Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Voting Rights Act Options · View
Guest
Posted: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 9:51:31 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,343
I know its another political question here in the think tank but here goes:

What are your views on the voting rights act as it was and currently is? (Liberal Source) (Conservative Source)

In My opinion, while I did not think it was fair that only a few states were under federal scrutiny, I very much dislike, that as of right now, no states are under any scrutiny. The lack of government regulation has a few states, like Texas and a few others, already attempting to enact polling restrictions that would have been deemed too racist when they were under government scrutiny. In my mind, all states should be regulated surrounding voting and polling places during federal elections, at a very minimum, and around all elections, ideally.

What do you think Lush? Are you for or against the Voting Rights Act as it was or as it is? (or both)?
Guest
Posted: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:27:52 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,343
IMO it is a sad day for America when one party is allowed to redraw district lines or reduce the number of polling places. That is what has been going on since Reince Priebus has been the head of the republican party. There isn't any activity that I am aware of, but here in the state of Washington Democrats have always controlled the three most populous counties, King, Pierce and Thurston. The rest of the state has been notoriously red counties. Washington has 12 electoral votes. So, for example, what the Republican's would do is draw it up so King, Pierce and Thurston county would each get one (1) electoral vote and they'd divided the other nine (9) among the rest of the state. So, despite the Dem's clearly winning the popular vote, the Repub's would win the state. You can only like it if you are Republican. In anybody else's book it's crooked politics. And the people can't do a thing about it. dontknow
matt55
Posted: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 8:13:00 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 3/31/2013
Posts: 374
Location: Atlanta area, United States
Kristind wrote:
IMO it is a sad day for America when one party is allowed to redraw district lines or reduce the number of polling places. That is what has been going on since Reince Priebus has been the head of the republican party. There isn't any activity that I am aware of, but here in the state of Washington Democrats have always controlled the three most populous counties, King, Pierce and Thurston. The rest of the state has been notoriously red counties. Washington has 12 electoral votes. So, for example, what the Republican's would do is draw it up so King, Pierce and Thurston county would each get one (1) electoral vote and they'd divided the other nine (9) among the rest of the state. So, despite the Dem's clearly winning the popular vote, the Repub's would win the state. You can only like it if you are Republican. In anybody else's book it's crooked politics. And the people can't do a thing about it. dontknow


It is called gerrymandering and isn't new or exclusive to the Republican Party. It goes back to at least the early 1800's. It is illegal if it can be proven but usually the party in power gets its way. My district looks like some fat U shaped snake and winds through several counties. It was redrawn by the Democratic Party when they were in power. Politics is a dirty game and neither side plays fair.
DLizze
Posted: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:19:08 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 4/23/2011
Posts: 2,501
Much as I hate racism, and much as I want to see fair voting practices, I have never believed the "Voting Rights Act" was constitutional. The problem is that it did not treat all states equally. I would like to see Federal oversight of the voter registration and voting process equally in all states.

(I would also like to see codified Federal oversight of traffic rules, instead of the quiet de facto process we currently have, but that is off-topic for this thread.)

"There's only three tempos: slow, medium and fast. When you get between in the cracks, ain't nuthin' happenin'." Ben Webster
Guest
Posted: Saturday, June 29, 2013 3:46:59 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,343
matt55 wrote:


It is called gerrymandering and isn't new or exclusive to the Republican Party. It goes back to at least the early 1800's. It is illegal if it can be proven but usually the party in power gets its way. My district looks like some fat U shaped snake and winds through several counties. It was redrawn by the Democratic Party when they were in power. Politics is a dirty game and neither side plays fair.


You're right. both sides do it. I am talking about repub's here cuz I'm young and have only seen what has been going on my experience. It is wrong no matter who does it. This country should make easier for people to vote...not harder. But then I'm surprised that as American citizens, voting is not seen as a right. It is a privilege. And people wonder why there is so much apathy.
DLizze
Posted: Sunday, June 30, 2013 8:36:40 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 4/23/2011
Posts: 2,501
Kristind wrote:


But then I'm surprised that as American citizens, voting is not seen as a right. It is a privilege. And people wonder why there is so much apathy.


I agree that is something I do not understand. For several years, I worked in a small engineering firm run by a "naturalized" citizen. He not only paid us to take time off from work to vote; he was adamant that we should educate ourselves, and try to make a reasoned choice, not just in the presidential race, but for all open offices, and ballot questions. He said that, as American citizens, voting isn't a right or a privilege; it is a DUTY. I agree with him. (He also paid us our full wage for time taken for jury duty, mileage to and from our house to the court, and he reimbursed for parking and gave a five dollar per day bonus, in case we had to buy lunch.)

"There's only three tempos: slow, medium and fast. When you get between in the cracks, ain't nuthin' happenin'." Ben Webster
Buz
Posted: Sunday, June 30, 2013 8:54:41 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,168
Location: Atlanta, United States
The Voting Acts Right was NOT overturned, just the criteria was declared no longer valid. The numbers proved that the mission was accomplished. In Mississippi, which had the worst case scenario in the 1960s, whites voted at an almost 70% rate and blacks at 6%. Now black people in Mississippi have a 71% voter participation rate, better than the 60% for white people. Congress can come up with a new number criteria but as it stands now there is no evidence needed to do so. The Voting Rights Act, though, is still in place. Should voting numbers show discrimination then the government can act upon it again.

For the life of me how did Maine get included with the 15 states that the Voting Rights Act covered? I understand several southern states at the time, California, and Michigan, were well known for voter discrimination and of course included. But Maine? I was surprised by that one.

Both political parties are equally guilty of 'gerrymandering' (drawing districts to improve electing their party.) This has gone on since the earliest days of the USA. There are laws to control it written 200 hundred years ago but actually hard to implement and legally prove. Texas gerrymanders to help Republicans, California gerrymanders to help Democrats. Nothing is perfect and never has been and never will be.

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

Ruthie
Posted: Sunday, June 30, 2013 9:29:04 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 10/21/2010
Posts: 2,176
Location: United States
Section 5, the section of the act that required federal pre-clearance of voting law changes, was used over two hundred times in Texas since 1975 to stop Texas politicans from changing election procedure, including gerrymandering. It has been used over a thousand times nationwide in the last twenty five years. This made it fairly simple for federal election officials to stop state laws that discriminate on the basis of race. Now each law will have to be tried in court under section 2 of the act.

Congress could fix this by making all states fall under section 5. As Chief Justice Roberts wrote in is opinion, “Section 2 is permanent, applies nationwide, and is not at issue in this case.” If section 5 were made to apply nationwide, under this ruling it would be fully constitutional. That would save a fortune in lawsuits as well as making all states comply equally to the law.
Guest
Posted: Monday, July 01, 2013 1:39:51 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,343
DLizze wrote:


I agree that is something I do not understand. For several years, I worked in a small engineering firm run by a "naturalized" citizen. He not only paid us to take time off from work to vote; he was adamant that we should educate ourselves, and try to make a reasoned choice, not just in the presidential race, but for all open offices, and ballot questions. He said that, as American citizens, voting isn't a right or a privilege; it is a DUTY. I agree with him. (He also paid us our full wage for time taken for jury duty, mileage to and from our house to the court, and he reimbursed for parking and gave a five dollar per day bonus, in case we had to buy lunch.)


I have never heard of that before. Could anyone see big corporations do anything close to this? NOT!! You said your employer was a naturalized citizen. There ya go. I bet he came from a repressed place and VALUES being an American. So many people I know will talk the talk and debate a good argument ...and then not vote. All I can say is 'WOW'.
Buz
Posted: Monday, July 01, 2013 6:34:13 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,168
Location: Atlanta, United States
CoopsRuthie wrote:
Section 5, the section of the act that required federal pre-clearance of voting law changes, was used over two hundred times in Texas since 1975 to stop Texas politicans from changing election procedure, including gerrymandering. It has been used over a thousand times nationwide in the last twenty five years. This made it fairly simple for federal election officials to stop state laws that discriminate on the basis of race. Now each law will have to be tried in court under section 2 of the act.

Congress could fix this by making all states fall under section 5. As Chief Justice Roberts wrote in is opinion, “Section 2 is permanent, applies nationwide, and is not at issue in this case.” If section 5 were made to apply nationwide, under this ruling it would be fully constitutional. That would save a fortune in lawsuits as well as making all states comply equally to the law.


That would be a good idea Ruthie, to apply it equally to all states. The states under the Voting Rights Act have successfully made vast improvement and may be surpassing many of the states that were not subject to it.

I travel the USA extensively and quite frankly hear more racist comments in north/midwestern and northeastern states than anywhere else. Generally though, I don't hear many overall, thank God!

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

Monocle
Posted: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 5:55:41 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 2/19/2007
Posts: 286
Buz wrote:

That would be a good idea Ruthie, to apply it equally to all states. The states under the Voting Rights Act have successfully made vast improvement and may be surpassing many of the states that were not subject to it.


The simple fact that Texas started moving again on its Voter ID law within _hours_ of the SC ruling (because it would have been stopped by the VRA) gives the lie to that.
Buz
Posted: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 7:25:18 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,168
Location: Atlanta, United States
You've accused one state not 15. If what you say is true Monocle, then prove that Texas is currently discriminating against registered voters because of race or creed with tangible evidence. Back it up.

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

Monocle
Posted: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 10:35:44 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 2/19/2007
Posts: 286
NC is joining them, and I've no doubt there are more coming. However, even one state doing that in the wake of the ruling makes the 'we've outgrown the need' sentiment a lie.

Shutting down early voting, reducing poling station number and changing location, killing same day registration, and requiring gov't issue ID for voting all place burdens on the poor, the old, the less mobile. Raising taxes on families when their college age kids vote in the state of their school instead of the state of the family's residence discourages student voting. The fact these laws/changes couldn't succeed when the VRA was in force is inherent proof that they were judged to have discriminatory effect.

I don't mind a periodic evaluation to see if states/districts can be taken off the list - and others put on. In fact, I think that should be how the act should live. But striking it down the way the SC did will end up disenfranchising many thousands.
Ruthie
Posted: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:31:55 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 10/21/2010
Posts: 2,176
Location: United States
Legislatures that are no longer hampered by having to get federal approval may pass discriminatory laws and gerrymander districts to keep the party in power in power, and to prevent voting by people who would most likely vote against them. Congress could fix this easily by making section 5 apply to all states. This should be common sense, especially in Federal elections. People in Texas should have the same chance to vote as people in any other state. Federal intervention has been used over a thousand times in Texas to keep them from using discriminatory laws to keep people from voting. Now they won't have to have consent to pass that kind of legislation. Of course they're going to pass it. Unless minorities suddenly decide to start voting for Republicans, my guess is that every Republican legislature in the country will pass legislation designed to limit minority voting.
Buz
Posted: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 9:13:36 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,168
Location: Atlanta, United States
I disagree with Mococle. That's one perspective and I don't think it is accurate. The right thing is to apply the Voting Rights Act the same to all 50 states. Like I said before, Democrats have a long history of gerrymandering just as Republicans. In fact most of the 15 states under the VRA were under Democrat control at the time the VRA was passed. Gerrymandering will continue to happen. It is so difficult to prove legally, but we hope that it is kept to a minimum. Anyone that thinks that Democrats are not just as guilty as Republicans at gerrymandering is so blind by prejudice that they cannot see or understand reality. But a citizen has to register to vote in order to vote. Any government has the right to make sure that the voter is a legally registered voter, and each person should only have one vote for each office in each election. Voters should not be hindered by race or creed. I see nothing wrong at all with having to show that you are the registered voter you say you are in order to vote. The only reason someone would oppose that is if they plan to or condone cheating and fraud.

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

CleverFox
Posted: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 9:29:40 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 463
Location: United States
The funny thing about all of these voter ID laws is that to make a difference at the polls in any congressional house race I would have to be able to cast about 7,000 fraudulent votes in any house district to make a 1% difference in the count.

If there is meaningful election fraud then it is the people counting the votes and not the people casting the votes.

All of these voter ID laws are just a bunch of bait and switch to keep the poor, elderly and other liberal leaning groups from voting while the real fraud happens when the votes are counted behind closed doors.
Monocle
Posted: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 10:30:08 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 2/19/2007
Posts: 286
I'd love the VRA to be in force in all states. I despise gerrymandering of any type, no matter which group is doing it. I belong to a convoluted district in a gerrymandered state, and want to see the lines redrawn in a sane way. Voter ID laws in and of themselves are not disenfranchising. Voter ID laws with hurdles to getting those IDs, and restricting access time and location of polling places are absolutely disenfranchising, to the poor and the less mobile, to name two groups. As CF says, voter fraud is a) negligible and b) of negligible impact where it does exist. And ironically, c) the biggest cases of it in recent times come from the right.
ArtMan
Posted: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 11:30:42 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 6/29/2011
Posts: 638
Location: South Florida, United States
I agree that the VRA should be in all 50 states. Make all states play by the same rules. But to say that voter fraud is negligible is laughable and ignorant. Get your heads out of the sand. It is notable that US President Lyndon Johnson launched his political career with massive voter fraud in his first ever run for public office.

You are invited to read Passionate Danger, Part II, a story collaboration by Kim and ArtMan.
http://www.lushstories.com/stories/straight-sex/passionate-danger-part-ii.aspx

Guest
Posted: Thursday, July 04, 2013 12:46:44 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,343
Buz wrote:
You've accused one state not 15. If what you say is true Monocle, then prove that Texas is currently discriminating against registered voters because of race or creed with tangible evidence. Back it up.


Hey Buz...you asked for proof...here ya go.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/pp4icNGNY0Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/BPbGiCBhygM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

And this, after the Supreme Court struck down Section 5 of the VRA.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/r4Ryt2uFAAM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

It is widely understood that any change in voter redistricting in the Great? State of Texas has been made to be cleared by the DOJ because of their blatant discriminatory behavior. Anyone believing that Texas has not and does want to gerrymander by discrimination lives in the nest next to the Dodo bird.

Buz
Posted: Thursday, July 04, 2013 9:47:11 AM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,168
Location: Atlanta, United States
That is just liberal political rhetoric and not facts. Plus MSNBC is nothing but a propaganda outlet like Faux News. The tactics and strategy of MSNBC and Faux News would make Joseph Goebbels proud.

Liberal and conservative are the two phoniest words in modern American politics. Neither are accurate descriptions of the radicals that represent themselves under those guises.

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

LadyX
Posted: Thursday, July 04, 2013 10:38:33 AM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,658
Location: United States
Buz wrote:
I disagree with Mococle. That's one perspective and I don't think it is accurate. The right thing is to apply the Voting Rights Act the same to all 50 states. Like I said before, Democrats have a long history of gerrymandering just as Republicans. In fact most of the 15 states under the VRA were under Democrat control at the time the VRA was passed. Gerrymandering will continue to happen. It is so difficult to prove legally, but we hope that it is kept to a minimum. Anyone that thinks that Democrats are not just as guilty as Republicans at gerrymandering is so blind by prejudice that they cannot see or understand reality. But a citizen has to register to vote in order to vote. Any government has the right to make sure that the voter is a legally registered voter, and each person should only have one vote for each office in each election. Voters should not be hindered by race or creed. I see nothing wrong at all with having to show that you are the registered voter you say you are in order to vote. The only reason someone would oppose that is if they plan to or condone cheating and fraud.


In theory, all this is true. But in reality, there's never been widespread- or even semi-frequent episodic- confirmation of voter fraud. There's nothing broken to fix, but Republicans have decided to pretend it is a problem in order to restrict minority and poor voters. We can repeat platitudes all day long about how it shouldn't be a big deal to require a shown I.D. at the polling place or how early voting should be done away with, but the facts are that these sorts of measures accomplish one thing and one thing only: suppress certain and specific types of voters. As Ruth Ann pointed out, if these same voters supported both parties in equal numbers, we wouldn't be hearing a damn thing about "voter fraud".
Buz
Posted: Thursday, July 04, 2013 11:01:26 AM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,168
Location: Atlanta, United States
Actually I don't believe that at all and respectfully disagree.

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

LadyX
Posted: Thursday, July 04, 2013 11:22:25 AM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,658
Location: United States
Buz wrote:
Actually I don't believe that at all and respectfully disagree.


If you don't believe that, then why don't you think there's a bipartisan effort to curtail "voter fraud?" Why is only Fox News and townhall.com presenting it as a real issue? Surely you don't believe it's because those damn democrats are just plain corrupt and Republicans aren't, because that would display the same level of naïveté and willful ignorance that you so often (and rightfully so) point out to anyone that implies one party's moral high ground over the other.
Monocle
Posted: Thursday, July 04, 2013 8:51:50 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 2/19/2007
Posts: 286
ArtMan wrote:
I agree that the VRA should be in all 50 states. Make all states play by the same rules. But to say that voter fraud is negligible is laughable and ignorant. Get your heads out of the sand. It is notable that US President Lyndon Johnson launched his political career with massive voter fraud in his first ever run for public office.


It's laughable and ignorant to use uncited data over 75 years old in a contemporary argument. Incidence of voter fraud today is negligible and of negligible impact.

LadyX, right on.
Buz
Posted: Thursday, July 04, 2013 8:56:06 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,168
Location: Atlanta, United States
I don't trust those hypocritical and corrupt Republicans at all, but I have even less respect and less trust for the Democrat party, who I think are even more despicable. I despise both parties. They are corrupt to the core.

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

Monocle
Posted: Thursday, July 04, 2013 9:17:32 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 2/19/2007
Posts: 286
Buz wrote:
I don't trust those hypocritical and corrupt Republicans at all, but I have even less respect and less trust for the Democrat party, who I think are even more despicable. I despise both parties. They are corrupt to the core.


Democratic party. "Democrat party" is a Rush Limbaugh denigration game, no better than idiocies like "Rethuglican".

"Corrupt to the core" is useless and factually false hyperbole.
WellMadeMale
Posted: Thursday, July 04, 2013 10:13:52 PM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,213
Location: Cakeland, United States
I've always been very wary when both the Republicans AND the Democrats agreed on anything...or didn't fight about any proposition.

I know we're getting fucked when that happens.

If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
CleverFox
Posted: Thursday, July 04, 2013 11:24:04 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 463
Location: United States
WellMadeMale wrote:
I've always been very wary when both the Republicans AND the Democrats agreed on anything...or didn't fight about any proposition.

I know we're getting fucked when that happens.


occasion5
beowulf69
Posted: Thursday, July 04, 2013 11:45:21 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/24/2011
Posts: 200
Location: Cocoa Beach, United States
Only a fool trusts a politician and only a very stupid fool trusts a political party.

My first story for Lush is posted, The Goodbye Fuck.
http://www.lushstories.com/stories/straight-sex/the-goodbye-fuck.aspx
Guest
Posted: Friday, July 05, 2013 1:28:03 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,343
Buz wrote:
That is just liberal political rhetoric and not facts. Plus MSNBC is nothing but a propaganda outlet like Faux News. The tactics and strategy of MSNBC and Faux News would make Joseph Goebbels proud.

Liberal and conservative are the two phoniest words in modern American politics. Neither are accurate descriptions of the radicals that represent themselves under those guises.


Well...I do agree with you that MSNBC is as politically biased as Faux News...but they are so much more honest in their facts, their reporting and their willingness to correct an error on the air. However Buz, when the federal government moves in on one state, as the feds have done to Texas for awhile now, it is because they have a bad history of corrupt politics in that area which they are being scrutinized. It is a fact and not political rhetoric that the federal govt. has ordered this done to Texas because...of the fact that Texas has been consistently corrupt in their election practice. That is not an MSNBC fabrication nor is it an MSNBC opinion.
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.