Contact
Archives
Search
Blogs
Newspaper Blogs
English-Language
Press
Polls

September 23, 2003

RECALL UPDATE....Well, the recall election is back on. Huzzah!

The en banc ruling was unanimous, which is a real kick in the teeth to the three judges who postponed it. I doubt very much that the Supreme Court will choose to review a unanimous decision like this, so we're off to the races.

In other recall news, Darrell Issa, the car alarm mogul who bankrolled the recall in the first place, is now having second thoughts:

"As someone who some people call the godfather of the recall, nobody should be more determined to remove Gray Davis from office," Issa said.

But, he said, "When you vote, if there are still two major Republicans on the ballot, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Tom McClintock, then I advise you to vote no on the recall."

Kinda brings tears to your eyes, doesn't it? Why, who could ever have guessed that more than one Republican might decide to run in the election?

But here's a cheery thought: regardless of how the recall turns out, at least Darrell Issa will be $1.7 million poorer when it's over. There is some justice in the world after all.

Posted by Kevin Drum at September 23, 2003 09:58 AM | TrackBack


Comments

The decision was a no-brainer. GORE LIED!!!

Posted by: Dave at September 23, 2003 10:00 AM | PERMALINK

Issa out $1.7 million dollars.

California taxpayers out between $53 million to $66 million dollars.

Some justice.

Posted by: sktsee at September 23, 2003 10:05 AM | PERMALINK

So Issa has second thoughts. All of the sudden he realizes that the recall could elect somebody worse (from a Republican perspective) than Davis. Seems to me that Republicans these days seem to have a lot of trouble dealing with the consequences of their actions.

Posted by: David Perlman at September 23, 2003 10:06 AM | PERMALINK

I not only wish Issa had stayed in the race, I wish he'd taken it all the way. I don't often think there's much merit in those arguments where you hope your opponent will win so that you'll have all the easier time of it at the next election, but California and its budgetary quagmire is one situation in which the logic fits. Let a Republican win and let him sink in the mess.

Posted by: Kriston Capps at September 23, 2003 10:06 AM | PERMALINK

How funny....the 9th circuit saves the supreme court from total humiliation! Form its own buffonery. Form its own illegitimate, corrupt decision.

Does this mean O'Conner can retire now?

Posted by: obe at September 23, 2003 10:10 AM | PERMALINK

It is all rather bizarre. Of course, who would have thought the Democrats would have been so disciplined as to have only one candidate?

Posted by: James Joyner at September 23, 2003 10:20 AM | PERMALINK

Maybe this is a foolish prediction, but aren't the Democrats almost certain to win the recall?

Current opinion polls suggest that between 45-50% of voters are opposed to the recall.

Bustamante is polling at around 28%, and Arnold's numbers are similar.

So here is the question: won't Bustamante pick up most of the people who vote "no" on the recall? Doesn't this effectively make his numbers 65-70%?

I know a few Republicans who plan to vote "no" on the recall, but they seem to be in the minority.

Posted by: Joe Schmoe at September 23, 2003 10:24 AM | PERMALINK

From what I saw of the decision, it was basically "The original panel had a legitimate reason, it's just that it wasn't sufficient over these other reasons"

Basically, what this says is "It's possible this will be another Bush v. Gore mess, and it'll all get litigated after the election, but it's not possible enough to warrant interfering. But when the shit hits the fan after the election, you'll get to say "I told you so" and SCOTUS will still have to eat it's words".

Posted by: Morat at September 23, 2003 10:25 AM | PERMALINK

Log Cabin Republicans Endorse Arnold

"We believe that Arnold Schwarzenegger will be a governor for all the people of California, even girlie-men like us" the Log Cabins said in their news release.

Posted by: raj at September 23, 2003 10:33 AM | PERMALINK

Sktsee: I didn't say there was a lot of justice, just some!

For the record, I should point out that I happen to think the en banc decision was the right one. I didn't think the equal protection argument in Bush v. Gore was correct, and I don't think it was any better here. We should do our best to make this very human process work, and get on with the election. And may the least worst person win.

Posted by: Kevin Drum at September 23, 2003 10:36 AM | PERMALINK

I'm voting no on the recall. If the recall is successful there will definitely not be any accountability for the major architects of this mess--free spending Democratic state representatives. (Ok, slightly inflated campaign-style rhetoric). The only problem is that with term limits, they were never going to be held accountable anyway.

Posted by: Sebastian holsclaw at September 23, 2003 10:36 AM | PERMALINK

Bustamante doesn't automatically pick up every anti-recall vote. His financial dealings have distressed a lot of progressives and good-government folks, and those folks might vote no on the recall, and then vote for Huffington or Comejo.

Still, I think that either Davis will survive the recall or Bustamante will be the next gov.

Posted by: Joe Buck at September 23, 2003 10:41 AM | PERMALINK

Am I understanding correctly that Issa has to pay $1.7 M for a recall that will cost about $60 M?

This sounds like a costly undertaking at a time of (what should be) belt tightening.

Posted by: Tripp at September 23, 2003 10:46 AM | PERMALINK

Anyone have the source for the 60 million number? I am not doubting it but it does seem pretty astounding. Where is all the money going?

Posted by: damon at September 23, 2003 11:11 AM | PERMALINK

If Bustamante were to come out ahead, then Gray Davis would be removed from office. And yet Issa now says he is opposed to that?

This is nothing but a naked power grab by Republican leadership, who are once again trying to game the system to the detriment of democracy.

Posted by: Spinning Tops at September 23, 2003 11:17 AM | PERMALINK

Spinning Tops says
This is nothing but a naked power grab by Republican leadership, who are once again trying to game the system to the detriment of democracy.

I don't know what Issa was thinking (and I'm pretty sure that I don't want to know) but I don't think Republicans (as a whole) are doing a power grab here. You don't see Bush saying anything, DeLay either. It's my opinion that the Republicans should withdraw from the race and run for the hills. I can't see a good outcome here. Can anyone?

Posted by: Ron at September 23, 2003 11:25 AM | PERMALINK

Ron:

"you dont see bush saying anything, delay either?" Who on earth do you think forced Ueberroth and issa out of the race? Whose interests do you think are served in Texas? The republicans have shown no shame, though a great deal of finesse, in using local actors to force through various kinds of re-districting/recalls to enhance republican agendas at the national level. To believe that the whole recall was purely a local idea is absurd and Issa's latest statement (Davis isn't the problem its really ending up with any democrat that's the problem) is symptomatic.--aimai

Posted by: aimai at September 23, 2003 11:40 AM | PERMALINK

Tops: If Bustamante were to come out ahead, then Gray Davis would be removed from office. And yet Issa now says he is opposed to that?

Yep, because he is having to contemplate an outcome he did not forsee. The whole idea was to ignite a tidal wave (yeah, I know it's a mixed metaphor, but that's how these people think) of opposition that would wash Davis out of government, establish a proper Republican governor (like, for example, Issa) and lead to California becoming a proper red state. The problem is that the Republican Party acted forseeably and split between true believers (who I can respect, if not agree with) and opportunists (Wilson - 'nuff said), while the Dems worked out a way to keep some sort of discipline. So, it's looking more and more like a choice between a complete second term for Davis with the R's looking like asshats, or Bustamante getting a two year head start on the 2006 election, with the R's looking like asshats. The natioinal GOP types can remember that the CA GOP has not been able to deliver on its promises for some time -- why should this time be differet?

Posted by: Claude Muncey at September 23, 2003 11:44 AM | PERMALINK

Hey -- my sister is moving to another address within California, and missed the registration deadline for the new address. (very fast offer and closing, about a week.)

Can she no longer vote in either place?

tia

Posted by: squiddy at September 23, 2003 11:49 AM | PERMALINK

Squiddy,
I would think she could still vote at her old polling place.

Posted by: Jeffrey Gordon at September 23, 2003 12:05 PM | PERMALINK

aimai says
using local actors to force through various kinds of re-districting/recalls to enhance republican agendas at the national level

I see no benefit at the national level for this. Hell, I see no benefit at the local level.

I don't live in California, so I don't know the problems or the solutions. But I would think that the reason the recall is on is that a substantial portion of Californians don't think Davis is doing what needs done, and I would think that they would want the winner to do things differently (this assumes Davis is recalled.) Imagine for a moment that a Republican wins. Do you suppose the Democrats want this Republican to succeed? Do you suppose the legislature wants this Republican to succeed?

Any Republican elected can only fail. How do you suppose this benefits Republicans at the national level?

And I was not trying to start an argument in asking if anybody could see a good outcome here. My interest is in you folks that have to live with this.

Posted by: Ron at September 23, 2003 12:09 PM | PERMALINK

Squiddy:

I was in the same position, but realized that I could just vote at the old polling place. THEN I realized that I am out of town on business and had to apply for my first absentee ballot....Oy.

She should be able to go to the polling place assigned to her old address.

RM

Posted by: Rosie at September 23, 2003 12:21 PM | PERMALINK

Damon - the Secretary of State's office projected between 47 and 55 million dollars based on projections from county elections offices, which breaks down to about $2.29 per registered voter. There's some pretty wide variation, tho, with Riverside County improbably projecting a cost of $.97 per registered voter and Alpine County projecting an obscene $8.16 per registered voter.

Posted by: aphrael at September 23, 2003 12:26 PM | PERMALINK

Oops. The cost per registered voter table is here; that was a cut-and-paste error.

Posted by: aphrael at September 23, 2003 12:27 PM | PERMALINK

Tia - did she move within the same county? If so, then all she has to do is show up with two items proving her new address, and she'll be allowed to vote provisionally; they will count the ballot once they've verified (a) that she's registered and (b) that she hasn't voted over in the other place.

If she's moved to another county than legally speaking she isn't validly registered.

As a practical matter, though, if she goes to where she was registered, she can vote - but only if she perjures herself by affirming that she lives at the old address.

Posted by: aphrael at September 23, 2003 12:30 PM | PERMALINK

Sorry to bust in OT, but Atrios has a stunner up, check it out:

http://tinyurl.com/oef7

The gist is this- Both Powell and Rice are on record in 2001 claiming that the sanctions against Iraq had worked, and that Hussein had no access to WMD, and had not been able to reconstitute his old stock.

Powell apparently said it on tape in Cairo in Feb 2001, and Condi two months later to a reporter.

I, myself, have lost the ability to be surprised.

O, btw, tell me how that tiny url thing went, if it works, I'll learn to tag then :-)

Posted by: epist at September 23, 2003 12:39 PM | PERMALINK

AAAAARGH! Never mind, I see that it doesn't work, and neither does the direct 80-character URL.

Is it me, or is URL linking in hypertext the (*^%^% POINT of HTML? How is it possible that these services can't get this right? It's like selling a new car that doesn't make left turns. Unbelievable.

Anyhoo- just got to Atrios' site. [/rant]

Posted by: epist at September 23, 2003 12:43 PM | PERMALINK

Who honestly believes that the $1.7 million came out of Issa's own pocket, that he had no financial support from the you-know-who's... Give me a break!

Posted by: Mike at September 23, 2003 12:48 PM | PERMALINK

There is a special place reserved for Darrell Issa in hell. One where the only sound is the plaintive bleat of a car alarm, and the only visual is a nude portrait of Gray Davis.

Posted by: cazart at September 23, 2003 01:10 PM | PERMALINK

But I would think that the reason the recall is on is that a substantial portion of Californians don't think Davis is doing what needs done, and I would think that they would want the winner to do things differently

The recall is on the ballot because Issa funded the drive. There wasn't any independent grassroots organization or bottom-up groundswell that started this thing.

Issa's stated reason for starting the recall was to remove Davis. But now that it's more likely that a non-Republican may win, Issa is now against the recall, even though the result would be what he originally stated as his intention.

Conclusion: This is a top-down partisan power grab.

Posted by: Spinning Tops at September 23, 2003 01:15 PM | PERMALINK

Incredibly, in restoring the October 7 date, the Court defended the rights of the absentee balloters stating "If the election is postponed, citizens who have already cast a vote will effectively be told that the vote does not count and that they must vote again."

For the life of me, I don't understand where the rights of the absentee ballotes who are told "that the vote does not count and that they must vote again" counts more than the rights of those thousands who will be effectively disenfranchised by the punchcard balloting and who *won't* be given the chance to vote again. As the 3 judge panel noted in citing the Reynolds case: "It has been repeatedly recognized that all qualified voters have a constitutionally protected right to vote, and to have their votes counted." and "the Equal Protection Clause requires “the opportunity for equal participation by all voters in the election . . . .”".

For some reason, the idea of "all voters" having rights that includes the right "to have their votes counted" was disregarded in this decision.

Posted by: Andy at September 23, 2003 01:20 PM | PERMALINK

The main reason I started here was to find out people's opinion on what the best outcome would be, but I guess I'm just a sucker for an argument.

Spinning Tops says
The recall is on the ballot because Issa funded the drive.

The last I heard there were still more people in favor of recall (even though recall support is dropping) so obviously Issa is not alone here. And those other people that support the recall must be looking for a change.

Can I think of a single reason to support Issa? Not a one. This has to rank among the dumbest things I've seen, because nobody wins here (or at least I can't see it).

Posted by: Ron at September 23, 2003 01:35 PM | PERMALINK

What does one have to do to vote absentee?

Would it be possible for grassroots organizations to go to densely-populated areas where people are stuck with chad makers & instruct them on the process of mailing in their vote?

Posted by: chris at September 23, 2003 01:46 PM | PERMALINK

Can't we all just get on with this election, now?

Finally! :-)

Posted by: Kiril at September 23, 2003 01:54 PM | PERMALINK

That's funny, I expected that by now Issa was devoting his life to peace in the Middle East, as he said he would earlier.

Posted by: R. Robot at September 23, 2003 02:31 PM | PERMALINK

For the life of me, I don't understand where the rights of the absentee ballotes who are told "that the vote does not count and that they must vote again" counts more than the rights of those thousands who will be effectively disenfranchised by the punchcard balloting and who *won't* be given the chance to vote again. As the 3 judge panel noted in citing the Reynolds case: "It has been repeatedly recognized that all qualified voters have a constitutionally protected right to vote, and to have their votes counted." and "the Equal Protection Clause requires “the opportunity for equal participation by all voters in the election . . . .”".

Well, this was also an issue in the NJ and MN Senate races in 2002. But the key to the 9th Circuit's decision today was clearly the determination that it was premature to worry about possible ballot spoilage when we don't know if the election will be close enough for it to make any difference. Courts don't generally get excited about ballot spoilage in elections that aren't close, at least not excited enough to overrule the (state) constitutionally-mandated deadline. Which makes a lot of sense, if you think about it.

Posted by: Crank at September 23, 2003 02:34 PM | PERMALINK

Chris - to vote absentee you have to request an absentee ballot by Sept. 30. But here's the problem: most jurisdictions just mail you the same card you'd vote in the polling booth.

Which means the pollstar cards are *worse* if you're voting absentee, rather than better.

Posted by: aphrael at September 23, 2003 03:02 PM | PERMALINK

Damon -- note also that the majority of the election expenses are being borne by the counties, who are the worst hit of any level of government by the current financial crises in California.

That alone is, I think, reason to vote against the recall. If it succeeds, we can look forward to many more of the same, and a further tremendous drain on resources that would be much better used elsewhere (e.g., running hospitals, funding libraries, maintaining county parks).

Posted by: bleh at September 23, 2003 03:04 PM | PERMALINK

"Issa's stated reason for starting the recall was to remove Davis. But now that it's more likely that a non-Republican may win, Issa is now against the recall, even though the result would be what he originally stated as his intention."

Isn't that astounding! You should read the voter phamplet. they paint the recall as justified because Davis is an incompetent hack, a danger to the state, a criminal almost.... Logic would dictate that if that's the case, the number one goal for Calif. should be to get rid of him for the sake of the state. But NOW we see that any democrat would, in the GOP playbook, be subject to recall ... not because of performance, but because of party affiliation.

Too bad this is not ancient greece. I think Isa would be drinking hemlock about now...

Posted by: obe at September 23, 2003 03:15 PM | PERMALINK

I don't understand where the rights of the absentee ballotes who are told "that the vote does not count and that they must vote again" counts more than the rights of those thousands who will be effectively disenfranchised by the punchcard balloting and who *won't* be given the chance to vote again.

Funny, from my vantage point back east I never heard anything about disenfranchised voters last time around - y'know, when Gray Davis was projected to whup butt on that right wing guy the GOP nominated. The condition of the voting machinery no doubt has significantly deteriorated over the last year.

For the record I think direct democracy's a good thing on balance. California's got more of it than just about any place else in America. Now, from what I can see from my visits there, there's a reason it's the biggest state: it's a very nice place to live. So my conclusion is that cutting out the middleman (the state legislature) on occassion has not been a net negative for California.

I would probably up the ante a bit on gubernatorial recalls, perhaps. Maybe double (at least) the number of signatures required and raise the filing fee to $100K.

Posted by: P. B. Almeida at September 23, 2003 03:55 PM | PERMALINK

I'm not willing to assign guilt to the entire Republican side of the aisle. There are principled Republicans, a lot of them. But Issa has demonstrated, quite extremely well, that he is not one of them. If Mr. Issa is ever able to attain elected office again, I would be willing to say that any Repub who votes for him is not of the principled kind.

This is such an incredible affront to democracy in our democratic republic that I really wish Issa could be held accountable for his actions. Ergo, he really should have to fund the entire recall election, out of his pocket, or serve time in jail if he refuses. He has made a mockery of the most important thing there is in America -- our democratic ideals. This kind of political thinking -- that it is all about winning, at any cost, is a deadly cancer. I really hope Repubs with principle will stand up and loudly decry this as a shame and a mockery. If we continue down this path, it is not inconceivable that in a few decades even the peaceful transition of power among elected officials may not be possible.

The only legitimate case Issa had for proposing the recall was that Grey Davis was a danger to the state of California. He has now shown that that was a complete lie -- it was simply about getting a D out, and an R in. That is damn near treason (and would be if the Rs or Ds were reversed, too). Mr Issa, when the people vote, that is binding. If you can't live with that, go find a banana republic somewhere.

Posted by: Timothy Klein at September 23, 2003 03:59 PM | PERMALINK

'But, he said, "When you vote, if there are still two major Republicans on the ballot, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Tom McClintock, then I advise you to vote no on the recall."'

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought all the names were going to be on the ballet, regardless of whether candidates had withdrawn from active consideration? If true then he's saying vote in just about any circumstance (although who knows with the way things are going, anything might happen).

Posted by: Abe at September 23, 2003 04:59 PM | PERMALINK

Abe, you're right: candidate withdrawals at this point do not result in a change of the ballot.

Posted by: aphrael at September 23, 2003 09:05 PM | PERMALINK

I'm getting pretty tired of the hackneyed old "I never heard anything about disenfranchised voters last time around.." line. were you listening then?

look at 'Figure 1' on page 59 of http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/elections/davisvshlly80703decs.pdf

the data are pretty incontrovertible, no matter how you want to spin them: Votomatic and Pollstar punchcard machines show a highly statistically significant relationship between minority population and error rates. precinct-count optical scan machines do not.

Posted by: wcw at September 23, 2003 09:44 PM | PERMALINK

Make phone calls against the hijack attempt!!

Phone Banking to Defeat the Recall
http://moveon.org/pac/pb/standup.html

Posted by: John Smith at September 23, 2003 10:23 PM | PERMALINK

I'm getting pretty tired of the hackneyed old "I never heard anything about disenfranchised voters last time around.." line. were you listening then?

I don't blame Dems one bit for getting behind an attempt to have the courts delay the election. They might as well use all legal means at their disposal to prevent a politically undesirable outcome. Both the Gore and Bush camps did the same in 2000. The charge of hypocrisy against the dems obviously should be taken with a grain of salt (as indeed it is leveled with a grain of salt). Again, of course the recall was going to be opposed in court. This is America, after all. It's just that the wounded tone one hears is really a bit much (use racial disparities and the Equal Protection Clause for political ends? Moi?). Please. Get over yourself.

Posted by: P. B. Almeida at September 23, 2003 11:14 PM | PERMALINK

>>Funny, from my vantage point back east I never heard anything about disenfranchised voters last time around - y'know, when Gray Davis was projected to whup butt on that right wing guy the GOP nominated. The condition of the voting machinery no doubt has significantly deteriorated over the last year.

why not address the substance of the issue - the fact that the rights of absentee voters who WILL get the chance to do a "do over" are being favored over the thousands who won't get that chance. Much easier to sneer and make platitudes to actually discuss substance, huh?

Posted by: Andy at September 24, 2003 05:40 AM | PERMALINK

>>Courts don't generally get excited about ballot spoilage in elections that aren't close, at least not excited enough to overrule the (state) constitutionally-mandated deadline. Which makes a lot of sense, if you think about it.

we're not talking a regular election here, preceded by full campaigns of the major parties with different requirements for making the ballot than in a special election with over 130 people running. In a regular election, one would expect to see the 2 major candidates get the lions share of the vote - in a special election where 130 people are running and the winner may squeak by with about 20% of the vote (would THAT happen in a regular election? hardly), the amount of votes potentially not being counted stands a much more likely chance of deciding the election than otherwise. It's amazing to me that conservatives, so eager to twist things around so as not to admit that this is denying thousands of people their fundamental rights, deny or ignore all differences between the two.

Posted by: Andy at September 24, 2003 05:45 AM | PERMALINK

why not address the substance of the issue - the fact that the rights of absentee voters who WILL get the chance to do a "do over" are being favored over the thousands who won't get that chance. Much easier to sneer and make platitudes to actually discuss substance, huh?

Andy: By all means buy and install state of the art voting machinery in every jurisdiction in America. I'm no Luddite. But again, democracy wasn't so mortally wounded during the last election in California that the voting had to be delayed. What's the difference now?

Posted by: P. B. Almeida at September 24, 2003 08:53 AM | PERMALINK

Issa did not begin the recall effort, if I recall correctly. It was, in fact, begun by a grassroots organization. However, the initial effort pretty much was going nowhere, since it was poorly funded and managed. It wasn't until Issa stepped in, contributing money, organization and paid signature-gatherers, that the recall effort took off.

Issa clearly had in mind that he would become the next governor of California. He had stated that he was going to run, had a website and was organizing a campaign, when he abruptly withdrew his name from consideration. I don't remember hearing exactly why he was withdrawing (although I remember being highly unconvinced by the "official" explanation). I believe the rumor was that Rove had decided that Arnold was more electable and he wanted Issa out so that Arnold could win. I don't know what they offered him (or threatened him with).

Issa's latest comments, by the way, are most likely directed at McClintock. The party leadership is leaning on him *very* heavily to get him out of the race. So far, he's not budging.

Posted by: PaulB at September 24, 2003 09:50 AM | PERMALINK

Claims that Republicans are hurting democracy by pushing the recall are ridiculous. They are using existing law to their benefit; Dems just don't like the law (at least as long as one of theirs is governor). The cynic in me suspects that Dems would be making the opposite argument if the shoe were on the other foot (so would the Rep's, by the way). What a shock! Politicians are using the law to their advantage!

Posted by: Ben at September 24, 2003 03:06 PM | PERMALINK

This small change to the recall law might add some saneness to the process.
1). The organizers of a recall effort must put in escrow 10% of the cost of the election if they are to use paid signature gatherers. If the recall petion drive leads to a recall election then the funds would be used to help pay for the election.
2) If the organizers of the recall use even one paid signature gatherer and not disclose this use, they would be subject to a criminal penalty of life in prision without possibilty of parole.
Enjoy your new governor.

Posted by: dilbert dogbert at September 24, 2003 04:33 PM | PERMALINK

online casinos | casino bonus | casino directory | high roller casinos | casinos

Posted by: doi at May 23, 2004 10:49 AM | PERMALINK


Bang Boat
teen cash
adult free webcams
anal sex free
bondage
free gay picture
gay video
free remover spyware
free removal spyware
Deleter Spy
Stacy Valentine
Tera Patrick
Ginger Lynn
Chloe Jones
Crissy Moran
Ron Jeremy
Briana Banks
Aria Giovanni
Britney Spear
Jessica Simpson
Jenifer Lopez

free web cam free live web cam free chat with web cam free sex web cam adult free web cam free nude web cam free girl web cam free web cam site free porn web cam free gay web cam free xxx web cam free teen web cam free web cam chat room free amateur web cam free web cam pic free adult live web cam free adult web cam chat live sex web cam free free personal web cam free live nude web cam free live girl web cam free live web cam chat web cam live free personal cam free view web free web cam picture free sex chat web cam free online web cam cam free viewing web free web cam software free lesbian web cam free web cam community cam free watch web free web cam video free live web cam site free web cam host free sexy web cam free web cam hosting free live web cam porn free naked web cam free web cam of woman free home web cam free live xxx web cam free adult web cam site free nude web cam chat cam free totally web cam free movie web cam chat free teen web free web cam chat site free asian web cam free black web cam voyeur web cam free free streaming web cam free web cam pussy free live teen web cam free web cam show free gay live web cam free private web cam cam free web yahoo web cam free ware cam chatting free web cam free gallery web free teen web cam pic free nude teen web cam free live web cam show free male web cam cam free live web woman cam free now web cam free membership no web cam college free web free live web cam amateur access cam free web cam dating free web free shemale web cam free sex web cam site cam free sample web cam download free web cam free room web cam free no registration web free adult web cam community free gay web cam chat cam chat free girl web cam free girl girl live web free hidden web cam free naked woman web cam free erotic web cam free hardcore web cam cam code display free web cam free mature web free web cam broadcast cam free preview web cam chat free online web free college girl web cam free live lesbian web cam cam free skin web free gay male web cam cam free man web free porn web cam chat cam free service web free nude woman web cam free web cam sex show free sex web cam video free adult sex web cam free online sex web cam free teen sex web cam free gay sex web cam free web cam sex amateur free private web cam sex home web cam sex free free web cam cyber sex free couple sex web cam free lesbian sex web cam free hardcore sex web cam cam free sex watch web free sex web cam pic cam free movie sex web cam free free sex web cam free sex view web free sex web cam sample free black sex web cam free nude web cam pic free amateur nude web cam cam free nude sexy web cam free non nude web free nude web cam site free adult nude web cam free nude man web cam free nude web cam show cam free live nude web woman free nude beach web cam free nude gay web cam free nude web cam at home free nude web cam picture cam free nude preview web cam free nude video web cam free girl hot web free web cam teen girl cam free girl pic web cam free girl online web black cam free girl web cam free girl watch web free adult girl web cam asian cam free girl web cam free girl video web cam free girl picture web cam free girl web young cam cam free free girl web web cam free girl totally web cam free girl show web cam free gallery girl web cam free girl real web cam free free girl web cam free live online web free live streaming web cam cam free live web free home live web cam cam free live secretfriends-com web cam free live totally web free live sexy web cam free live naked web cam cam free live watch web cam free live view web cam cam free free live web web cam feed free live web cam free live private web cam free live naked web woman cam community free live web amsterdam cam free live web cam free host live web free live pussy web cam asian cam free live web hot live free web cam cam free live now web cam female free live web cam free free live web amateur cam free live web xxx animal cam free live web cam free hidden live web cam free live preview web free live voyeur web cam cam ebony free live web cam free live password web cam free live shemale web free xxx web cam chat free web cam video chat cam chat free lesbian web cam chat free private web cam chat free program web cam chat free web cam chat free naked web cam chat free naughty web cam chat free web yahoo cam chat free totally web cam chat free software web cam chat free kid web cam chat free line web free amateur web cam and chat cam chat free free web cam chat college free web cam chat community free web cam chat free msn web best cam chat free web free porn web cam site free teen porn web cam cam com free porn web cam free online porn web free adult porn web cam cam free porn video web cam free porn web xxx free amateur porn web cam free gay porn web cam cam free porn watch web free xxx web cam site cam free teen web xxx free adult xxx web cam free amateur xxx web cam free teen web cam gallery cam free teen video web free gay teen web cam cam free site teen web cam free teen web young free amateur teen web cam free teen web cam picture free amateur web cam site free amateur adult web cam free gay amateur web cam free amateur web cam pic free sex cam free live sex cam free sex cam chat free live sex cam chat free sex video cam free sex spy cam free online sex cam free amateur sex cam free hidden sex cam free teen sex cam free adult sex cam free live sex chat web cam free gay sex cam cam com free live sex web free home sex cam free live teen sex cam free sex voyeur cam free lesbian sex cam free asian sex cam com cam free sex free private sex cam free sex cam site free nude sex cam free live sex video cam free sex cam sample free live web cam sex show adult cam chat free sex web free sex cam show anal cam free live sex sex cam chat free room sex web free live sex cam feed cam free home private sex web cam free movie sex cam free lesbian live sex amsterdam cam free sex cam free sex watch cam free livefeeds sex cam free latina sex free live sex cam show adult cam free live sex free hardcore sex cam amsterdam cam free live sex free couple sex cam free hot sex cam cam free membership no sex free porn sex cam free sex spy cam pic cam free gratis sex cam free live sex site web free streaming sex cam live sex voyeur cam for free girl web cam live web cam girl college girl web cam teen girl web cam hot web cam girl web cam girl pic young web cam girl cam chat girl web web cam girl picture black cam girl web asian girl web cam girl home web cam cam girl web yahoo girl personal web cam real web cam girl cam girl online web school girl web cam cam chat girl live web cam girl high school web web cam girl gallery cam girl video web cam girl hot live web cam girl little web cam college girl live web cam girl in web cam cam girl web cam girl horny web teenage girl web cam cam caught girl web web cam girl archive cam girl naughty web japanese girl web cam girl private web cam cam girl msn web cam girl photo web arab cam girl web cam cute girl web cam fat girl web cam girl indian web cam flashing girl web girl web cam site cam girl stripping web cam girl goth web cam girl watch web cam free girl streamate web cam dorm girl web cam girl girl web cam girl gratis web girl web cam adult cam flexing girl web cam free girl girl web cam girl gone web wild collage girl web cam cam girl korean web cam free girl view web alone cam girl home web cam canadian girl web cam girl russian web cam girl single web top 100 girl web cam teen girl web cam pic cam girl voyeur web cam girl home live web cam girl latina web cam french girl web cam girl secret web action cam girl web australian cam girl web cam girl strip web cam free girl preview web cam free girl horny web cam girl stripping teen web cam girl pic web young cam girl preteen web cam girl talk web cam girl index web cam girl kissing web cam girl local web cam girl teen web young web cam sex live sex web cam web cam sex chat teen sex web cam sex gratis web cam amateur web cam sex gay sex web cam live web cam sex chat adult sex web cam adult cam direct sex web web cam sex chat room video sex web cam sex web cam site home sex web cam web cam sex show cam online sex web live sex show web cam web cam cyber sex asian sex web cam web cam sex pic lesbian web cam sex hot sex web cam couple sex web cam cam college sex web cam sex web yahoo cam hidden sex web amsterdam cam sex web black sex web cam web cam sex com cam membership no sex web live adult sex web cam web cam sex gratuit cam pal pay sex web cam friend secret sex web adult cam chat sex web free sex porn web cam oral sex web cam cam having people sex web cam dating sex web cam live secretefriends sex web xxx sex web cam cam msn sex web nude sex web cam cam sex watch web cam cam free sex web group sex web cam cam sample sex web sex voyeur web cam cam couple live sex web com cam sex web free nude sex web cam
Bang Boat
Bang Boat
Bang Boat
Bang Boat

Posted by: Nick at July 26, 2004 01:50 PM | PERMALINK

You are invited to check the sites about http://www.texas-hold-em-4u.com/ texas hold em http://www.texasholdem-4u.com/ texas hold em http://www.texas-hold-em-555.com/ texas hold em http://www.worldwide-holdem.com/ texas hold em http://www.online-deals24x7.com/ texas hold em http://www.bestdeals-winner.com/ texas hold em http://www.texasholdem777.net/ texas hold em http://www.texas-hold-em-winner.net/ texas hold em http://www.texasholdemsite.net/ texas hold em http://www.playandwin777.com/ texas hold em http://www.blackjack-4u.net/ blackjack http://www.black-jack-4u.net/ blackjack http://www.blackjack-777.net/ blackjack http://www.worldwide-games.net/ blackjack http://www.online-games24x7.com/ blackjack http://www.bestgames-winner.com/ blackjack http://www.blackjack777.net/ blackjack http://www.blackjack-winner.net/ blackjack http://www.blackjacksite.net/ blackjack http://www.playandwinit777.net/ blackjack http://www.tramadol-4u.net/ tramadol http://www.tramadol-24x7.net/ tramadol http://www.tramadol-50-mg.net/ tramadol http://www.worldwide-tramadol.net/ tramadol http://www.online-medications24x7.com/ tramadol http://www.bestonline-medication.com/ tramadol http://www.tramadol90.net/ tramadol http://www.tramadol-pills.net/ tramadol http://www.tramadolsite.net/ tramadol http://www.gethelp24x7.net/ tramadol http://www.onlinepharmacy-4u.net/ online pharmacy http://www.online-pharmacy-24x7.net/ online pharmacy http://www.online-pharmacy-4u.net/ online pharmacy http://www.worldwide-online-pharmacy.net/ online pharmacy http://www.online-shop-24x7.com/ online pharmacy http://www.bestonline-shopping.com/ online pharmacy http://www.onlinepharmacy2004.net/ online pharmacy http://www.online-pharmacy-pills-4u.net/ online pharmacy http://www.onlinepharmacysite.net/ online pharmacy http://www.shop24x7.net/ online pharmacy ...

Posted by: blackjack at August 2, 2004 09:35 AM | PERMALINK

In your free time, check some information about http://www.texas-hold-em-4u.com/ texas hold em http://www.texasholdem-4u.com/ texas hold em http://www.texas-hold-em-555.com/ texas hold em http://www.worldwide-holdem.com/ texas hold em http://www.online-deals24x7.com/ texas hold em http://www.bestdeals-winner.com/ texas hold em http://www.texasholdem777.net/ texas hold em http://www.texas-hold-em-winner.net/ texas hold em http://www.texasholdemsite.net/ texas hold em http://www.playandwin777.com/ texas hold em http://www.blackjack-4u.net/ blackjack http://www.black-jack-4u.net/ blackjack http://www.blackjack-777.net/ blackjack http://www.worldwide-games.net/ blackjack http://www.online-games24x7.com/ blackjack http://www.bestgames-winner.com/ blackjack http://www.blackjack777.net/ blackjack http://www.blackjack-winner.net/ blackjack http://www.blackjacksite.net/ blackjack http://www.playandwinit777.net/ blackjack http://www.tramadol-4u.net/ tramadol http://www.tramadol-24x7.net/ tramadol http://www.tramadol-50-mg.net/ tramadol http://www.worldwide-tramadol.net/ tramadol http://www.online-medications24x7.com/ tramadol http://www.bestonline-medication.com/ tramadol http://www.tramadol90.net/ tramadol http://www.tramadol-pills.net/ tramadol http://www.tramadolsite.net/ tramadol http://www.gethelp24x7.net/ tramadol http://www.onlinepharmacy-4u.net/ online pharmacy http://www.online-pharmacy-24x7.net/ online pharmacy http://www.online-pharmacy-4u.net/ online pharmacy http://www.worldwide-online-pharmacy.net/ online pharmacy http://www.online-shop-24x7.com/ online pharmacy http://www.bestonline-shopping.com/ online pharmacy http://www.onlinepharmacy2004.net/ online pharmacy http://www.online-pharmacy-pills-4u.net/ online pharmacy http://www.onlinepharmacysite.net/ online pharmacy http://www.shop24x7.net/ online pharmacy ...

Posted by: blackjack at August 2, 2004 09:37 AM | PERMALINK

hi

Posted by: penis enlargement at August 10, 2004 09:47 AM | PERMALINK

217 check out the hot blackjack at http://www.blackjack-p.com here you can play blackjack online all you want! So everyone ~SMURKLE~

Posted by: play blackjack at August 23, 2004 11:28 AM | PERMALINK

2950 Herie http://blaja.web-cialis.com is online for all your black jack needs. We also have your blackjack needs met as well ;-)

Posted by: blackjack at August 24, 2004 09:22 PM | PERMALINK

4687 check out http://texhold.levitra-i.com for texas hold em online action boodrow

Posted by: online texas hold em at August 26, 2004 11:21 AM | PERMALINK
Navigation
Contribute to Calpundit



Advertising
Powered by
Movable Type 2.63

Site Meter