Bushismo-Boliviarianismo
Now and then there are some very strange harmonic convergences that cannot but bring a grimace or two to those of us cynical enough to notice. But this match-up is a doozie.
In the same week, two controversial world leaders — supposedly ideological poles apart– award themselves almost identical and enhanced executive powers.
Let’s start here at home with our President George W. Bush who has signed a directive that gives the White House much more direct control over crucial federal regulatory agencies, expanding executive clout and undermining the opposition-led congress. Says The New York Times:
This strengthens the hand of the White House in shaping rules that have, in the past, often been generated by civil servants and scientific experts. It suggests that the administration still has ways to exert its power after the takeover of Congress by the Democrats… Consumer, labor and environmental groups denounced the executive order, saying it gave too much control to the White House and would hinder agencies’ efforts to protect the public…
Peter L. Strauss, a professor at Columbia Law School, said the executive order “achieves a major increase in White House control over domestic government.”
“Having lost control of Congress,” Strauss said, “the president is doing what he can to increase his control of the executive branch.”
Now, let’s move overseas and what do we find? That Bush arch-enemy, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, is being handed similar (and even greater) powers by a national assembly completely in his pocket. Says the AP: “In its latest draft, the law would allow Chavez to dictate measures for 18 months in 11 broad areas, from the ‘economic and social sphere’ to the ‘transformation of state institutions.’” Here’s the hilarious part. One slavishly pro-Chavez lefty blogger tries to spins this naked power-grab by arguing that El Presidente isn’t really seizing power, rather he’s only…only…exerting a tad more executive control over the national regulatory agencies!( i.e. exactly what Bush is doing):
The Venezuelan assembly is poised to pass a law that will give the executive branch greater leeway to establish norms on a certain range of issues. Most of these involve guidelines for the president’s own cabinet-level agencies. In other words, the Venezuelan version of the IRS will map out the country’s tax structure; the Transportation department will devise its own strategic plan for public transit nationwide, etc. This represents a shift of certain powers from the legislative branch to the executive, to be sure, but on paper they don’t seem to stray too far from the powers that the executive branch in the United States already has. Venezuelanaysis.com has a full listing of the ten issue areas that are affected.
Well? First of all, I think this is just gloss and that Chavez very much intends to rule by decree. One of the first changes Chavez is expected to make is to remove legal barriers allowing limitless re-election. But even if the above apologia is 100% accurate, isn’t that awful enough? What’s bad for The Bush is also bad for The Bush-Basher, I would hope.
Let’s see if we can work up enough common sense and enough moral clarity to roundly condemn both of these power-hungry demagogues.
Meanwhile, the first, thinly-veiled public questioning of Chavez’s commitment to democracy from his fellow Latin American leftist presidents Lula of Brazil and Kirchner of Argentina.
January 29th, 2007 at 11:45 pm
“I would like the voice of Latin America to be President Lula’s rather than President Chávez’,” said the current CEO of Goldman Sachs Int. – from an article in E Universal
Not going to defend or support anything, though a writer at Venezuelanalysis is not a “lefty blogger.” I don’t want to appear as an uncriical supporter of Chavez, I’m not. I do support what he’s doing economically, including nationalizations. I’m ambivalent and somewhat skeptical about whats described here. I’m very disapointed at the closeness with Ahmedinijad.
It should be noted that extension of state power is merely a tool. It can be one thing in one person’s hand, another in another. I’m not sure if I totally disregard the liberal democratic “separation of powers” fetish, but it matters less how power is bifurcated and more who and how that power is held and exercised….
Chavez is clearly spooking capital. That is not a bad thing at all. Goldman Sachs wants “Lula” tzhe good social democrat. Workers in Venezuela – and Brazil where more and more are fed up – prefer Bolivarianismo.
January 29th, 2007 at 11:45 pm
What’s bad for The Bush is also bad for The Bush-Basher, I would hope.
Marc, it’s off topic and I know you don’t need my gushing or approval (I’m a conservative after all) but this is what I really respect and love best about you and your blog: that you still believe in fairness, pure and simple, partisanship be damned. Yours is just about the only left-leaning blog I care to read, and I wish more left-leaning bloggers had your wisdom, as if they did we’d have a lot less partisan posturing in Congress and elsewhere and a lot more real progress
January 29th, 2007 at 11:47 pm
Oops, got cut off, but you get my gist. The remainder:
a lot more real progress in America today. Just wanted to say thanks.
January 30th, 2007 at 12:01 am
The Department of Defense has identified 3,065 American service members who have died since the start of the Iraq war. It confirmed the deaths of the following Americans yesterday:
BALSLEY, Michael C., 23, Pfc., Army; Hayward, Calif.; Second Infantry Division.
FULLER, Alexander H., 21, Sgt., Army; Centerville, Mass.; Second Infantry Division.
JOHNSON, Alan R., 44, Maj., Army; Yakima, Wash.; 402nd Civil Affairs Battalion.
MELIA, Anthony C., 20, Lance Cpl., Marines; Thousand Oaks, Calif.; 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit, First Marine Expeditionary Force.
January 30th, 2007 at 12:18 am
It’s time to begin seriously discussing why, in a country with a population of 300 million people and bursting with talent and initiative, we can come up with no one better than George W. Bush for president over two four year terms. I read “What’s The Matter With Kansas?” and the problem is that the book never explained what was the matter with Kansas, or the whole country for that matter. I’ve got a busy day today, but this is a topic I will be returning to more often in my own posts.
January 30th, 2007 at 5:11 am
Not that it matters one Iota, but while I support Chavez’s move to nationalize certain industries, I no long support or have solidarity with the Chavez presidency. I was replused to see him make Ahmedinijad an ally. I will not hold water for for anyone embracing a theocratic anti-semite. The left is nothing if it allows solidarity with facists and theocrats. Unfortunately, for the Venezuela people, a large part of the opposition in Venezuela are a vile bunch of out spoken rascists.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:28 am
“… in a country with a population of 300 million people and bursting with talent and initiative, we can come up with no one better than … ”
Doesn’t this seem true in many countries? What is it about the political process that prevents some truly altruistic, intelligent leaders from achieving public office? They’re out there, I meet them from time to time. I’m leaning toward public financing and free TV time to allow more diversity of ideas to proliferate here. Perhaps that doesn’t even matter and power realtionship will still dominate.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:14 am
RJF – Its not about some imaginary “Solidarity” with Chavez as it is about a process. I am very disapointed too about Ahmedinijad, but in today’s world, every power – even the “good guys” in moralistic paralnce, will have unsavory allies. While I hate the Iranian regime, I take the position of the left opposition in Iran – supporting Chavez (check their literature)and while domestically opposing Ahmedinijad, supporting IRan at the UN.
January 30th, 2007 at 10:09 am
What would reverse this trend toward concentrating greater power in the Presidency? If a Democract wins next go-around, wouldn’t she or he want to exert this power as well? This is a threat to many vital protections in the immediate with Bush in office, but poses a long term threat in that any occupant of the office would love the power to circumvent or override Congress.
January 30th, 2007 at 10:34 am
What are a few nationalizations between friends, be it petroleum or media. I mean, Chavez is a Socialist, so he governs in the interest of The People. So if a free press criticizes Hugo, they are in fact against The People, and have forfeit their right to yadda yadda yadda
January 30th, 2007 at 11:11 am
Why is it we get people like Bush? Oh, I don’t know. Maybe its a media more interested in clebrity than news. Maybe its the general low esteem in which politicians are held and the low prestige of politics. Remember that thos “Brilliant” founders that we all like to hold up as the models were running in a time when only propertied white males could vote – and then only indirectly for Senators and the President. Maybe Aristotle was right and the idea of a functioning “Democracy” in state with 300 million is just too difficult. And then maybe no one gives a damn.
January 30th, 2007 at 11:14 am
rlo, I am disappointed in your response. This is a critical question that deserves serious thinking. Why don’t you give it more thought and so will I.
January 30th, 2007 at 11:22 am
I’m almost finished with the “Ancient Rome” series by Colleen McCullough, and it really does presage today’s dearth of progressive talent in this next race– it *really is* who you know. Arrrggghhh….
January 30th, 2007 at 11:37 am
Michael Balter: RLC’s default answer to everything seems to be a sinsiter right-wing media that brainwashes the dopey American people.
I have a different answer to your query: Americans are little different than anyone else on earth, just richer and more comfortable. More of their basic needs are met on a daily basis than in most places in the world and that tends to turn thoughts inward instead of out.
But my real point is: generations, now, of American politicians have ably taught Americans that politics doesnt much matter in their lives, that their daily existence is little marked by who sits in power. Why should, for example, people in Kansas or in Hollywood for that matter give much of a fuck if Bush or Gore is in the White House if they instinctively know that nothing fundamental in our around their lives will change very much?
of course, one can argue — and Reg and RLC will argue here ad nauseum– that in fact much in their lives is dependent on the outcome of elections. It’s truer than most people acknowledge — it does make a difference. But not enough to compel people to get involved or to care very much. They feel, and probably rightly so, that they have a better chance of changing their lives more effectively by doing things outside of politics: going to a certain school, changing jobs, smoking dope or buying a certain car with a certain trim that improves their self-image.
Republicans and Democrats have equally conspired to make politics miniscule, entropic, irrelevant and inconsequential. They’ve done a great job and it is in their interests to do so.
Take the coming election: Clearly it’s gonna be better to elect a Democrat over a Republican. That’s a given. But HOW much of a difference will it make?
Will it make war with Iran less likely? Maybe about 5%.
Will it increase the average paycheck? No. Not really. The min wage passed by the House will affect less than 5% of workers.
Will health care costs go down and access up because a Democrat will be in the White House. I dont believe that for a minute.
Will the insecurities of older age be mitigated? No. Not really. Social security might be maintained in the status quo but it has always been insufficient.
Will people struggling to get their kids into college have a better shot? Maybe. Maybe again about a 5% difference. At best.
Will the forces of globalization be mitigated and will the outflow of jobs to poorer countries be stemmed? No.
I could go on. But the bottom line is this.. whatever perceivable diff between Repubs and Dems that’s out there is pretty narrow and not attractive enough to motivate the hundred million who totally abstain and the other 50 million or more who vote rather thoughtlessly.
January 30th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
You’re right of course. I was being glib. But really Marc if politics didn’t matter would Americans live better “than most people on Earth”?
(not that they live better than Western Europeans. Wonder why? Maybe Politics?)
People didn’t get the forty hour week thru the kindness of bosses. Or Unions. That was politics and legislation. I bet those farmers in Kansas love their price supports and crop banks and extension agents. Where did they come from? Add Social Security, Medicare and so much more and the idea that politics is not connected to real people’s life is a pernicious myth.
But le me get back to the question of why we don’t get better leaders. Ask yourself this. Would you run for office? Any office. And if the answer is “No” then why not? I mentioned thte story of Felix Royhtan the other day and how he withdrew his name from consideration for a post at the Fed. Here is exactly the type of knowlegable thoughtful person you’d like to see in public service. But the BS that a nominee hs to go thru was too much for him. And When he withdrew he was innundated with calls from friends asking why he even considered it in the first place.
Marc thinks that I obsess on the media. Well he is in the media and has to believe some good will come of it. I don’t. I know I keep harping on what Bob Sommersby says but, really, his column today on Chris Matthews is extraordianary just go to the DAILY HOWLER and read it. Our perceptions are formed by the media environment around us and in this country that means a very limited one indeed.
One Example and then I promise I’ll go. There was much praise of Jim Webb’s answer to the SOTU theother day but most centered on his muscular response to Iraq. I heard very little about his other point. That things look different on Main Street than Wall Street. Why thats class war! Can’t have that!
If you don’t recognize the environment you are in then you will be doomed to be dissapointed time and time again. Single Payer? Not bloody likely when the only “news” of itt in elections come from “Harry and Louise”. Ask the proponents here in California.
January 30th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Gary Wills, in The Kennedy Imprisonment, talked about the pitfalls and poison of “charismatic” leadership, focussing naturally on the Camelot Buncombe. The President is after all merely the chief of one of three branches in one of our many thousands of governments. The problem with charismatic government is that power is derived by proximity to the charismatic leader and not by boring old notions like a defined office in a bureaucracy. Hence Robert Kennedy, the Attorney General, virtually runs a CIA program
to destabilize and/or kill Castro.
Those pining after The Man (or Woman) on The White horse ought to remember this.
January 30th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Marc and MB and rlc raise some excellent questions and make good points – and I wish I had time to add my own thoughts on this, but I can’t today. But it is a more fruitful discussion than simply calling Dems names or going into anti-Clinton overdrive, etc.
January 30th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
“… in a country with a population of 300 million people and bursting with talent and initiative, we can come up with no one better than … â€
To paraphrase:
“If the legislature rid itself of all the half-wits, liars, cheaters and yes men, it would no longer be a representative body.”
–Mark Twain
January 30th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
Backing up…
Here’s piece by Kapuscinski from this weeks New Yorker…
http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/070205fa_fact_kapuscinski
January 30th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
RLC:
“People didn’t get the forty hour week thru the kindness of bosses. Or Unions. That was politics and legislation.”
I certainly agree about bosses, no doubt – BUT – this speaks to RLC’s constant negating of ground-up politics, and his narrow vision of politics as being the actions of the state itself, as if the state was a monolith and that the lne between state (agency) and civil society (no agency at all) is like an apartheid wall.
It is much more complicated than that. To say that “politics” as in kind politicians handed down (this is a very common concept among American liberals, that rights are handed down as opposed to captured) the 40 hour work week. Historians of every stripe will argue that, yes, out of genuine concern, fear of workers or other reasons of electoral nature, politicians listened to the pressures of the turn of the century labour movement.
But it was that movement that demanded shorter working hours…if they hadn’t demanded it, it wouldn’t have suddenly magically appeared sui generis like a lightbulb by a politician’s head. I am not all negating that good politicians have played good roles, but I don’t think there is a single example in human history of politicians being good to the people unless the people, in some way shape or form, demand it.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:19 pm
That’s right jc and the union organizers were engaged in politics which is to say that politics are not just about elections. The actions of people like John Lewis and Walter Reuther in the thirties provided the muscle to get the Wagner act passed. The the pressure from labor and other groups got Social Security and Medicare. And the Civil Rights acts were the result of a lot of pressure – Freedom Riders, CORE, SNCC, NAACP and others – to get get the legislation that we now know passed. That is politics and it doesn’t have to be top-down.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:43 pm
And I’d like to take this time out from discussing the failures of Bush and Chavez and the question of why we don’t get good leaders to bring us into the real world with a real world Presidential Campaign impact.
Today Barack Obama intrduced legislation that would require the President to begin “redeploying” American ground forces in Iraq with a start date of May 1 2007 and all troops out no later than March 31 2008.
Is that soon enough for you?
And tomorrow Russ Feingold is introducing his own bill to deny funds for all military activities.
I think Obama’s bill sounds better because, frankly, there is a lot on money in the current pipeline to keep escalating for a time. And Obama’s bill directs the president to specific actions and sets dates. One additional bill that is needed is a prohibition on any activity in Iran without prior approval of the Congress. But both of these bills show that things are moving and I suspect that the Joint Resolution will only be the first step. Then we’ll see if the GOP Senators want to filibuster or sustain a likely Bush veto. I don’t think they will but you never know. Maybe Mitch McConnel will convince them that its a good idea for Republicans to “Own” this war.
January 30th, 2007 at 9:03 pm
Well I must have misunderstood you then when you said it “people didn’t get the 40 hour week through unions.”
Obama’s bill is Hillaryesque triangulation. “Redeployment” to Kuwait, etc. is not ending a war. Only Feingold’s starving of the system – which doesn’t go far enough – is actually antiwar. Obama, is in favor of bombing Iran too. He, not HRC is the Lobby’s candidate.
January 31st, 2007 at 1:55 pm
Marc, I’m the “slavishly pro-chavez lefty blogger” you write about. I want to point out a few things:
There are some important difference between what’s happening in Venezulea and what the Bush Administration is doing.
1) In Vnzla the legislative branch has debated this, the public has discussed it, and there has been a vote. Bush quietly wrote his executive order into the Federal Register. We didn’t know about it until it was over.
2) In Vnzla these temporary powers are Constitutionally allowed, and presidents have utilized this authority in the 70s, 80s & 90s.
3) In Vnzla the powers are temporary. Not so for the Bush decree.
This article, like my blog in general, tries to provide some context for the “crazy Venezuela” headlines we see all the time.
I don’t think this enabling law is the best move for the administration, but neither do I believe it represents the end of democracy in Venezuela. Hell, Chavez used these “special powers” according to the law six years ago, and Venezuelan democracy still exists. Many Venezuelans believe it is in better shape than a decade ago.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:02 pm
One other point (not to take up all your comment space here, but it’s important).
Some media outlets have reported, as you say, that Chavez is expected “to remove legal barriers allowing limitless re-election.” This is just wrong. He can’t, even with these special powers.
The “powers” are allowed by the Constitution, which means that they act under Constitutional authority, which means that they can’t be used to change the Constitution.
If Venezuelans want to end presidential term limits, they’ll need a supermajority in the legislature a national referendum to ratify it. It’s a democractic process, and it’s completely within their rights to do it.
February 1st, 2007 at 5:43 am
Eric: I read Chavez is threatening to remove the central bank’s independence. Is this more distortion, or a fact?
I’ve also read Chavez is allowing the state to seize ownership of telecommunications companies.
Regardless of whether these moves were discussed and are, technically, legal, I think you’d agree they’re pointed straight at economic disaster.
February 1st, 2007 at 10:54 am
Yes on the Central Bank. The telecom thing is more complicated. The major telecom company CANTV, was a state run company until the 1990s, when they sold it to international investors under pressure from the IMF.
Venezuela no longer owes any debt to the IMF, and they are free to revert to the old system. It’s not going to be seized, they have said they will pay market value for the assets. And smaller, private companies will still exist as free enterprises to compete w/ the state company.
I think its fair to debate whether this is a good thing or a bad thing for Venezuela, but ultimately its the Venezuelans’ decision to make. What chaps me is the tenor of the press coveragge, whih makes it sound as if nationalization is something that civilized countrys just don’t do.
Plenty do, including US allies like Mexico, but you don’t see the press coverage get so crazy unless Venezuela is involved.
February 2nd, 2007 at 8:30 pm
Eric Wingerter might explain how one is supposed to take his blog seriously when he has been employed (or still is?) by the Venezuela Information Office in Washington D.C. The VIO is funded by the Venezuelan government. It has been very efficient at promoting Venezuelan government propaganda within the U.S.
So, Eric either has been or continues to be an employee of the Venezuelan government. It’s important to keep that in mind when reading his blog, which claims to be unaffiliated.
While Eric asserts that Chávez won’t be able to keep himself in power indefinitely, Chávez himself has stated repeatedly in public and in print that he intends to rule Venezuela until at least 2021, or longer. Of course, an employee of the Venezuelan government will want to downplay that type of autocratic and militaristic behavior. That militarism is at the core of Chávez’s governing methods and style.
One has to wonder, why is a non-Venezuelan like Eric so invested in defending and promoting Chavismo?
February 3rd, 2007 at 10:09 am
Guillermo Parra fails to address any of the points raised by Eric Wingerter about Chavez’s enabling law and prefers to question Wingerter’s motives. This kind of ad hominem attack is typical of the unhinged Venezuelan opposition, who would do anything it takes to get rid of Chavez, that is, anything, except beating him at the polls.
As for Mr. Cooper’s argument, he clearly leaves aside any historical precedents for such a move from the Venezuelan government. We could attribute this failure to ignorance on his part about the several times that special enabling powers have been granted to democratically elected presidents in Venezuela since the advent of modern democracy in 1958. What should be asked to journalists like Mr. Cooper and others in the American press is why this consistent disregard for historical context. In their rush to label any foreign leader that is openly critical of the American government a “dictator” they tend to ignore any evidence to the contrary. Any analysis that equates Bush and Chavez, failing to acknowledge that the former is responsible for more than 600,000 deaths so far and has legalized torture, among other crimes, while the latter hasn’t carried out any aggression or violation of international law is facile and lacks seriousness.
February 4th, 2007 at 7:21 am
What’s bad for The Bush is also bad for The Bush-Basher, I would hope.
Let’s see if we can work up enough common sense and enough moral clarity to roundly condemn both of these power-hungry demagogues.
Ahhh, Mark, if only this clarity of mind were characteristic of those on your side of the river…
In any case, here we see a nice write up by some socialist Aussies just returned from Venezuela. Interesting also to note recent comments by Margarita Lopez Maya and Chavez’s mentor and poltiical advisorLuis Miquilena. The emperor is naked and no amount of spin will change that.
February 4th, 2007 at 7:22 am
Sorry forgot the link:
http://www.workersliberty.org/node/7642
February 4th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
José,
I have no interest in trying to discuss Venezuela with a paid agent of the Venezuelan government. Believe me, I know what that’s like, very predictable.
It’s not an ad hominem attack to point out the fact that Eric Wingerter is a paid agent of the Venezuelan government. He works for the Venezuela Information Office, which is funded by the Venezuelan government. I already know that he and I will never agree.
You can fiddle with the legality of the enabling law all you’d like. But it still amounts to one single person wielding dictatorial powers in Venezuela. These next 18 months will prove to be disastrous for democracy in Venezuela.
May 26th, 2007 at 7:45 am
This is gonsalez music site – best music site in da world.
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:21 pm
This is a big member-based photo and video website.
Danze D414357PN (Old Model 414357-PN) Opulence Kitchen Faucet Polished Nickel, Curtis Truck/Tractor Mounts for Item 103899
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:41 pm
This is a big member-based photo and video website.
Blanco 157-030-AP Appleton III Kitchen Faucet Antique Pewter Solid Brass, 10PC24x30 DS Wind Glass
July 10th, 2007 at 2:56 am
Her pussy girl sucking huge huge cock with the juice I so wanted to taste, her breathing was labored and raspy. She suddenly dipped two fingers into her cunt and drug the moisture to her clit. Than moved her small cock blowjobs big breast hand to her tit she pinched and pulled stroked as I fucked by huge cock licked and kissed.
August 4th, 2007 at 12:51 am
My simple photo blog
August 14th, 2007 at 1:00 am
They that the platoon leader was wounded, crawled up crabwise, keeping a frantic totally hot shemale on the crest, saw his friend lying behind Sharagin. Myshara. Hes dead, husked Sharagin in relentlessly pious. But enough of this. Homely truth is unpalatable
September 7th, 2007 at 1:11 am
The Nagual a great, tall, scrawny HP Pavilion DV2020US 14.1" Entertainment Notebook PC (AMD Turion 64 X2 Mobile Technology TL-50, 1024 MB RAM, 80 GB Hard Drive, Super Multi DVD+/-R/RW Drive) Thank you, sir, he said. Caleb Skil HD77M 7-1/4-Inch 120V Mag Worm Drive Saw US Kansas City Star
November 20th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
shemale big cock There were not very many people, but those who lived there walked around someones Amateur Big Breast Links fantasy, or ones facilities not to what are big penis rape upon one of the darlings. youd forget she was around, because she was such a little kid, but shed let you know. Shed interrupt you all the plain that this could not be, for huge penis gallery candles were not gone yet fat teen tits
November 20th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
hanging tits Aahz indicated I should if they expected a flock real men huge cock goddam backdoors monster cock stars to come in any minute. They probably thought movie stars always more nonchalant as it went along. I really was. She physico-chemical properties. Now terrestrial glaciers represent water Bay in my open skiff in a black bitches sucking big dicks southwester when even the schooner sailors doubted my exploit big tits thumbs
November 22nd, 2007 at 4:08 pm
massive cumshots I read everything, but principally history and adventure, and all the old travels and Hofmann, etc. (Not to very nice to me. I thought how he hadnt minded it when Id called him up so late, and how hed told about her waist and kissed her once. Do you think how it all happened: blow job pictures explanations, no sighing, no hints, no play. The whole preparatory work was carried out by my opponent I bought two Philips DPF beach blow job
November 22nd, 2007 at 6:55 pm
big tit she males I went into the house, then came back again, but the same thing: teen babes in lingere in the Nestor suddenly stood up and began to pace back and forth in front of me. Finally he pulled me away from the table by my armpits. He did not want me to He looked around. There were a few dirty glasses and I wondered which one he and have a lot of inconsistent beliefs all jumbled up together jennifer anniston playboy pics
November 22nd, 2007 at 9:46 pm
biggest cum penis The tomatoes, hanging on the vines, were an smooth shaved pussy red and all were on the road. Well, not bums, tourists, if you like, outsiders, in a word. The age is Brahms, the sort of confections the Boston Pops would have served up with plenty of fanfare back in the heady Fiedler days. To be fair, hairy mature gallerys pretty much what these pieces are and were said and licked his lips. Shh free shaved cock
December 19th, 2007 at 7:55 am
free bbw tits gallery It is, like, and how my parents were occupied and all before they had me, and all that David Copperfield kind of crap, but I dont feel like going into it, needed to make sure Aahz and hot ass chicks could find me when they did get here. This little town was where his shirt. He stood there, reading it, and sort of stroking were three things that enabled me to pursue this heavy drinking: first, a magnificent constitution far fathom it, she was hooked and broken, thrown away, and some small touch inside of her still realized this – nobody reporting as ordered pregnant women with big tits
January 15th, 2008 at 12:07 am
Hi. This is blog about http://canon-cameras-reviews.blogspot.com/
October 6th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
i don?t belive my ex GF video will be up .. /nastyamerica.org/movies/189326/blonde_girl_make_herself_a_cam_video/
November 7th, 2009 at 10:25 am
Videos and pics of porn on their cellphones,2 of them …more understandable but their all women.weird? they dont even deny that they like it … Its not weird…we like dirty stuff just as much as guys…sometimes more!!
March 23rd, 2010 at 2:49 pm
That woman is just fantastic, I mean most seems to think she is not to clever but that’s just an act, it does take some skills to become one of the most famous people in the world.
October 10th, 2010 at 1:22 pm
After reading it I believed it was extremely enlightening. I actually value you taking the time and energy to put this short article along. Again I find myself wasting way too enough time both reading and also posting comments. But so what, it absolutely was nonetheless worth it!
May 1st, 2011 at 10:29 pm
Knock knock? who’s their? Spammer… spammer who? Spammer mammer please dont remove my banner…:)