just keep kicking up strawmen?
No strawmen here. You specifically called out liars in military service, and I was curious whether you felt that any lies should lead to a dishonorable discharge, or just an initial lie about legitimate citizenship. Because I can think of many more dangerous and deadly lies that our servicemen have told which have not been punished in that way.
Posts: 20585 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No, I did not call out liars in military service. I referred to the laws in place about people who lie about their immigration status and forge documents. Do you see the difference?
Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let me expand that to all people who forge tax documents. If Card's argument is based on the 2nd Article of Faith, how is he ignoring that pesky "false witness" thing?

Or additionally, how can he hang his hat on the 2nd AoF while ignoring the 12th?

[ June 26, 2012, 05:54 PM: Message edited by: emarkp ]

Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So, let's say you're a fifteen-year-old child whose parents brought you here when you were three. Your dad works in a restaurant; your mother is a hotel maid. Half your parents' money goes to support a largish family back in Mexico, where you've never been. You would someday like to own a car, and maybe go to college; you've shown some talent at math, and are interested in engineering. Obviously, a summer job would be the first step. What is the correct thing to do in this situation?
Posts: 20585 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JShope
Member
Member # 6657

 - posted      Profile for JShope   Email JShope       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
So, let's say you're a fifteen-year-old child whose parents brought you here when you were three. Your dad works in a restaurant; your mother is a hotel maid. Half your parents' money goes to support a largish family back in Mexico, where you've never been. You would someday like to own a car, and maybe go to college; you've shown some talent at math, and are interested in engineering. Obviously, a summer job would be the first step. What is the correct thing to do in this situation?

15 year old kids are not eligible to work, in most states. How did the parents get jobs in the hotel and restaurant? The child's education has been a bounteous gift to this point, from the American taxpayer. It is indeed a dire predicament that THE PARENTS have put THEIR CHILD in.

Since OSC wants to speak Mormon to Mormon with Mitt, he should consider the Mormon program of the Perpetual Education Fund. Under this program, anyone can donate towards educating people in their own home country.

This 15 year old has to decide either to continue living a shadow life, or to put himself on a solid footing in this country. If we want to offer citizenship to him, let's cover that with legislation that will consider all of the ramifications. It wouldn't be hard to get through Congress the precise qualifications that Obama has laid out. He simply never tried.

Posts: 13 | Registered: Mar 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Have you read the Dream Act in any of its versions?
Posts: 1988 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
So, let's say you're a fifteen-year-old child whose parents brought you here when you were three.

So you've no longer addressing Card's comments and you're off on this sad sack case? Go back and look at the 12th Article of Faith.
Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mynnion
Member
Member # 5287

 - posted      Profile for Mynnion   Email Mynnion   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I feel out of sorts. I actually agree with OSC. The idea of deporting a child to a country where he/she has not lived for many years is inhuman. We are a nation of laws but there is also common sense. There are numerous laws that are not enforced even though they remain on the books.

Obama merely spelled out priorities for enforcement. Political? Sure. But that doesn't mean he is only doing this for political gain. He pushed the Dream Act previously. This is just a natural response to it's failure.

Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
It is indeed a dire predicament that THE PARENTS have put THEIR CHILD in.
Agreed. Now, rather than worrying about punishing the parents, let's consider how to do the best thing for the child.

quote:
So you've no longer addressing Card's comments and you're off on this sad sack case?
I actually think that this observation directly pertains to Card's comments. Why do you see no connection?
Posts: 20585 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It is not the job of the state to "fix" all the problems of the people. In particular, it is not my job to protect, by law, the family of criminals from effects of the criminality.

Furthermore, there is great harm done to those who are trying to legally immigrate when the entire system of law is undermined. The lesson is, don't follow the law, just break it and you'll get what you want. That is lawlessness, and it's not just a theoretical issue. Do you know what immigration attorneys advise many clients? To just break the law, because that's the most expedient solution to many immigration problems.

The particularly risible part of OSC supporting Obama's declaration is that it castrates the balances of the federal government. I didn't realize that the Empire books weren't merely fiction, but advocacy.

quote:
Obama merely spelled out priorities for enforcement.
False. He also presented a bureaucracy for work permits. By diktat he said congress is irrelevant. Should an executive be able to simply decide which laws to ignore? Let's ignore voting laws! Let's ignore 2nd Amendment. Let's just force those Mormons out of Missouri, because who needs them anyway.

quote:
The idea of deporting a child to a country where he/she has not lived for many years is inhuman.
Baloney. "Inhuman" is the idea that a child trying to follow the law from south of the border is told he has to wait in line behind the lawbreaker. "Inhuman" is a pejorative, not an argument. If you want to make law or policy on pejoratives, feel free to take up arms and start the revolution. Because the alternative to written law is shooting at each other.

quote:
Now, rather than worrying about punishing the parents, let's consider how to do the best thing for the child.
That's naive and frankly stupid. There is no perfect outcome from the crime committed. Any leniency on the criminality to "do the best thing for this child" is punishing a different child whose parents are trying to follow immigration law and are still waiting outside the border.

No one is proposing torturing and executing a child (keeping in mind the "child" might be 30 years old), so stop pretending they are. Consider the harm all children come to if we descend into lawlessness. If the US ignores law and becomes a failed state like much of the rest of the world, how many children suffer?

Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by emarkp:

Do you know what immigration attorneys advise many clients? To just break the law, because that's the most expedient solution to many immigration problems.
other.

Perhaps we should fix the law so following it is a possibility for more people?

[ June 28, 2012, 03:04 PM: Message edited by: kmbboots ]

Posts: 1988 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
<sigh> Yes, we should fix the law to make it better. Ignoring it makes it worse.
Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Have you read the Dream Act?

Legal immigration is tough enough for those with support and money. For the "huddled masses" it is all but impossible.

Posts: 1988 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh baloney. People keep immigrating legally.

I'm familiar with the Dream Act (several versions of it actually).

Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
If the US ignores law and becomes a failed state like much of the rest of the world...
Do you think letting a few more Mexicans live here would do that?
Posts: 20585 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Awesome straw man! A few more Mexicans indeed! Dude, you could write for Obama (straw man arguments are his favorite speech tactic).
Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Like Mynnion, I agree with much of OSC's column. I also think the chance that Romney will do what he suggests is negligible. A significant number of the votes Romney hopes to get in November can be expected to come from Republicans motivated by racial and religious hatred for Hispanics - and expressing approval for Obama's policy could cost him these. Whether Romney agrees with OSC or not, expressing OSC's views publicly could cost him the election. And I think asking a political candidate to take a public position that makes it impossible for him to be elected is perhaps more than should be asked.

So far as I remember from when I was a soldier, illegal immigrants were free to join the U.S. military. And, upon completing a period of service resulting in an honorable discharge, they were then eligible to become citizens. Nativists who hated immigrants changed those policies to make getting citizenship that way impossible, and I think that was despicable. Maybe OSC feels the same way.

Posts: 4350 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Uh, hobsen that's some awesome ad hominem there.

Please prove that illegal aliens were ever allowed to join the military. Legal residents have been, but AFAIK illegal aliens never have been.

Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by emarkp:
Oh baloney. People keep immigrating legally.

I'm familiar with the Dream Act (several versions of it actually).

Of course they do. And it usually takes years, money, support, and often, an immigration lawyer. Things not readily available to the huddle masses I was talking about.
Posts: 1988 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
emarkp
Member
Member # 461

 - posted      Profile for emarkp     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So you're saying that some people are too poor and stupid to immigrate, so we should just have open borders?
Posts: 34 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Baloney. "Inhuman" is the idea that a child trying to follow the law from south of the border is told he has to wait in line behind the lawbreaker. "Inhuman" is a pejorative, not an argument. If you want to make law or policy on pejoratives, feel free to take up arms and start the revolution. Because the alternative to written law is shooting at each other.
I find the idea that a 'child' can be following the law or a lawbreaker, as opposed to just doing whatever his parents are doing.

quote:
That's naive and frankly stupid. There is no perfect outcome from the crime committed. Any leniency on the criminality to "do the best thing for this child" is punishing a different child whose parents are trying to follow immigration law and are still waiting outside the border.
Does US law reduce the number of legal immigrants based on estimates of how many people are crossing the border illegally? If so, you have a point. If not... wtf?

quote:
No one is proposing torturing and executing a child (keeping in mind the "child" might be 30 years old), so stop pretending they are. Consider the harm all children come to if we descend into lawlessness. If the US ignores law and becomes a failed state like much of the rest of the world, how many children suffer?

Posts: 6387 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by emarkp:
So you're saying that some people are too poor and stupid to immigrate, so we should just have open borders?

I said neither of those things. Now you are just making things up.

Not having access to certain resources does not make one stupid. Neither does wanting to help people without access to those resources equal open borders.

Posts: 1988 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1