Dr. Grace Vuoto: If it was good enough for Barack Obama it’s now going to be a standard that’s good enough for Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio—
Carl Gallups: Oh I know! Thats-I know-But I’m telling you Grace the reason the media they hate Ted Cruz-by the way I love almost everything Ted Cruz stands for. And if it comes between Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton I’m pulling the button for Ted Cruz, legal or not legal. I mean we’ve got to have some change in this nation.
That was brilliant, Gallups. You’ll vote for a candidate who is not eligible for office because you don’t like the other candidate. And you’re looking for change.
You sound like an Obama voter in 2008.
Brilliant. Thanks for helping demonstrate that we Birthers are hypocrites and that it was never really about natural born citizen or being eligible for the office.
Please exercise your free speech in the comments section below. There are no stipulations of political correctness on this blog. Speak your mind, give us your thoughts, both objective and subjective. Share your ideas, hunches, inklings or your expertise. Please provide recommendation and corrections if you spot errors in fact within the blog report. Lastly, remember that posting a comment is much like casting a vote, so please do so.
“Thanks for helping demonstrate that we Birthers are hypocrites and that it was never really about natural born citizen or being eligible for the office.”
There’s already ample evidence of that, and Gallups only re-enforces that birthers are just sore losers who can’t accept reality. And grifters trying to con the sore losers.
bob wrote:
Early in 2011 I was emailed some links and asked to read the articles & comments on what turned out to be Obot sites calling themselves birther debunkers. The question going in was asking me to determine something. Right from the get go I was in total shock over what I was reading. We actually had online groups of Americans who had joined together attacking the rights of the American people with vicious smears over something so simple as wanting some records released to clear up the controversy surrounding Obama’s birth issues, when Obama himself says when you’re running for president you should be an open book so people know who you are.
What rights were attacked?
The only people who believe there was ever a “controversy surrounding Obama’s birth issues” are sore losers, and the grifters trying to con the sore losers.
bob wrote:
The rights of the people. You know that. There were all kinds of threats including race & class war if Obama wasn’t elected.
“When you’re running for president, everything should be public – including your full medical records. I believe in a right to privacy. But when you’re running for president, which is such an important job, the need of the public to know supersedes it.”
~ Senator Charles Schumer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
July 2014 Poll Report: Six years after the first lawsuits were filed alleging Barack Obama is not constitutionally eligible to be president, a new poll indicates nearly one-quarter of American adults don’t even believe he’s a U.S. citizen, let alone a “natural-born citizen,” and another 17 percent are unsure.
Rasmussen Reports found 41 percent of Republicans believe Obama is not an American citizen, a belief shared by 21 percent of those who are unaffiliated and 11 percent of Democrats.
“Just over 20 percent of Republicans and unaffiliated adults also are not sure, but only 7 percent of those in the president’s party share that doubt,”
That’s more than 1 in 10 from Obama’s own party that don’t believe Obama is an American citizen.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Another Poll Report after the release of the Substitute Birth Document in April 2011:
Even after Barack Obama’s release of an official long-form birth certificate online, a Gallup poll showed that fewer than half of Americans are fully convinced that Barack Obama was actually born in the United States.
Rambo Ike wrote:
I have no idea who was threatening the (unspecified) rights of “the people.” Nor do I know who was threatening race and class wars.
That a percentage of people have false beliefs is only evidence that some people have false beliefs; it does not make their false beliefs true.
Paul vs. Cruz…
Lucas, I sometimes post long comments on Mario Apuzzo’s Natural Born Citizen blog, but since this the first time that I have posted a comment here on your blog, I will keep this very brief.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I would vote for Sen. Rand Paul or Sen. Rick Santorum or Gov. Palin or other Conservative or Libertarian natural born Citizens in the general election, but I will focus this comment on Sen. Paul since he announced a couple of days ago, and he was born with ONLY singular U.S. citizenship of ONLY one nation by birth on U.S. soil to two U.S. citizen married parents.
With Carl Gallups, I also would vote in the general election for Ted Cruz even though he was born to only one U.S. citizen parent and one foreign citizen parent on a third nation’s foreign soil, because if the uninformed American electorate do not know the “original genesis original intent” of “natural born Citizen” as John Jay intended it when he underlined the word “born” in “natural born Citizen” in his note to George Washington, and Sen. Cruz is the Republican Party candidate, well, simply put, Cruz as a dual U.S./foreign citizen is better than Hillary “what difference does it make” Clinton or ANY progressive, Democrat OR Republican OR Independent OR Libertarian OR ….
Those who still do not know that “natural born Citizen” can have ONLY one meaning, which is ONLY singular U.S. citizenship of ONLY one nation ONLY by birth to two U.S. citizen married parents, and still think that “nbC” can ALSO have the meaning of only one U.S. citizen parent so that the child has dual U.S./foreign citizenship is eligible to be POTUS, well, their “natural born Citizen” new meaning neo-birther understanding is not supported by original birther John Jay and his original meaning, what I like to refer to as Jay’s “original genesis original intent” for underlining the word “born” in “natural born Citizen” in his July 25, 1787 note to George Washington.
Art
U.S. Constitution: The Original Birther Document of the Union
( http://originalbirtherdocument.blogspot.com/ )
ajtelles wrote:
Then why does it matter that Obama is not a natural born citizen?
ajtelles wrote:
I heard a rumor quite a few months ago that Sen. Rick Santorum was NOT a NBC, so I decided to check to see if that charge was correct. It turns out, according to Attorney Mario Apuzzo, that Santorum is indeed an Article II NBC and eligible for POTUS.
Thus, the old rumor about Santorum not being a NBC is false and you are absolutely correct in your statement.
——————————————-
“Rick Santorum Is An Article II Natural Born Citizen and Eligible to Be President”
Natural Born Citizen – A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
1/28/2015
View the complete article at:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2015/01/rick-santorum-is-article-ii-natural.html
Mario Apuzzo is not the arbiter of whether President Obama, Cruz, or Santorum are natural-born citizens. And Apuzzo, like all birthers, has an incredibly poor track record in predicting how the courts (and the public) will react to these fanciful beliefs.
@ Lucas Daniel Smith:
“Then why…”
That is a good question Lucas, but it is not clear what “then why” is referring to that needs to be clarified, so I will just add some things of which you are probably already aware.
Yes, (1) it does matter that BHObama is not an “nbC” because he is not an “nbC” according to John Jay’s July 25, 1787 original intent for underlining the word “born” in “natural born Citizen” in his note to George Washington that was incorporated into Article II and adopted by the delegates on September 17, 1787, with the ONLY meaning of ONLY singular U.S. citizenship of ONLY one nation, not dual U.S./foreign citizenship, and (2) BHObama is also definitely not a “citizen” according to the 1868 original intent of the original author, John Bingham, of the first six words of the first sentence of Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, “All persons born or naturalized in…are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
The original intent of the Fourteenth Amendment, which is ONLY singular U.S. citizenship of ONLY one nation, was rejected by the 1898 U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court by its decision that a male child born on U.S. soil to two married parents who were NOT U.S. citizens was a “citizen” of the United States. The rejection by the 1898 U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark Court of John Bingham’s 1868 Fourteenth Amendment original intent words, “All persons born…in the United States…,” which was directed to the 1865 Thirteenth Amendment free Negroes who were made “citizens” with ONLY singular U.S. citizenship of ONLY one nation, America, the holding of the 1898 Court must be overturned by the Supreme Court or amended with an Article V convention of states’ legislatures since the House and Senate will never deal with correcting the error of the 1898 Supreme Court.
It also matters that Cruz is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” or an Amendment XIV “citizen” since he was not born on U.S. soil, but in his case, he definitely is included in the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act as a “citizen” since he was born on foreign to one U.S. citizen parent and one non-U.S. citizen parent. A naturalization act can “declare” a child to be a “citizen” but not “declare” a “natural born Citizen” since an act of Congress can only “declare” citizenship by statute, not by birth.
That being said, if Sen. Cruz is chosen in the Republican primary by the “natural born Citizen” new meaning neo-birthers who are in the majority and who are still willfully uninformed and still think that “natural born Citizen” ALSO means birth to only one U.S. citizen parent which allows the child with dual U.S./foreign citizenship to be eligible to be POTUS, well, the “nbC” new meaning neo-birthers are still our “fellow American” friends. That is why I wrote, “…well, simply put, Cruz as a dual U.S./foreign citizen is better than Hillary “what difference does it make” Clinton or ANY progressive, Democrat OR Republican OR Independent OR Libertarian, male or female.
If I were to vote for Sen. Rand Paul, or Sen. Rick Santorum, or Gov. Rick Perry, or Gov. Scott Walker, or Gov. Sarah Palin in the Republican primary and Sen. Cruz is chosen by “nbC” new meaning neo-birther majority, well, that’s the way the cookie crumbles, that is also the way the constitution crumbles. Cruz, my favorite Federal Senator and also my Texas Senator, is a disappointment for not defending original birther John Jay’s “original genesis original intent” for underlining the word “born” in “natural born Citizen” in his note to George Washington and not defending the original intent of Article II section 1 clause 5, but Sen. Cruz is definitely better than ANY progressive, Democrat OR Republican.
Art
U.S. Constitution: The Original Birther Document of the Union
( http://originalbirtherdocument.blogspot.com/ )
ajtelles wrote:
Although I am not particularly fond of Ted Cruz, I too would vote for him in the general election when matched with any of the potential Democrat candidates widely discussed to date in the MSM.
OF COURSE, Cruz is not an Article II NBC, according to the Founding Fathers original Constitutional intent.
However, IMO, the VERY SURVIVAL of the U.S.A. as a Republic, is now in it’s most threatened state since the Civil War.
See my editorial: “Kenyan-Born Obama WILL ultimately be confirmed POTUS ELIGIBLE — TRAGIC!” (but that’s sad REALITY, as I see it, now in 2015). The very important NBC issue should have been settled by the proper authorities 6+ years ago, back in 2008 prior to the election (twice) of Obama! We must now suffer the consequences, but I BELIEVE WE WILL SOMEHOW SURVIVE.
http://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/InspectorSmith/showthread.php/5416-Kenyan-born-Obama-WILL-ultimately-be-confirmed-POTUS-ELIGIBLE-Tragic?p=7315#post7315
Many ostrich-like ‘Birther Purists’ won’t agree with me on the above, and that’s fine. God bless them. It’s not that they are wrong, IMO, it’s just that they are not nearly as powerful and influential as they fervently believe. The important decisions are largely out of their hands now and history is going to render the ultimate decision on our future.
Image Credit: https://earthspiritjourneys.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/ostrich.jpg
Bruce wrote:
I don’t really understand. So this was never really about being a natural born citizen?
And rather than voting for Cruz or a Democrat couldn’t you write in another candidate who you preferred or just not vote at all?
@ Bruce:
Dittos Bruce…
I also made a long analysis on Mario’s blog of Sen. Santorum’s eligibility to be POTUS to which Mario made a comment.
It seems that the naturalization statute language does not require a child, Rick’s father, born on foreign soil, Italy, who follows a father, Rick’s grandfather, to the U.S. AFTER the parent, Rick’s grandfather, becomes a naturalized U.S. citizen, the child, Rick’s father, does NOT lose his U.S. “citizen” status derived from his father, Rick’s grandfather, at the age of majority. That means that after Rick’s father married a U.S. citizen, Rick’s mother, Rick Santorum was born on U.S. soil to two U.S. citizen married parents.
Art
U.S. Constitution: The Original Birther Document of the Union
( http://originalbirtherdocument.blogspot.com )
@ bob:
Like all neo-birthers vs. “like all birhters”…
Bob, are you the same “Bob” who posts pithy comments at Cafe Con Leche Republicans and Fogbow directed at Mario Apuzzo, and whom Mario as addressed as “Bob, poor Bob” because of the lack of original source authority?
You are correct, Bob, Mario is not the arbiter of who is a “natural born Citizen” and eligible to be POTUS, and neither are “natural born Citizen” new meaning neo-birthers like the Fogbow denizens, or you, or Bryan Gene Olson/aka Not Linda, or Kevin/aka Slartibartfast/aka Ph.D. mathematician, or Kevin/aka Dr. Conspiracy/aka Masters mathematician who agrees with Mario that “natural born Citizen” is a “proper” subset of “citizen” and a “proper” subset of “born citizen.”
The “poor track record” you mention is simply your accurate analysis that the courts have NEVER dealt with the merits addressed by Mario, so the courts simply “declare” that BHObama is a natural born citizen because he was born on U.S. soil (so BHO says) naturally to at least one U.S. citizen parent, so he says.
When “nbC” new meaning neo-birthers can seriously rebut and refute original birther John Jay’s original mean of ONLY singular U.S. citizenship of ONLY one nation ONLY by birth on U.S. soil ONLY to two U.S. citizen married parents, THEN you will have to defend the absurdity that Jay ALSO meant dual U.S./foreign citizenship of TWO nations when he underlined the word “born” in “natural born Citizen” in his note to George Washington.
However, you will probably respond with ridicule just as ALL of the new meaning neo-birthers do when I ask them a simple question about John Jay, and they NEVER respond with a coherent response that Jay meant BOTH singular U.S. citizenship AND dual U.S./foreign citizenship.
Art
U.S. Constitution: The Original Birther Document of the Union
( http://originalbirtherdocument.blogspot.com )
Lucas Daniel Smith wrote:
TIMES CHANGE AND RULES CAN CHANGE EASILY AND VERY QUICKLY WHEN ONE NO LONGER LIVES UNDER THE STABILITY OF A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC
IMO, this WAS ‘ALL ABOUT’ being an Article II Natural Born Citizen back in 2008 to 2010 and perhaps even as late as early 2012. However, with Obama being allowed by virtually EVERYONE in a national position of authority and trust in the USA to run for a SECOND TERM- I believe THE ‘DE FACTO’ DEFINITION FOR ‘NBC’ in the U.S.A. has EFFECTIVELY CHANGED.
If a nation such as ours was established as a Constitutional Republic over 200 years ago but nobody of national significance is now paying any attention to something as IMPORTANT and BASICALLY SIMPLE as POTUS ELIGIBILITY — are we really STILL a Constitutional Republic? In reality, I hardly think we still qualify!
Here in 2015, 6+ YEARS after Obama, the U.S. Political Establishment, and the controlled MSM began to SUCCESSFULLY challenge the original NBC definition and our original-intent CONSTITUTION, we may not be too many years away from ANARCHY and ultimately, DICTATORSHIP. — A very dangerous situation!
LOL – I have no intention of wasting my time ‘writing in a candidate” on the Presidential Ballot, and I definitely intend to vote for whomever I see as the best POTUS candidate running in 2016. All candidates will NOW, under the NEW RULES that we are making up as we go along, likely be POTUS eligible, including Ted Cruz.
Very sad indeed!
Bruce wrote:
So the Constitution is a living document then?
And “LOL” ?
Yet you believe that, if it came down to it, that Cruz would help save the Constitutional Republic?
Now that’s a significant LOL moment.
And you believe that Arpaio and Zullo are going to expose Obama and somehow help save the Constitutional Republic?
That’s another real LOL moment.
I’m very sorry Dr. Franklin, but we have as a nation become distracted by issues of far less importance and allowed your precious and truly remarkable historic document, the U.S. Constitution, to fall into disuse and disrespect. That is, we have NOT been able to ‘keep it’, as you so wisely warned.
PERHAPS THE CONSTITUTION’S VALIDITY CAN BE REVIVED IN FUTURE YEARS — I CERTAINLY HOPE SO –
– BUT IT’S GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF WORK, OVER MANY YEARS, BY A GREAT MANY INDIVIDUALS WHO UNDERSTAND THE DIRE SITUATION WE ARE IN.
Thankfully, our country still has many such highly intelligent individuals who are capable of ‘righting the ship of state’, but they need to WAKE UP NOW, face reality, and dedicate themselves to the important task at hand. These individuals are capable of understanding the very important difference between a “Democracy” (unstable – usually leads to anarchy and ultimately dictatorship) and a “Constitutional Republic” (permanently stable).
Image credit & View the article at:
http://www.ourrepubliconline.com/Author/21
I think the best and easiest way to ‘wake up’ the sleepy potential patriots in the U.S.A. is to expose KENYAN-BORN OBAMA, who has been strongly supported by the Political Establishment and the controlled MSM, as a LIAR, FRAUD and IMPOSTER.
The revelation could be very helpful in restoring respect for the U.S. Constitution and may even set the world socialistic agenda of those in control back a generation or more.
I think it’s admirable for the ‘Birther Purists’ to continue their up-hill fight against tremendous odds to keep the Article II NBC issue alive. However, after 6+ years of valiant combat, it seems obvious to me that THEIR WORTHY BATTLE WITH THE ‘PTB’ HAS LIKELY BEEN LOST. They should, certainly NOT give up the eligibility fight, but instead turn their PRIMARY ATTENTION to a battle that is WINNABLE and within their grasp.
Two examples:
(1) ObamaFraud.5X – Inform Your Neighbors – http://wasobamaborninkenya.com/ObamaFraud.5x-InformYourNeighbors.pdf
(2) Team Arpaio – Wherefore art thou?
It’s very important that the two Obama-related issues of LIAR/FRAUD/IMPOSTER and INELIGIBILITY be DECOUPLED and ADDRESSED SEPARATELY. IMO, the wealthy and powerful ‘PTB’ will not permit Obama to be declared ineligible so if the two issues are linked, BOTH WILL BE IGNORED.
ajtelles wrote:
Never claimed they were the arbiters.
The courts, however, did decide the issue with respect to President Obama, and he was consistently found to be eligible. And the courts cited Wong Kim Ark, your personal disagreement with that case notwithstanding.
Apuzzo’s delusions were rejected on the merits in the Vermont Superior Court, the New Jersey ballot challenge, and the 4th Circuit. Because birth in the United States is sufficient for natural-born citizenship, and President Obama was born in Hawaii.
Your obsession with John Jay’s letter, and what you think it means, is entirely your own; good luck with that.
The following comment was posted by B. Steadman (me) 4/15/2015 on the the below-linked Birther Report article titled, ‘Reality Check: Return Of The Rubio Birthers; Another Constitutionally Ineligible Candidate’
http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/04/reality-check-return-of-rubio-birthers.html
—————————————————–
Yes – Let’s do a Reality Check
Cruz and Rubio, both Article II INELIGIBLE according to the ‘Original Intent’ Constitution, MvH 1875, etc. are now actively running for POTUS with FULL APPROVAL by the wealthy and powerful Political Establishment and largely controlled MSM.
Bracketing the pertinent birth scenario data of the two candidates, we have (1) Cruz born in a foreign country and (2) Rubio born of two parents, neither of which were U.S. Citizens at the time of his birth.
Combining the data from the two candidates, we have – WTF – virtually ANYBODY can, under the new rules we are making up as we go along, serve as POTUS. — Very frightening, but that’s reality.
I strongly suggest that any challenges to Obama regarding his LIAR, FRAUD and IMPOSTER issues be DECOUPLED from challenges regarding his ELIGIBILITY issue. Otherwise, I believe the PTB will likely simply chose to IGNORE both issues, as they have successfully done for the last 6+ years.
That is, the PTB will likely not tolerate any challenges regarding Obama’s eligibility issue at this time. Maybe they will someday, but I think not in the foreseeable future .
I think it’s fine to keep the very important Obama eligibility issue alive, but WE CAN’T ALLOW IT TO CAUSE THE PTB TO IGNORE OBAMA’S LIAR, FRAUD and IMPOSTER ISSUES, WHICH ARE MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BE ACTED UPON.
@ bob:
“Never claimed…”
So, Bob, since you did not deny it, you must be the same “Bob, poor Bob” who has posted similar inanities on CafeConLeche.com.
Also, your “never claimed” response is also revealing.
I did not say that it was you who claimed that the arbiters were the Fogbow denizens, or you, or Bryan Gene Olson/aka Not Linda, or Kevin/aka Slartibartfast/aka Ph.D. mathematician, or Kevin/aka Dr. Conspiracy, aka the “natural born Citizen” new meaning neo-birthers, aka Obama Obots, defending the 2008-2015 ahistorical theory that birth to only one U.S. citizen and dual U.S./foreign citizenship makes a person eligible to be POTUS.
Dual U.S./foreign citizenship with only one U.S. citizen parent is such a silly and incoherent theory. Think about how incoherent “dual citizenship” is, and then just try to defend how the incoherent “dual citizenship” is as coherent as singular U.S. citizenship.
In your response you conclude with this:
“Your obsession with John Jay’s letter, and what you think it means, is entirely your own; good luck with that.”
So, Bob, what is YOUR “obsession” with John Jay’s letter, and what do YOU think it meant?” Good luck with that.
What do YOU think that John Jay meant when he underlined the word “born” in “natural born Citizen” in his note to his friend George Washington, President of the Constitutional Convention?
If YOU were writing that note to George Washington on July 25, 1787, what would YOU have meant? The question is NOT what do you THINK that Jay meant, but what would YOU have meant in 1787? (1) Would YOU have meant singular U.S. citizenship of only one nation by being born on U.S. soil to two U.S. citizen married parents? (2) Would YOU have meant dual U.S./English citizenship of two nations by being born to only one U.S. citizen parent?
What is YOUR 2015 informed opinion of what YOU may have meant in 1787? Surely you know what you know now in 2015, right, so it MUST be the same thing that you would have meant in 1787, right?
What is YOUR “obsession” Bob? Good luck defending dual U.S/English (foreign) citizenship.
Art
U.S. Constitution: The Original Birther Document of the Union
( http://originalbirtherdocument.blogspot.com/ )
@ ajtelles:
Bob is clueless. He opens & swallows whatever his Obot Overlords feed him
Rambo Ike wrote:
Who, exactly, are these “Obot Overlords”?
Rambo Ike wrote:
A controversy created by wingnuts is not a real controversy.
I HAVE A SUGGESTION
Why don’t WE (millions of concerned, knowledgeable, action-oriented Americans) commit over the next 10 years or so, to peacefully CONVERT our current DE FACTO, left-wing, radical, fascist DICTATORSHIP, currently assigned to the fraud Obama by the wealthy and powerful PTB, to a true, stable CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, like the one established in the former U.S.A. by its Founding Fathers!
They enacted a perfectly workable CONSTITUTION, and appropriate amendments have been added over the last 200+ years, so there’s no need to call for a constitutional convention to draft one. We can just use the CONSTITUTION of the former U.S.A.
The conversion task will take a lot of work, but will be well worth the effort!
@ Bruce:
Great idea, Bruce.
When will you wake up to LLDS’ lies?
How stupid are you Bruce?
bob wrote:
Speaking of Smith, it has been nearly two months since he has made an appearance on his own blog.
Is there anyone here who doesn’t think Smith is in jail somewhere?
bob wrote:
Have you developed a man crush for Lucas?
Rambo Ike wrote:
No; Smith is loathsome.
But his absence from his own blog is notable. Not even Bruce is making excuses.
>>> HEY ” BLOB ” . WHO THE HELL DO YOU IMAGINE YOURSELF TO BE CALLING LUCAS LOATHSOME AND BRUCE STUPID ? YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY A GAPING , BLEEDING ASSHOLE WHO SHOULD BE BANNED FROM THIS BLOG .
” WE ” HAVE BEEN KEEPING THE TRUTH IN THE PUBLIC EYE AND EAR FOR A LONG TIME WITHOUT IDIOMORONS LIKE YOU . YOU CAN RETURN TO HELL FROM WHENCE YOU CAME . FOO ~ YUCK . <<<
Smith is a convicted felon who swindles others. And Bruce gives him money, with no results. Sounds like loathsome and stupid, respectively.
I don’t know what truth you think you are keeping, but this blog is not in the public eye in any meaningful way.
And too bad for you that Smith is MIA from his own blog; there’s no one to ban me. But banning me would go against Smith’s oft-repeated intent to permit open discourse.
I for one would be against any ban of Bob, BobJ or Slow Bob. This Bob individual is the clown of this site now that Andrew Vrba has been exposed and no longer comments here.
I will back Larry up on that.
@ Rambo Ike: Thank you Sir!
@ Larry Bland:
Shouldn’t get rid of Slow. He’s the forum entertainment.
@ CARL TAPP:
You are a fool all CAPS
@ Bruce:
great idea.
Is LLds dick always up your ass Bruce?