The Obama File

Discussion in 'Politics' started by eyeswideshut, Oct 5, 2011.

  1. eyeswideshut Registered Senior Member

    For some reason Tiassa hasnt put up this file yet, so I took the liberty to do it.
    Here we go...

    Obama on Fire at Human Rights Campaign Fundraising Dinner
    Sunday, October 2, 2011

    Yesterday night, President Barack Obama gave a speech at the HRC Fundraising Dinner, entirely consisting of gays and lesbians. The crowd strongly applaud Obama when he mentioned the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

    But the most electric reaction, however, came when Obama sharply criticized the GOP presidential candidates for staying silent when audience members at a debate booed a gay soldier who asked a question about DADT.

    "We don't believe in the kind of smallness that says it's okay for a stage full of political leaders -- one of whom could end up being the president of the United States -- being silent when an American soldier is booed. We don't believe in that," said Obama to loud cheers and a standing ovation.

    "We don't believe in standing silent when that happens. We don't believe in them being silent since. You want to be commander in chief? You can start by standing up for the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States, even when it's not politically convenient. We don't believe in a small America. We believe in a big America -- a tolerant America, a just America, an equal America -- that values the service of every patriot."

    Will this move secure much of the gay community votes ?
    I think this will be appealing to liberals also.
    Pretty smart move I think because this propably dont cost much votes since
    conservatives are pretty tightly aligned against him anyway.

    President Obama: Fighting for the American Jobs Act
    Saturday, October 1, 2011

    In this week’s address, President Obama told the American people that it has been nearly three weeks since he sent Congress his jobs bill, and now it is time for Congress to send it back so that it can be signed into law. Economists agree that the American Jobs Act will spur hiring and boost the economy, and it will give workers and small businesses tax cuts, get construction workers back to work rebuilding our roads and bridges, and put more teachers in classrooms and cops on the streets. Too many Americans are struggling and need help now, and so Republicans and Democrats should come together without delay to pass the American Jobs Act.

    Remarks of President Barack Obama
    Weekly Address
    The White House
    October 1, 2011

    Hello, everyone. It’s been almost three weeks since I sent the American Jobs Act to Congress – three weeks since I sent them a bill that would put people back to work and put money in people’s pockets. This jobs bill is fully paid for. This jobs bill contains the kinds of proposals that Democrats and Republicans have supported in the past. And now I want it back. It is time for Congress to get its act together and pass this jobs bill so I can sign it into law.

    Some Republicans in Congress have said that they agree with certain parts of this jobs bill. If so, it’s time for them to tell me what those proposals are. And if they’re opposed to this jobs bill, I’d like to know what exactly they’re against. Are they against putting teachers and police officers and firefighters back on the job? Are they against hiring construction workers to rebuild our roads and bridges and schools? Are they against giving tax cuts to virtually every worker and small business in America?

    Economists from across the political spectrum have said that this jobs bill would boost the economy and spur hiring. Why would you be against that? Especially at a time when so many Americans are struggling and out of work.

    This isn’t just about what I think is right. It’s not just about what a group of economists think is right. This is about what the American people want. Everywhere I go, they tell me they want action on jobs. Every day, I get letters from Americans who expect Washington to do something about the problems we face.

    Full speech here

    Havent seen much talk about this in here.
    How this act is funded and what are the short/long term economic effects ?
    What are republicans view on this bill ?
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. 786 Searching for Truth Valued Senior Member

    Not nearly as good as Tiassa's threads. One could do a quite good job attacking Obama if they want to, and make a thread comparable to hers.

    PS: But only an undeniable racist would do such a thing

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    This video (an ad run by the Minnesota Majority) does a pretty good job of that.

    Obama by the numbers
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Highly misleading, madanthonywayne.
  8. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    Ironically, it was Republican leader Mitch McConnell who tried to bring Obama's bill up for a vote, but he was blocked by none other than the senate majority leader, Harry Reid.
    Why? Because Reid knew that Obama couldn't even get enough Democrats to vote for the bill to pass it, let alone any Republicans. Even Democrats are losing faith in government spending as a cure all for the economy.
  9. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    A couple of things, one the numbers are off. Two it was very blatently misleading and intentionally so. There was this little thing called the Great Recession in full bloom when Obama entered office. And when asked the question about it the money had been sent and didn't work, Obama had not spent a dime of federal dollars as he had only been in office a few weeks.

    Obama by the numbers forgot to mention that oil prices are down from $4 plus dollars per gallon as it was under the previous Republican administration. Oh, and let's not forget that when Obama took office the nation had lost 4 million jobs and was loosing jobs at rate of almost a million jobs a month. And let us not forget that under the Obam administration, the nation went from loosing almost a million jobs to adding a 100k jobs consistently month after month for more than a year.

    And let us not forget that Obama changed the accounting games used by Republicans to keep the deficit low - under report the deficits. Obama stopped all the off funding used by the previous Republican administration in order to not report their huge budget deficits (e.g. the wars, national disasters, etc.). Obama should get kudos for dragging the problem out into the light instead of sweeping it under the rug as is Republican predecessor did.

    One other little fact, let us not forget that when Obama took office the economy was shrinking at a rate of 9 percent per year. After six months in office, the economy reversed course and began growing at a 2-3 percent rate.
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2011
  10. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Well that is the spin Republicans area trying to put on the deal. But the truth of the matter is thus:

    "was a maneuver by McConnell to try to set up a politically embarrassing vote for Democrats; Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) hasn't yet secured the support of his full caucus of the jobs bill, partially because of some of the measures used to finance the $447 billion price tag.

    Because of that, Reid promptly objected to holding a vote now, arguing there was other legislation pending before the Senate. As long as Republicans in the House, refuse to allow a vote on the bill, it matters little what happens in the Senate.

    "We need to move to this right away. There is no question about that. But to tack this onto the China currency manipulation legislation is nothing more than a political stunt. We all know that," he said" - MSNBC

    This is just normal politics in the Senate. Now in the House it is a different story. The real de facto Speaker of the House, Eric Cantor, has stated the president's bill is dead on arrival in the House. He will not let it hit the floor for an up or down vote.
  11. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    As already said, that video is a twisting of facts and statistics in an attempt to make Obama look bad... the simple truth is he's simply getting the fallout from a cascade failure that was ALREADY well in place before he took office... but then again, statistics are EASY to make say whatever you want... *shrug*
  12. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    Bad news for Obama:

    And there's more:
  13. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Last edited: Oct 6, 2011
  14. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    And again, we see statistics lie - I would wager my hard earned money that if 90% of the people who answered as "highly dissatisfied" (excluding the biased biggots who wouldn't be happy no matter what simply due to party lines) understood what was really going on and how the delay in economic reaction was... they'd be singin a different tune.
  15. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    The economy certianly has room for improvement as we are still, along with the rest of the world, suffering through the effects of the Great Recession of 2008. I think the big advantage Obama has over the Republican/Tea Party is the slate of potential candidates he is running against.

    And I think that fact is not lost on the Republican money masters. That is why we have Wall Street Republican billionaires still trying to get people like Governor Christie to run for president even at this late hour.
  16. eyeswideshut Registered Senior Member

    You better keep that racist tongue of yours in check, be politically correct and attack only on the white half of the man.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  17. 786 Searching for Truth Valued Senior Member

    I'm being sarcastic. Just saying the community here doesn't take long to use the racist card. That if anyone were to create a thread that was a real attack on Obama (this thread is too nice), they'd be a racist in no time (not by me).

    Don't go after him, you're only inviting nonsensical rants which will never end until you surrender out of the frustration of American political debate which is nothing more than a Football match. The teams are Red and Blue, and the debaters are the senseless fans cheering on rampant stupidity without any thought; being taken up by the shear madness and adrenaline of the crowd which has taken away any level of sanity that may exist.

    *Go Obama. Go go go!!!!! The crowd goes wild.... The other side 'Go Bush go. go. go!!! and the crowd goes wild*... Wild they are

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    By the way, atm I agree with those defending Obama (*

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    shock amongst his defenders*). He is not responsible for the condition of this economy, and so all those number really are misleading as others have suggested. What I would say though is the policy Obama has followed will inevitably create another problem, perhaps not on his watch (so numbers will keep getting better), but on another President's watch. That is what the policy of bailout of Fed printing money does IMO. And if at that time the President is Republican, these very same people will start blaming him for the problems using the same type of videos. None of them will realize that the system itself is bad, and the President's were simply following 'conventional' economics which is being told to them by their expert economists.

    This is why I don't attack President Obama on the economy, but if he did something specific to make it bad, like Bush did by forcing companies to make bad home mortgage loans, I would criticize him on that. But Bush did many things wrong. He introduced tax cuts (which was good) BUT no spending cuts but increase in spending (and those wars) which leads to an overall BAD. It would have been better not to have those tax cuts if they weren't going to cut spending. Deficit financing is worst than higher taxes.

    Obama actually makes sense when he says they should raise taxes (but I question what they will do with those taxes- see my last line below), because they really have no plans on cutting spending, Democrat or Republican. All those 'cuts' are from proposed increases so thats just semantics, thus its a better idea to raise taxes if no one in government is serious about cutting spending. In the end though, the debt will be extreme burden on the economy, the temporary 'betterment' will lead to a extraordinary collapse. And whoever the President is at that time will be held responsible for it, which in my eyes is complete bullshit. Its the policies of all the previous President's of massive spending that will lead to it. I can't possibly attack 1 President for the economy and be 'fair' in my assessment.

    And I wouldn't want to resort to Football match debate to say 'he did it' which is most likely what the American debate will be and most likely the direction of this thread.

    I urge the government to cut spending drastically (not from proposed increase), and if they can't do that (means a failed leadership), then raise taxes. Although raising taxes will hurt the economy it is still better than deficits which will hurt the economy even more. But this just means raising taxes is the 'lesser of two evils'. The only best option is to cut spending and cut taxes. First priority would be to cut spending, the tax cuts can wait, until they are not running deficits.

    Republicans arguing for tax cuts without accompanied spending cuts that compensate or go beyond the tax revenues lost, should be kicked out of office for pandering and rampant stupidity.

    Democrats arguing for tax increases so they can spend more, and not use the increased tax revenues to 'save' and put against the debt, should likewise be kicked out of office for pandering and rampant stupidity.

    And for god sake President Obama, end these wars. Thats the one thing you can do without Congress.
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2011
  18. eyeswideshut Registered Senior Member

    I hear you. In the Bush era it was the Patriot card.
    Its been interesting to watch how the tables have turned, like defending the goverment in same issues that were before elections reprehensible and attacking the goverment in issues that were before elections justified. Politics as usual I guess.

    I´m not planning to go after him, it was just odd that there wasnt file on him, maybe there isnt anything to discuss about hes policies ?
    Thats what I´m after, what he stand for and how it shows in hes policies, I dont go after the man himself because in my opinion hes just a tool like many presidents before him.
    Its interesting to see though to where this thread is going to, I hope civil argumentations to the point, that could be against the odds heavily I know.
    Paul file was wild reading, kudos to you for the effort, it was pretty big task.

    Yes, he is a lawyer so real hardcore economics are out of reach I think.
    Its interesting to see what promises he can deliver before hes time runs out, you know the change and all that.
    Attacking him would be fruitless effort, no matter is there valid point or not, unless one enjoys to be belittled, ridiculed and patronazed.

    I know you were sarcastic, I was just kidding

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  19. wlminex Banned Banned

    . . . that's the liberal way . . . play the race card!
  20. 786 Searching for Truth Valued Senior Member

    ^I was being sarcastic

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  21. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    As you see fit

    By all means, certainly do. I didn't because Obama is not presently in a nomination contest.

    Candidate files are intended as overview threads; the idea is that instead of occupying the front page of the subforum with a multitude of threads pertaining to any individual candidate, people can build a running dossier on each candidate; thus a Cain File, Paul File, Perry File, Romney File, &c.

    To the other, this never works, because each candidate has their shills that are afraid their simplistic advocacy, or even advertising for a candidate might get lost in a larger thread.

    And that's fine, too. The multitude of threads, I mean. You know, if it's what people want. Sure, we might chortle at the simplicity of this, or the stupidity of that, or even more so at the desperation of the other; but, in the end, it's left to each as they see fit, even through shut eyes.

    And, as you demonstrate, sometimes it's not really about the candidate, but another person in our virtual community. It's just a matter of any given member's priorities.
  22. eyeswideshut Registered Senior Member

    He isnt ? My bad, I thought he was since everybody speculates hes second term and all that. Thats why I went to the source and the name of the bloc (barackobama2012) with its content got me fooled that he is in the race.

    That was my understanding about it.

    You think I´m after you ? Sweet. Although I disliked your style in Paul thread I really wanted to just see whats going on with Obamas run and open up discussion.
    You havent see me labeling all of the Obama supporters (insert insults) for actions of few or the man himself, have you ?

    I value my time so that I try not to invest it in vanities, unlike you implied.
    Believe me, I would have lot to say about lots of people here, been reading this site for years, so I pretty much know who is what, but, why bother ?

    So far in these elections Obama and Paul are the only ones that interests me, and Cain somewhat because he is new to me.
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2011
  23. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Obama, Congress, and the Jobs Bill

    Giving Up: Obama Presses Congress to Pass Jobs Bill

    President Obama yesterday held his first press conference since July, hoping to put his jobs bill center stage.

    Next week the Senate will vote on the American Jobs Act. And I think by now I’ve made my views pretty well known. Some of you are even keeping a tally of how many times I’ve talked about the American Jobs Act.

    And the reason I keep going around the country talking about this jobs bill is because people really need help right now, our economy really needs a jolt right now. This is not a game. This is not the time for the usual political gridlock.

    The problems Europe is having today could have a very real effect on our economy at a time when it’s already fragile. But this jobs bill can help guard against another downturn if the situation in Europe gets any worse. It’ll boost economic growth, it’ll put people back to work.

    And by the way, this is not just my belief. This is what independent economists have said -- not politicians, not just people in my administration, independent experts who do this for a living have said this jobs bill have a significant effect for our economy and for middle-class families all across America.

    And what these independent experts have also said is that if we don’t act, the opposite will be true: There will be fewer jobs, there will be weaker growth.

    The press leapt to the occasion, with several questions focusing on Obama's approach to the bill:

    • [Ben Feller, AP] ... And, secondly, on your jobs bill, the American people are sick of games. You mentioned games in your comments. They want results. Wouldn’t it be more productive to work with the Republicans on a plan that you know could pass Congress as opposed to going around the country talking about your bill and singling out, calling out Republicans by name?

    • [Chuck Todd, NBC] Before I get to my question, do we assume by how you’re talking about the bill in the Senate that you are OK with the change in how to pay for it -- the surtax -- the 5.6 percent surtax on millionaires?

    • [Chuck Todd, NBC] Are you worried about your own powers of persuasion and maybe that the American public is not listening to you any more?

    • [Bill Plante, CBS] Anybody on Capitol Hill will say that there’s no chance that the American Jobs Act in its current state passes either house. And you’ve been out on the campaign trail banging away at them saying, “Pass this bill” .... And it begins, sir, to look like you’re campaigning and like you’re following the Harry Truman model against the Do- Nothing Congress instead of negotiating. Are you negotiating? Will you?

    • [Bill Plante, CBS] Is this kind of public pressure the only leverage you have, sir?

    Responding to Bill Feller, the president explained the political problem as he understood it:

    Now, with respect to working with Congress, I think it’s fair to say that I have gone out of my way in every instance -- sometimes at my own political peril and to the frustration of Democrats -- to work with Republicans to find common ground to move this country forward.

    In every instance, whether it was during the lame-duck session, when we were able to get an agreement on making sure that the payroll tax was cut in the first place and making sure that unemployment insurance was extended, to my constant efforts during the debt ceiling to try to get what’s been called the grand bargain, in which we had a balanced approach to actually bringing down our deficit and debt in a way that wouldn’t -- wouldn’t hurt our recovery.

    Each time, what we’ve seen in games-playing, a preference to try to score political points rather than actually get something done on the part of the other side.

    And that has been true not just over the last six months. That’s been true over the past two and a half years.

    Now, the bottom line is this.

    Our doors are open and what I’ve done over the last several weeks is to take the case to the American people so that they understand what’s at stake. It is now up to all the senators and hopefully all the members of the House to explain to their constituencies why they would be opposed to common-sense ideas that historically have been supported by Democrats and Republicans in the past.

    Why would you be opposed to tax cuts for small businesses and tax cuts for American workers? You know, my understanding is that for the last decade, they’ve been saying we need to lower taxes for folks. Well, why wouldn’t we want to do that through this jobs bill?

    Obama offered long answers, spending a good deal of consideration on Plante's query. To Chuck Todd, the president noted, of the surtax proposal—

    We’ve always said that we would be open to a variety of ways to pay for it. We put forward what we thought was a solid approach to paying for the jobs bill itself.

    Keep in mind, though, that what I’ve always says is that not only do we have to pay for the jobs bill, but we also still have to do more in order to reduce the debt and the deficit.

    So, the -- the approach that the Senate is taking I’m comfortable with, in order to deal with the jobs bill. We’re still going to need to reform this tax code to make sure that we’re closing loopholes, closing special-interest tax breaks, making sure that the very simple principle, what we call the Buffett rule, which is that millionaires and billionaires aren’t paying lower tax rates than ordinary families -- that that’s in place.

    So there’s going to be more work to do with respect to making our tax system fair and just and promoting growth, but in terms of the immediate action of getting this jobs bill passed, I’m fine with the approach that they’re taking.

    —and explained that, "Well, no," he is not worried that the American people are not listening to him anymore:

    You know, what we’ve seen is the American people respond very enthusiastically to the specific provisions of the jobs bill. They are very skeptical about Congress’ ability to act right now, and that’s understandable.

    You know, the American people are very frustrated. They’ve been frustrated for a long time. They don’t get a sense that folks in this town are looking out for their interests. They get a sense that folks in this town are thinking about their own jobs, their own careers, their own advancement, their party interests.

    And so if the question is, Chuck, are people feeling cynical and frustrated about the prospects of positive action in this city, absolutely.

    And, you know, I can go out there and make speeches, but until they actually see action, some of that cynicism is going to be there.

    As you said, during the debt ceiling debate, you know, a very solid majority -- I think maybe even higher than 70 percent -- agreed with the approach that I talked about, which was we should have a balanced approach to deficit reduction.

    Responding to Bill Plante, President Obama continued to press Congress:

    I am always open to negotiations. What is also true is they need to do something.

    I mean, I’m -- I’m -- look, the -- Bill, I think it is very clear that if members of Congress come in and say, “All right, we want to build infrastructure. Here’s the way we think we can do it. We want to put construction workers back to work. We’ve got some ideas,” I am ready, eager to work with them.

    They say -- you know, “We’ve got this great idea for putting teachers back in the classroom. It’s a little different than what you’ve proposed in the jobs bill,” I’m ready, eager to work with them.

    But that’s not what we’re hearing right now.

    I mean, what we’re hearing is that their big ideas, the ones that make sense are ones we’re already doing. They’ve given me a list of, “Well, here -- here’s the Republican job creation ideas: Let’s pass free-trade agreements.”

    It’s great that we’re passing these free-trade agreements. We’ve put them forward. I expect bipartisan support. I think it’s going to be good for the American economy. But it’s not going to meet the challenge of 9 percent unemployment or an economy that is currently weakening ....

    .... So what I’ve tried to do is say, “Here are the best ideas I’ve heard, not just from partisans but from independent economists. These are the ideas most likely to create jobs now and strengthen the economy right now. And that’s what the American people are looking for.”

    And the response from Republicans has been, “No,” although they haven’t given a good reason why they’re opposed to putting construction workers back on the job or teachers back in the classroom.

    And if you ask them, “Well, OK, if you’re not for that, what are you for? Trade’s already been done, patent reform has been done, what else?” the answer we’re getting right now is, “Well, we’re going to roll back all these Obama regulations.”

    So their big economic plan to put people back to work right now is to roll back financial protections and allow banks to charge hidden fees on credit cards again or weaken consumer watchdogs?

    Or, alternatively, they’ve said, “We’ll roll back regulations that make sure we’ve got clean air and clean water, eliminate the EPA.”

    Does anybody really think that that is going to create jobs right now and meet the challenges of a global economy that are -- that is -- that is weakening, with all these forces coming into play?

    I mean, here -- here’s a good question. Here’s a little homework assignment for folks.

    Go ask the Republicans what their jobs plan is if they’re opposed to the American Jobs Act, and have it scored -- have it assessed by the same independent economists that assessed our jobs plan.

    These independent economists say that we could grow the economy as much as 2 percent and as many as 1.9 million workers would be back on the job. I think it would be interesting to have them do a similar assessment -- same people. Some of these folks, by the way, traditionally have worked for Republicans, not just Democrats. Have those economists evaluate what over the next two years the Republican jobs plan would do.

    I’ll be interested in the answer. I think everybody here -- I see some smirks in the audience because you know that it’s not going to be real robust.

    And so, Bill, the question then is: Will Congress do something?

    If Congress does something, then I can’t run against a do-nothing Congress. If Congress does nothing, then it’s not a matter of me running against them. I think the American people will run them out of town because they are frustrated and they know we need to do some -- something big and something bold.

    The president scored a few sound bites that made heavy rotation in cable and radio news; namely, trying to work with Congress to his own political peril, the homework assignment, and running against a do-nothing Congress.

    Meanwhile, Republicans did not wait for the president to start speaking before firing back. CBS News reports:

    Just before President Obama took to the podium on Thursday for a press conference at the White House, House Speaker John Boehner posed a question, taking a shot at the president for campaigning more than he is working with Republicans on a plan for the economy.

    "Why have you given up on the country and decided to campaign full time instead of doing what the American people sent us all here to do... to find common ground and deal with the big challenges that face our economy and our country?" Boehner asked at the Washington Ideas Forum.

    "Nothing has disappointed me more than to watch what's happened over the past five weeks... to watch the president of the United States give up on governing, give up on leading and spend full time campaigning," he said ....

    .... "All year I've reached out to the president," Boehner said across town at the Newseum. "We've moved dozens of bills over to the United States Senate that are just sitting there. That would help create jobs in America."

    "Yet the president, some 14 months before the election, throws in the towel," he continued. "We're legislating, he's campaigning."

    It is a curious pre-emptive rejoinder; as Republicans face mounting public criticism for their opposition to the jobs bill, and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor actually blocked the bill from House debate—acknowledging that the bill is dead—Speaker Boehner argues that President Obama, in promoting a bill intended to put 1.9 million people to work and revitalize the economy, has "given up" on the country and governing.

    Obama's path to re-election seems to be clarifying: As has long been expected, he needs to make progress on employment and economic issues. And, as has long been known, the Republicans are determined to prevent that progress—to keep unemployment high and the economy in the gutter—in hopes of winning the White House in 2012.

    While the president's supporters have long expressed frustration at his failure to deliver on diverse campaign promises, the Republican opposition to lower unemployment and a stronger economy may well be Barack Obama's saving grace. The best the GOP can pitch to voters is that Obama has failed on the economy, so the people should vote in favor of the reason why he has failed.

    The 2012 election promises to be interesting, and likely in a proverbial sense.


    Marlowe, Beth. "Transcript: Obama's news conference on jobs plan, October 6, 2011". The Washington Post. October 6, 2011. October 7, 2011.

    Delargy, Christine. "Boehner: Obama has 'given up' on governing". Political Hotsheet. October 6, 2011. October 7, 2011.

    Hook, Janet and Carol E. Lee. "Cantor: Obama’s Job Bill Is Dead in Congress". Washington Wire. October 3, 2011. October 7, 2011.

Share This Page