|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
![]() |
LeftNYC
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:25 PM Original message |
Breaking:US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:28 PM Response to Original message |
1. Sorry, but, presuming these are public sites, it's legal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gauguin57
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:28 PM Response to Reply #1 |
3. Homes, businesses and warehouses are public? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftNYC
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:31 PM Response to Reply #1 |
4. Read further in the article |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grytpype
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:44 PM Response to Reply #4 |
20. Monitoring for radiation is not an intrusion on privacy. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftNYC
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:52 PM Response to Reply #20 |
24. Monitoring for radiation |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rocktivity
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:18 PM Response to Reply #24 |
63. DING DING DING! LeftNYC, you're our grand prize winner! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Barkley
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 01:26 AM Response to Reply #63 |
85. I wonder if the 'monitored' Muslims also included the Nation of Islam? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Captain Hilts
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 03:30 PM Response to Reply #20 |
28. I agree. They monitor LOTS of places for nuclear material. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Peter Frank
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 03:49 PM Response to Reply #20 |
30. I agree... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Warren Stupidity
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 04:57 PM Response to Reply #20 |
40. Another one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Guaranteed
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 07:28 PM Response to Reply #20 |
55. It is when you go on people's private property. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jawja
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 11:07 AM Response to Reply #20 |
111. Yes, I agree with this one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:52 PM Response to Reply #4 |
69. Professor Cole and I agree. The issue turns on whether the technology |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
displacedtexan
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:34 PM Response to Reply #1 |
9. Mosques are not "public" places. Want them monitoring your "church?" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 04:29 PM Response to Reply #9 |
34. It doesn't matter what I want. There is no reasonable expectation of |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
merwin
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 05:07 PM Response to Reply #34 |
42. so they could legally bug a confessional? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 08:54 PM Response to Reply #42 |
57. There is a reasonable expectation of privacy within the confines of a |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Warren Stupidity
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:34 PM Response to Reply #57 |
65. Oh nonsense. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:59 PM Response to Reply #65 |
71. However, what is described here is police pressuring people to give |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
chicagiana
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 02:16 PM Response to Reply #57 |
121. Even if the office isn't locked ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wishlist
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:34 PM Response to Reply #1 |
10. Homes and businesses mentioned in article are not public sites n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 04:40 PM Response to Reply #10 |
36. Whoops. Quite true. The question then turns on whether they were |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Occulus
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 03:23 AM Response to Reply #36 |
89. Hasn't the SCOTUS ruled that thermal monitoring |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 07:53 AM Response to Reply #89 |
98. I think the distinction is that the nuclear monitiors just measure air |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
longship
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:36 PM Response to Reply #1 |
12. Legal? I do not think so. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 04:37 PM Response to Reply #12 |
35. Were they entering otherwise closed buildings or merely driving onto |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Warren Stupidity
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 04:54 PM Response to Reply #35 |
39. Did you read the article or even the excerpt? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:01 PM Response to Reply #39 |
60. I am saying it's legal, not falling for any "meme." "Going on" property, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Warren Stupidity
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:29 PM Response to Reply #60 |
64. They cannot enter my property. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:51 PM Response to Reply #64 |
67. "Parsing" words is the Supreme Court's job. What position do you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
teryang
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 10:00 PM Response to Reply #67 |
72. In what country is that well established? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 10:02 PM Response to Reply #72 |
73. "Acquiescing to police authority" usually happens because people feel |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
teryang
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 10:10 PM Response to Reply #73 |
74. You don't have a clue |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 10:30 PM Response to Reply #74 |
75. Do you think when Mr. Pothead "consents" to a search when he knows |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
teryang
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 10:39 PM Response to Reply #75 |
77. Your responses indicate you have no understanding of the law |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 06:52 AM Response to Reply #77 |
94. So, does this have some relevance to whether the nuclear monitoring |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
teryang
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 10:58 AM Response to Reply #94 |
109. You brought up the consent issue not me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
unschooler
![]() |
Tue Dec-27-05 05:14 AM Response to Reply #109 |
124. I have no idea what you just said, and I'm pretty sure the average |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madeline_con
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 10:39 PM Response to Reply #75 |
78. Can't the police detain the motorist until... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 06:55 AM Response to Reply #78 |
95. Have you been told that if you did not consent to a search you would |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
teryang
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 10:24 AM Response to Reply #78 |
107. A motorist can only be delayed for the time necessary to write... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Garbo 2004
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 02:40 AM Response to Reply #72 |
87. In the "old days" didn't the police have to show some probable cause, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
teryang
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 11:15 AM Response to Reply #87 |
112. The standard for traffic stops is reasonable suspicion to believe |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheGunslinger
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 11:02 PM Response to Reply #60 |
80. "across the street" "going on the property" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Occulus
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 03:25 AM Response to Reply #35 |
90. Don't mineral rights include the ground AND sky? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 07:54 AM Response to Reply #90 |
99. Hey there! Don't be searchin' my sky minerals! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Occulus
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 11:27 AM Response to Reply #99 |
115. Oh, you know what I meant |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
chicagiana
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 02:10 PM Response to Reply #1 |
120. The doors open at 9am ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ny_liberal
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:28 PM Response to Original message |
2. wow - great find! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftNYC
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:31 PM Response to Reply #2 |
5. www.thinkprogress.org |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftNYC
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:40 PM Response to Reply #2 |
15. Jets fan here |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
johnnybaseball
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 12:49 AM Response to Reply #2 |
83. Also a Jets fan ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Botany
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:32 PM Response to Original message |
6. If the FBI or whomever had real info and could stop a nuke fine |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftNYC
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:33 PM Response to Reply #6 |
8. exactly...why does the law not matter? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Botany
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:43 PM Response to Reply #8 |
16. Especially because the law has been written so as to aid |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kevinbgoode
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:32 PM Response to Original message |
7. Ok...this is where I have to ask the question. . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
danalytical
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:34 PM Response to Original message |
11. Why couldn't they get a warrant? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftNYC
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:36 PM Response to Reply #11 |
13. Surprised Dubya |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ian David
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:44 PM Response to Reply #11 |
19. All Muslims radioactive after all the depleted Uranium we shoot at them? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Warren Stupidity
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:49 PM Response to Reply #11 |
21. Because a warrant requires probable cause |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Guaranteed
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 07:26 PM Response to Reply #21 |
53. Right- they had no reason whatsoever to believe that there |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grytpype
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:58 PM Response to Reply #11 |
25. I doubt that this is a "search." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Warren Stupidity
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 04:45 PM Response to Reply #25 |
37. Go back and read the article. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
merwin
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 05:16 PM Response to Reply #25 |
45. none of that would hold up in court. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:55 PM Response to Reply #45 |
70. Sorry. You'd be surprised what the courts have permitted. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
merwin
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 09:37 AM Response to Reply #70 |
103. The 4th amendment doesn't mention anything about that. I could leave my |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Guaranteed
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 07:27 PM Response to Reply #25 |
54. It's invasive when they're going onto private property. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Occulus
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 03:35 AM Response to Reply #25 |
92. I'm quickly becoming a purist on the Fourth |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funflower
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 07:57 AM Response to Reply #25 |
100. You are right. Monitoring what's in the air around a building is not a |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Catrina
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 04:01 PM Response to Reply #11 |
31. Muslim Americans are US citizens also. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MisterP
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 05:22 PM Response to Reply #11 |
46. why target Muslims? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Captain Hilts
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 07:10 PM Response to Reply #46 |
51. The '93 WTC bomber was assoc. with a mosque as were some of ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Warren Stupidity
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 07:19 PM Response to Reply #51 |
52. OK then take that to a judge and see if he buys it as probable cause. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Captain Hilts
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 12:06 AM Response to Reply #52 |
82. I agree they should get a warrant. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ian David
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:39 PM Response to Original message |
14. See prior thread |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Demeter
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:43 PM Response to Original message |
17. There's Paranoia, and then there's Just Plain Stupid |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
unschooler
![]() |
Tue Dec-27-05 05:20 AM Response to Reply #17 |
127. And then there's stupinoia! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Finder
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:43 PM Response to Original message |
18. Geesh--Mushroom cloud imagery is just what they need... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SpiralHawk
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:50 PM Response to Original message |
22. This whole Domestic spying THING is mushrooming |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
daleo
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 02:50 PM Response to Original message |
23. This certainly strikes one as profiling - racial, ethnic and/or religious. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Humor_In_Cuneiform
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 03:03 PM Response to Original message |
26. It is bad enough that they break the law unnecessarily if they are |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Trillo
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 03:11 PM Response to Original message |
27. Environmental Radiation? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HuffleClaw
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 03:42 PM Response to Original message |
29. busted again! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jseankil
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 04:07 PM Response to Original message |
32. If they thought there was a threat then I support this move. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Warren Stupidity
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 04:51 PM Response to Reply #32 |
38. Can't get a warrant withou probable cause. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tirechewer
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 07:24 AM Response to Reply #38 |
96. You're right.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Divine Discontent
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 04:15 PM Response to Original message |
33. my Goodness, the SHIT hits the FAN |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gulliver
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 05:06 PM Response to Original message |
41. Convenient timing on this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Straight Shooter
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 05:11 PM Response to Original message |
43. To all those who think this type of "monitoring" is just hunky-dory ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Humor_In_Cuneiform
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 05:15 PM Response to Reply #43 |
44. Agreed, see post 26 by me. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Straight Shooter
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 06:42 PM Response to Reply #44 |
48. The only ones being fooled are the fools. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Boojatta
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:00 PM Response to Reply #43 |
58. Radiation, searches, and privacy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Straight Shooter
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:17 PM Response to Reply #58 |
62. You're comparing apples and oranges. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Boojatta
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:45 PM Response to Reply #62 |
66. No one is saying the police should not investigate legitimate reports. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Straight Shooter
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 10:39 PM Response to Reply #66 |
76. Write the author of the article and make the inquiry of him/her. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Boojatta
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 09:52 AM Response to Reply #76 |
105. You expected everybody who reads this message board to accept your claims |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Straight Shooter
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 11:34 AM Response to Reply #105 |
117. You're the one who wants me to do your homework. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Boojatta
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 12:43 PM Response to Reply #117 |
118. Why did you say: "No one is saying the police should not investigate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
donheld
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 06:21 PM Response to Original message |
47. I can't believe any of you are defending this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Media_Lies_Daily
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 08:11 PM Response to Reply #47 |
56. Bingo. If this is allowed to go on, what will they want to monitor next? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Boojatta
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:02 PM Response to Reply #47 |
61. Who said anything about the general public entering? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hyernel
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 06:42 PM Response to Original message |
49. The monitoring of mosques presumes that they are the enemy... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Solon
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 06:50 PM Response to Reply #49 |
50. What did Earth ever do to us? :) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madeline_con
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 10:41 PM Response to Reply #49 |
79. And if there's nothing to fear but fear itself... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PsychoDad
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 03:32 AM Response to Reply #49 |
91. Crusade |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:00 PM Response to Original message |
59. Considering all this domestic spying |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Boojatta
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 09:51 PM Response to Reply #59 |
68. Why haven't they caught the senders of anthrax? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheGunslinger
![]() |
Fri Dec-23-05 11:03 PM Response to Reply #68 |
81. Why would they go after themselves? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Barkley
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 01:38 AM Response to Reply #68 |
86. Ans: the same reason the Bin Ladens got to fly home right after 9-11! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
goforit
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 12:57 AM Response to Original message |
84. I do believe this story is to cover all the OTHER illegal wiretaps, like |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
unschooler
![]() |
Tue Dec-27-05 05:17 AM Response to Reply #84 |
125. Tell me more. How would this cover up other illegal wiretaps? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PsychoDad
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 03:14 AM Response to Original message |
88. They found no nukes..... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Peace Patriot
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 03:38 AM Response to Original message |
93. Four big problems: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greiner3
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 07:37 AM Response to Original message |
97. If the testers went onto the site; |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
soda
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 08:00 AM Response to Reply #97 |
101. whats next |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tirechewer
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 08:47 AM Response to Original message |
102. The one more thing..... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Boojatta
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 09:46 AM Response to Reply #102 |
104. Background radiation, radiation above that level, and detection |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tirechewer
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 10:22 AM Response to Reply #104 |
106. It has occurred to me... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Boojatta
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 10:43 AM Response to Reply #106 |
108. If you have answers to the questions, then post them here. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gudshoveler
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 11:20 AM Response to Reply #108 |
113. What were they REALLY looking for, anyway? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tirechewer
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 11:24 AM Response to Reply #108 |
114. Are you having a bad day? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
baal
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 11:02 AM Response to Original message |
110. Sorry, I hate this guy mor than any of you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gudshoveler
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 11:29 AM Response to Reply #110 |
116. I don't get what you are saying. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
chicagiana
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 02:07 PM Response to Original message |
119. By Muslim ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Coastie for Truth
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 07:09 PM Response to Original message |
122. Expert Professional Opinion |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
unschooler
![]() |
Tue Dec-27-05 05:18 AM Response to Reply #122 |
126. But that would make tooooo much sense! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grahamhgreen
![]() |
Sat Dec-24-05 07:48 PM Response to Original message |
123. This story is meant to deflect attention from "Big-Brother" gate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
unschooler
![]() |
Tue Dec-27-05 05:21 AM Response to Reply #123 |
128. I agree. It confuses a lot of people. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Charles19
![]() |
Tue Dec-27-05 06:18 AM Response to Reply #123 |
129. Agree 100%, it is so suburbia will say "oh they only spy on the Muslims" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Prisonerohio
![]() |
Tue Dec-27-05 06:19 AM Response to Original message |
130. This seems to be a common method of media manipulation. Release info on |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sun Jun 16th 2024, 02:00 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC