Bad Juju! You no logged in or no introduced to the frogman. Log-in or register. Or suffer mucho hoo-doos.

The Bar

Have a drink and talk about:

Texas and Taxes ♠ Texas et Taxes
the dissident frogman | Fri, October 10, 2003 | Permalink | 742 hits

Post

You're not logged-in, so your comment will be held for approval; check the "Help" tab for details.

Vous n'avez pas ouvert de session, votre commentaire doit être approuvé avant publication; voyez "Aide" pour les détails.


Comment form

Red-framed fields required. Email address will NOT be published or shared but may be used for a direct answer, on my part only.

Les champs bordés de rouge sont requis. L'adresse email ne sera PAS publiée ou partagée mais pourra être utilisée pour une réponse directe, de ma part seulement.


Guidelines | consignes

DISCLAIMER: in my experience, the following doesn't apply to 99% of my readership. Unfortunately, experience also shows it has to be written down for the remaining 1%.

The short version, when it comes to my comments policy, goes down to a line taken from the (mediocre) second opus of the Matrix:

"I built this place. Down here, I make the rules."

Let's elaborate a bit:

  1. Try to stay on topic. If you have a beef against the cow-fart(1) induced climate change and this post is about monkey spanking(2), then it's not the place to draw your sword(3).
    I have nothing against a freewheeling conversation, but if it's off-topic AND stupid or offensive, then it will have a badly limited lifespan.
  2. Consider the two following statements…
    • I'm totally open-minded when it comes to rational ideas.
    • It is quite obvious that Anti-Americanism, anti-Semitism, Islamism, Nationalism, Racism, Collectivism(4) and Multiculturalism (non-exhaustive list) exist in complete contradiction with Reason.
    … And guess the total amount of tolerance you can expect from me if you indulge in any of these.
  3. If you shall persist in these ways nevertheless, understand that I'm not spending countless hours of work on this site to "reach out", "debate" with you, "understand" your "root causes" or "learn" about your religion. Unlike race, ideology is something we choose, and for which we must bear all responsibilities. I loathe your sick mindset and what you defend and promote. I've heard all your pitiful excuses for your despicable totalitarian psyche and your compulsion to coerce or enslave your fellow men and women in the name of some "greater good".
    So understand that this is not a public forum: it is my outpost in the culture war you wage against me, my kin, my rights and my freedom — thus, you will only be tolerated here, and only if I decide so. I call the shots and I owe you nothing. As a matter of fact, I don't like having you around, so the only argument you're truly entitled to hear from me would come, if you insist, amplified through the barrel of my Sig-Sauer high powered rifle(5) — because when it comes to intolerant scumbags, I'm an intolerant bastard.
    So keep your distances, and nobody gets hurt.
  4. I also have a very limited patience for social-democrats of all race and creed, center-of-center jellyfish and buttermonkey(6) hybrids, Blame-America-First (and always) Libertarians (usually of the Rothbardian school), Hollywood idiots & Festival-de-Cannes cretins and those Parisians who fancy themselves as an elite when they are nothing but the developed world's rednecks(7). However, I tend to ignore them, so they may consider themselves lucky if they manage to draw some sarcasm in colorful language from me.
  5. Yeah, and don't get me started on journalists and the Wonderful World of Mainstream Media...
  6. American and British soldiers (including the Commonwealth) stand on a special pedestal in my personal pantheon. Disrespect them here, and you'll quickly wish you'd rather stand naked in Mecca during Hajj, wearing only a sign that reads "Muhammad was a pedophile".
  7. I may moderate, remove or edit anything and give neither excuses nor explanations. It has nothing to do with "censorship": I am not a State, you are not a coerced citizen of said State and so you are always free to express yourself on your own facility and by your own means. Commenting is not a right, it is a privilege I grant or take away, according to my right as the owner of this place.
  8. My site is not awfully biased: it's shamelessly opinioned. If you're on my side, you get my vote and are free to rant 'n' roll. If not, live with it or go rot in the gutter.
  9. Oh and, if you're a vegan, be advised that I hunt, kill, cook(8) and eat all sorts of animals, and thoroughly enjoy the whole lot of it. Have fun with your carrots, Doc.
  1. Ha ha. Beef. Cow. Geddit?
  2. It's been known to happen.
  3. Neither is the guestbook by the way.
  4. That includes of course all its variations: Socialism, National-Socialist, Communism, Fascism, etc.
  5. With a loud 'Bang'
  6. Nope, don't know what species is that either, but it does sound like a particularly vile creature, doesn't it?
  7. Tell me London, New-York, Sydney or Tokyo, but Paris is a dump.
  8. Frequently in some sort of wine sauce or with loads of tears-pulling spices. Grapes and pepper count as veggie stuff right?

AVERTISSEMENT : selon mon expérience, ce qui suit ne s'applique pas à 99% de mes lecteurs. Malheureusement, l'expérience prouve aussi qu'il faut que cela soit écrit pour le pourcentage restant.

La version courte, concernant ma politique pour les commentaires, se résume à une ligne tirée du second (médiocre) volet de Matrix:

"J'ai construit cet endroit. Ici, je fais les lois."

Élaborons un brin :

  1. Il existe une subtile différence entre "être familier" et "traiter familièrement". Cela signifie que les culs-sales qui s'imaginent débarquer ici et me tutoyer comme si nous avions gardé les piquets de grève ensemble verront leur contribution à la conversation éradiquée sans autre forme de procès. Quelle que soit la pertinence de ladite contribution. Même si vous n'êtes Vraiment Pas Content® avec ce que j'écris, cela ne vous dispense pas de surveiller vos manières : tant que je n'ai pas été présenté à votre chère Maman, nous nous vouvoierons. Vu ?
  2. Évitez le hors-sujet. Si vous avez une rancune à l'égard de l'impact des pets de vache sur le changement climatique et que cet article traite de la fessée de macaque(1), alors ce n'est pas l'endroit d'où lancer votre croisade (2).
    Je n'ai rien contre une conversation à bâtons rompus, mais si c'est hors-sujet ET stupide ou insultant, ça aura une durée de vie salement limitée.
  3. Considérez les deux affirmations suivantes...
    • J'ai une ouverture d'esprit totale en ce qui concerne toutes idées rationnelles.
    • Il est évident qu' Anti-américanisme, anti-Sémitisme, Islamisme, Nationalisme, Racisme, Collectivisme(3) et Multiculturalisme (liste non-exhaustive) existent en complète contradiction avec la Raison.
    ... Et tâchez de devinez la dose totale de tolérance que vous pouvez attendre de moi si vous cédez à l'une de ces sirènes.
  4. Si vous deviez cependant persister dans ces voies, comprenez que je ne dépense pas un nombre incalculable d'heures de travail sur ce site pour vous "tendre la main", "débattre" avec vous, "comprendre" vos "causes profondes" ou "apprendre à connaitre" votre religion. Contrairement à la race, l'idéologie est le résultat de nos choix, et nous devons en supporter l'entière responsabilité. J'abhorre votre mentalité tarée, et ce que vous défendez et promouvez. J'ai entendu toutes vos pitoyables excuses pour votre détestable psyché de totalitaire et votre compulsion à forcer et réduire vos semblables en esclavage au nom d'un quelconque "intérêt général".
    Comprenez donc que ceci n'est pas un forum publique : c'est mon avant-poste dans la guerre culturelle que vous lancez contre moi, mes semblables, mes droits et ma liberté — vous ne serez que toléré ici, et seulement si je le décide. Je tire les ficelles, et ne vous doit rien. En fait je n'aime pas vous voir dans le coin, et en conséquence les seuls arguments de ma part auxquels vous puissiez réellement prétendre, si vous insistez, se transmettent par le canon de ma carabine de fort calibre Sig-Sauer(4) — Parce dès qu'ils s'agit d'ordures intolérantes, je suis un salaud d'intolérant.
    Alors gardez vos distances, et personne ne sera blessé.
  5. J'ai aussi un patience très limitée pour les sociaux-démocrates de toute confession et couleur, les centristes-du-centre fruits de l'union d'une méduse et d'un cul de singe, les Libertarés de l'École Rothbard conditionnés au "C'est la faute à l'Amérique, toujours et partout", Les Idiots d'Hollywood et les Crétins-de-Cannes, de même que ces parisiens qui se prennent pour une élite alors qu'ils ne sont que les bouseux du monde développé (5). J'ai cependant tendance à les ignorer, et ils peuvent donc s'estimer chanceux s'ils arrivent à me soutirer ne serait-ce qu'un sarcasme en langage fleuri.
  6. Ouais, et ne me lancez pas sur les journalistes et le Monde Merveilleux des Medias...
  7. Les soldats Américains et Britanniques (parmi lesquels j'inclue le Commonwealth) prennent place sur un piédestal particulier dans mon panthéon personnel. Manquez leur de respect ici, et vous souhaiterez rapidement vous trouver plutôt à la Mecque en période Hajj, tout nu avec seulement une pancarte autour du coup sur laquelle on puisse lire "Mahomet était un pédophile".
  8. Je peux modérer, supprimer ou éditer quoi que ce soit, sans fournir d'excuses ni d'explications. Cela n'a rien à voir avec de la “censure”, pour une raison très simple : je ne suis pas un État, vous n'êtes pas un citoyen opprimé dudit État et demeurez donc libre de vous exprimer sur votre propre support et par vos propres moyens. Commenter n'est pas un droit, c'est un privilège que j'accorde ou refuse selon mon droit de propriétaire des lieux.
  9. Mon site n'est pas affreusement partial, il est impudemment orienté. Si vous êtes de mon côté, vous avez mon aval et êtes libre de disserter à l'envi. Sinon, faites avec ou allez crever dans le caniveau.
  10. Oh, et si vous êtes végétarien, sachez que je chasse, tue, cuisine(6) et bouffe toutes sortes d'animaux, et que j'apprécie le tout sans aucune retenue. Soyez heureux avec vos carottes Docteur.
  1. C'est déjà arrivé.
  2. C'est aussi valable pour le Livre d'Or.
  3. Ce qui inclue aussi ses variantes : Socialisme, National-Socialisme, Communisme, Fascisme, etc.
  4. Avec un gros 'Bang'
  5. Londres, New-York, Sydney ou Tokyo, d'accord. Mais Paris, c'est un bled de cul-terreux.
  6. Généralement avec une sauce au vin, ou alors des poignées d'épices à t'arracher la tripaille. Le raisin et les piments, ça compte comme trucs de végétarien, non ?

Help

  1. As an additional layer of defense against comment spamming and surf-by shooting, I enacted a set of restrictions on how you can post a comment as a simple guest on my site (i.e. either when you're not registered as a member, or registered but not logged in), starting with pre-publishing comment approval. As approving comments will take a certain — and variable — amount of time, I invite you to check-in if you're serious about joigning the conversation in real time.
  2. Non-authenticated users are also limited to the following HTML tags:
    • Bold (<strong></strong>)
    • Italic (<em></em>)
    • Underline (<u></u>)
    • Quote (<blockquote></blockquote>)
    Don't bother entering any other tags, as they will automagically get stripped on posting.
  3. Members have access to a greater range of tags and publishing tools, and they can also choose to be informed by email of follow-up comments, for any given thread.
  4. Members also have an easier and more straightforward posting process. Some of the system defenses are lowered for them, and the details fields (name, etc.) are pre-filled with the information they entered in their profile.
  5. Members have a greater chance to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, while it will be assumed that, in addition to an opinion, strangers have stinky feet and greasy fingers. They may therefore be regarded with great condescension by regular members and the dissident frogman alike, and derided accordingly. So wash your feet, your hands, and register.
  6. A reminder: you decide what you write, no matter how brilliant or stupid it might be, and the fact that I let it go published doesn't mean I condone, agree or disagree with it—no matter if I answer it or not. Hey, you're supposed to be a responsible adult, right?

If you need further help with the site, you may want to check the Field Manual. Ultimately, you can also drop me a line. I usually don't answer jellyfish and buttermonkey(1) hybrids however.

  1. Nope, don't know what species is that either, but it does sound like a particularly vile creature, doesn't it?
  1. En défense contre le spam et les tirs isolés, j'ai établi un ensemble de restrictions sur l'ajout de commentaires par les simples visiteurs sur le site (i.e. soit lorsque vous n'êtes pas enregistré comme membre, soit lorsque vous l'êtes, mais n'avez pas ouvert une session), dont notamment la modération avant publication. L’approbation des commentaires prenant un temps certain et variable, je vous invite donc à vous inscrire, si vous envisagez sérieusement de participer à la conversation en temps réel.
  2. Les utilisateurs non authentifiés sont également limités aux balises HTML suivantes :
    • Gras (<strong></strong>)
    • Italique (<em></em>)
    • Souligné (<u></u>)
    • Citation (<blockquote></blockquote>)
    Ne vous fatiguez pas à en utiliser d'autres, le texte passe par un filtre de suppression lors de la publication.
  3. Les membres ont accès à une plus large sélection d'outils et de balises, et ils peuvent choisir pour chaque 'conversation' à laquelle ils prennent part d'être informé par email des réponses.
  4. Les membres ont également un "processus de publication" plus simple et direct. Certaines défenses du système sont abaissées pour eux, et les champs des détails sont pré-remplis avec les informations qu'ils ont entré dans leur profil.
  5. Les membres ont une plus grande chance d'entrer au Royaume des Cieux, tandis que l'on considèrera que, en sus d'une opinion, les visiteurs venus d'ailleurs ont les doigts gras et les pieds sales. Ils pourront de ce fait être traité avec grande condescendance par les autres membres et le dissident frogman de même, et ridiculisés en conséquence. Alors lavez vos mains, vos pieds, et inscrivez-vous.
  6. Pour mémoire : vous décidez de ce que vous écrivez, aussi brillant ou stupide que cela soit, et le fait que j'en autorise la publication ne signifie pas que je l'approuve ou le désapprouve, et cela que j'y réponde ou non. Hé, vous êtes censé vous comporter en adulte responsable, s'pas ?

Si vous avez besoin de plus d'aide avec le site, jetez un œil au manuel d'instruction. Au pire, vous pouvez également m'envoyer un mot. J'ai cependant tendance à ne pas répondre aux fruits de l'union d'une méduse et d'un cul de singe.

Comments | Commentaires

fred | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for fred
France
10/10 2003
11:38 AM

Et si on envoyait notre Gvt en stage aux Usa , tu crois qu’ils apprendraient quelque chose ?

:p :p ;)

 
jkrank | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for jkrank
Bulgaria
Website
10/11 2003
04:50 AM

We have him for a few more years, then you can have him.

 
the dissident frogman | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for the dissident frogman
Website
10/11 2003
05:20 AM
Comment 815

jkrank: There it is. They were right. They’ve been telling us relentlessly, but we never listened. They were right, and I was wrong.

But I didn’t see it.

And there you come, consenting to turn from your court of gorgeous balkanic beauties and alcoholic refreshments for a split second, and sling at my very friendly face the overwhelming evidence backing what’s Michael Boor - sorry, Moore - among other splendid and noble voices in the wilderness have been repeatedly warning us about:

The utter selfishness of the Americans.

Fine. Keep your President.

I’m changing to “the opposant frogman, time to CHANGE sides”.

You’re not gonna like it, mind me.

 
JFM | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for JFM
France
10/11 2003
06:27 AM

J’ai une meilleure idée: la France doit quitter l’UE et devenir un Etat Uni. D’Amérique.  Evidemment, il faudrait faire subire aux français un stage de d’une vingtaine ou une trentaine d’années de délavage de cerveau pour les désintoxiquer de l’Immonde et de Collaboration. C’‘est aussi une excellente idée à lancer devant un communiste au coeur fragile.

I have a better idea: France must leave the EU and become a United State.   Of America.   Of course the French would need to be subject to a twenty or thirty years of debrainwashing from the hideous lies of such media as “Le Monde” aka the Pravda and Liberation aka Der Sturmer. It is also great to say this when in hearing distance from a communist with a heart condition.  :-)

 
the dissident frogman | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for the dissident frogman
Website
10/11 2003
06:36 AM
Comment 817

JFM:

Hmm, I’m afraid that our commies are in such a state of denial of reality (remember that, for them, Chirac and Ra-Fous-Rien are “right wingers” and “ultraliberals”) that they would tell you we already are…

But that would be a funny campaign idea, for sure.

 
fred | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for fred
France
10/11 2003
10:59 AM

Ok , so ii’s a bad idea “to post” a french GVt to USA ( with Raferarien and Chirak ) the risk so that “they are exploded” ( french expression : se faire exploser “) is too great, notice that would not be useless, but the bad grass is always difficult a to mow .

And to quit a UE , no no , you don’t know , the France recover the billions and billions of dollars to Ue Subvention is great swindle.

the French socialist republic needs its rounds to pay the GVT because the salairs is increased to 70 per cent when this Gvt entered in functions.

 
Papertiger | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for Papertiger
United States
10/12 2003
06:41 AM

I could fix your economy in a week . Would only have to change one rule to do it. I’m dissappointed that GW’s blog isn’t a real blog with moderator and comment section. Ah well I suppose he has to run the company. Not enough talent to fight two wars,  rebuild three countries,  overhaul four economies, and answer questions on his weblog.  I think the Editor in Chief is doing a pretty good job anyhow . And you can’t have him inspite of what jkrank says.

désolé

 
the dissident frogman | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for the dissident frogman
Website
10/12 2003
06:52 AM
Comment 820

Papertiger:

No, on second thought, I had to admit that jkrank was right. I don’t want a declination of the original. I want the real deal.

And it would be unfair to exile GWB, anyway.

It’s just that if I’m the last leaving France, I have to remember to switch off the lights.

 
Chrees | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for Chrees
United States
10/13 2003
10:37 AM

Maybe Chirac could take a page out of the movie “The Mouse that Roared”? Couldn’t hurt France to openly declare war on the U.S. There are pretty sweet aid packages as door prizes…

 
Adam | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for Adam
Israel
10/13 2003
01:35 PM

A nation cannot tax its way to growth or job creation, but it can’t spend its way there either. W is only half good.

 
the dissident frogman | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for the dissident frogman
Website
10/13 2003
01:37 PM
Comment 823

Adam: how could he “spend” money he doesn’t “tax” exactly?

 
Mitch | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for Mitch
United States
Website
10/13 2003
02:02 PM

DF: One problem I have with GWB is that he has not cut spending along with cutting taxes.  How does he do it?  The same way we do, only instead of maxing out his credit card, he runs up the national debt by issuing Treasury bonds.  We made the same mistake when expanding social services (the Great Society campaign) while the Vietnam War was dragging on.  We paid the price in the ‘70’s.

 
the dissident frogman | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for the dissident frogman
Website
10/13 2003
02:22 PM
Comment 825

Mitch: That’s interesting, I didn’t know that. Could it be said that it’s a global politic of his - for instance, are all public spends going “on credit”, so to speak, or is it limited to certain sectors? (and in that case, which ones?)

Also, it does sound incoherent to cut the income and max out the spending, of course, yet being anything but an expert in this field, I’m wondering: could this move be justified by some obscure (well, at least for me) and surely paradoxical economic theory?

I mean, at least on the French side, everything is clear and simple: public spending is going over the top (and blasting the EU’s “stability pact”) and taxes are following (I’m not buying ChIraq’s alms on the income taxes as “tax cuts”. It’s a joke, not an abatement.)

 
Ernest Brown | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for Ernest Brown
United States
Website
10/13 2003
05:37 PM

DF,

“Adam: how could he “spend” money he doesn’t “tax” exactly?”

‘Deficit Spending’ is the answer to your last question. :-<

 
the dissident frogman | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for the dissident frogman
Website
10/13 2003
06:05 PM
Comment 827

Thanks Ernest. (looking forward to see you blogging back… the same, by the way)

So, all partisan considerations put aside, how does this fit in the economic model? I mean, what’s the strategy, if there is any?

 
Adam | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for Adam
Israel
10/13 2003
07:28 PM

Not only has Bush not cut spending along with cutting taxes, he’s actually increased spending *a lot*, so the taxes will just be paid by future taxpayers rather than current ones. Sure there are economic theories which justify this (some kind of Keynesianism or something), but even if you accept those theories, this is still a bit much. Most likely it’s just playing politics; the voters like tax cuts and also their pet programs, so Bush gives them both. This also makes it more difficult for the next Democrat (whoever and whenever) to spend a large deficit. Bush won’t be president anymore when the sh*t hits the fan anyway.

By the way, DF, great blog. It also helps me practice my French. :-)

 
j a pate | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for j a pate
United States
10/14 2003
01:28 AM

yes, that is correct, spending has greatly increased.  however, one should observe that when “homeland defense” and a war time increase in the defense budget is subtracted, the resulting increase for the rest of government is just 2 percent.  that is the lowest rate of increase in decades.  because of the recession, which has ended, tax revenues have been much lower.  the bush administration has vigorously pushed a policy of economic growth to get things in better balance.  the tax package is just a part.  much of this policy has been fiercely resisted by the Democrats. also note that the portion of the GDP devoted to defense is only 3.2 per cent.  the admisnistration has resisted, some would say foolishly, increasing defense spending due to this deficit problem.  for those not informed, 3.2 is a very small figure everywhere but in europe.  during the cold war, 6.5 to 9.0 was the rule.  as far as i know, britain was the only free european country that ever raised its defense spending to the 3.2 level during that period.  we always tried to get germany to give 3.0 per cent but it never happened.  another demonstration that europe rarely pulls its own weight in these matters.  oh, i forgot, turkey spends 10 percent and i think the greeks spend a lot, but, of course, greece is given a free economic ride by the EU, but the europeans with bouzikis are another story.

 
the dissident frogman | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for the dissident frogman
Website
10/14 2003
01:44 AM
Comment 830

Thanks j a pate, I was suspecting something along that line, particularly since one of my readers sent me an email pointing at the defense issue.

I just needed it be said in the comments I guess. ;-)

 
Joe | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for Joe
United States
10/14 2003
06:55 AM

Fred:

We already understand your government very well.  So do the citizens of France, and they are eternally aggrieved.  The euro apparatus only works as long as there is a US, an eager Eastern Europe, and a productive Asia to buoy it, give it a market for its’ rubbish, and nod while it insists that it always knows how the rest of humanity should live.

Look - no-one listens to them, and things go well.  They only seem able to impose their will over African states that are already on their knees with poverty caused by closed European markets and manipulation by European state industries.

The world realizes that ever so brilliant euro-chatter is little more than an expression of narcissism.

 
Mitch | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for Mitch
United States
Website
10/14 2003
08:56 AM

Hi again, DF Despite my qualms, there is some justification for Bush’s spending.  As j a pate points out, this is wartime and the first responsibility of any government is victory.  There is a big bill coming due for Iraq’s reconstruction, but failing to complete it would amount to failing to consolidate the partial victory. Reagan tried the same thing during a period of economic “malaise,” which really resulted from 3 previous administrations’ failure to address the hangover from the ‘60’s.  It was called “starving the beast,” whereby he insisted on tax cuts and dared the opposition to keep spending.  Eventually, spending tailed off and the economy grew out of the deficit.  Bush is much more attuned to Reagan than to his father, both in economics and in ideology.  We have a new “Evil Empire” to resist and eventually demolish. BTW, the design and operation of your blog is outstanding.  I took a look at the “view source” option to see how it is done, but I cannot reproduce the effects on Blogger.  The only suggestion I could possibly make is to employ a JavaScript to hide your e-mail from the spammers’ bots.  That is, unless you wish to receive e-mail regarding the molestation of various animals, offers to increase the size of your penis or your breasts (to do both at once would, I think, add a certain amount of variety to your social life). Keep up the good work, mec.

 
Papertiger | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for Papertiger
United States
10/14 2003
12:55 PM

I don’t like the idea of deficit spending , but I remember Sgt. Shroeder from my company. He borrowed money from everybody in the unit. His theory being when we went to war , everyone would be looking out for Shroeder to insure we got paid back. Same principal keeps Donald Trump solvent. He borrowed more money then the banks could write off , in effect they are business partners now.

 
rosignol | 8 years, 7 months ago
Avatar for rosignol
United States
10/24 2003
11:19 PM

This Schroder person sounds very shrewd, but I think you only see half of the idea- anyone who got killed before they were paid back was unlikely to collect on the debt.

 
Comment page 1 / 1 pages |

Trackbacks

Post title: Texas and Taxes ♠ Texas et Taxes

Date: 10th October, 2003