« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Lugar Campaign Starting to Reek of Flop Sweat

You can tell that the Dick Lugar campaign is terrified that they are going to lose by the emails the campaign is sending out over the last few days. Yesterday, Lugar was so desperate that he resorted to the tried and true Democrat tactic of scaring seniors about the nasty conservatives who are coming to steal their social security checks. In an email titled “Mourdock ‘just too risky’ for Hoosier senior citizens,” Lugar claimed that Mourdock wanted to slash everyone’s social security checks next year. It’s an odd attack for someone who has spent most of this campaign season trying to convince people that he’s really a conservative after all. News flash to Dick Lugar: conservatives don’t demonize Republicans over entitlement reform.

Today’s email, however, really took the cake. Over the last several days, as Lugar’s poll numbers have continued to slide, Lugar’s campaign has released a series of emails hilariously titled “Lugar-mentum.” The last item in today’s email? You’ll have to read it for yourself (and I assure you this is not a joke):

Student Body President Endorses Lugar
Terrence Lawrence, President of Carmel High School
May 1, 2012

“As a three-year member of student Senate and current student body president of Carmel High School, I can appreciate the impact experience has on an organization’s efficiency — whether that be running a school or providing good government. Senator Richard Lugar is a living example of that valuable experience, which is what we need during these difficult times facing our state and nation.”

Now look, I have nothing against Mr. Lawrence, who I am sure is a perfectly nice fellow and a capable President of his high school student body. But when a 36-year incumbent in the United States Senate has to resort to sending out endorsements from high school students, you know that very serious trouble is around the corner. Even more amusing, this particular issue of “Lugar-mentum” started with the following line from Peggy Noonan: “The most recent polls suggest Dick Lugar, the senior U.S. senator from Indiana, first elected in 1976, is on track to lose his primary on Tuesday.”

Being on track to lose apparently is what “Lugar-mentum” is all about.

Which is good news, because according to today’s polling, there’s plenty of Lugar-mentum on tap in the future.

COMMENTS

  • APA Guy

    The Indy Star reports this…I think I see the Lugar Hindenburg right now outside my window here in the Hoosier State :)

    • AceInTX

      To all you Mitch Daniels sycophants out there…explain THAT one to me would ya?

      AAHA

      AAAHHHAAAA

      AAAAAHHHHHAAAAHHHHHAAAAHHHAAAHHHAAAHHHAAAHHHAAAHHHAAAHHHAAAHHHHHAAAAHHAAAHHHAAAHHHAAAHH!

      • acat

        It could also show that Daniels suffers from the same loyalty problem that Bush 2.0 suffered from.

        It could also show that there’s something about Mourdock that we don’t know.

        It could also just be that Lugar asked first.

        I would say it’s a data point that should be kept in mind, and that Daniels should be asked to explain, should he want a higher office.

        Mew

        • earlgrey

          neutral on this. After all Mourdock is serving or served as the IN State Treasurer under Daniels.

          I wonder why he changed his mind. He did start his political career under Lugar I believe. Still, I think he should have stayed out, and he probably would agree with me at this point.

          • acat

            and avoided AceInTx (and others) thinking him a fool.

            Of course, according to Bill S. and others Daniels had already removed all doubt….

            Too bad – he has a good record as both a fiscal and social conservative.

            Mew

          • LibertarianHawk

            After all, he had a primary challenge from JD Hayworth, a much more conservative candidate. Did Palin campaigning for McCain put her conservative creds in question?

            It’s true: Daniels has tried his best to stay out of this race. He said very early on that he likes both candidates — but would be casting a vote for Lugar, his former boss and mentor.

            Daniels owes a debt to Lugar — just as Palin owed a debt to McCain.

            Only very late in the game, as it got competitive, did Daniels agree to get active in supporting Lugar. And, really, “active” is a relative term. He cut a couple ads for him.

            But he also said this just today:

            ***
            Still, if Mourdock wins, Daniels said he?ll have no trouble supporting him.

            ?He?s a thoroughly credible person ? you know, a friend and ally of mine,? Daniels said. ?I was in an awkward position, to say the least, here, between two people I know and like and admire. But one of them, I have a lifelong loyalty to, and that was the tiebreaker.?
            ***

          • AceInTX

            ?He?s a thoroughly credible person ? you know, a friend and ally of mine,? Daniels said. ?I was in an awkward position, to say the least, here, between two people I know and like and admire. But one of them, I have a lifelong loyalty to, and that was the tiebreaker.”

            I’m watching my mom and dad in a knife fight…which one am I going to root for to stick the knife in and twist?

            The answer is…I don’t root for either one if what I’m saying has any credibility…

            but he chose Lugar over Murdock….why?

            I contend…if he was going to take sides at all….he chose the one that most closely aligns with him…he wouldn’t stick on “Friend” in the back on behalf of the other “Friend” without a good reason would he?

            Or would he? is her really that slimy that he’d throw one friend under the bus on behalf of the other fo political reasons would he?

            I don’t care how you slice it…or what BS excuses you come up with for it…it makes him look like a tone deaf…unprincipled creep….and a slimy one at that

        • LibertarianHawk

          There are places where it clearly comes into play.

          Daniels and Lugar are not just two random Indiana Republican politicians whose paths have crossed here or there. Daniels first worked for Lugar when the latter was Indianapolis mayor in 1971. When Lugar was elected to the Senate in 1976, he tapped a 27-year-old Daniels as his chief of staff. When Lugar became chairman of the NRSC, he made Daniels the executive director.

          Lugar later recommended Daniels for a gig as political director in the Reagan Administration.

          These two spent nearly 15 years working together closely in various capacities.

          Ideology and everything else aside, there’s nothing the least bit wrong with Daniels honoring that relationship by coming to his mentor’s aid.

          • AceInTX

            So you’re making excuses for his shiving of his underling on behalf of his master?

            The term “Sith Lord” comes to mind here

        • AceInTX

          Lets play…”What can Ace pull from the top of his head” shall we?

          Mitch said:

          “It’s time for the Republican Party to get ov er Reagan”

          “It’s time for a truce on Social Issues”

          “China isn’t a threat to the United States of America”

          If I dig, I can pull the exact quotes and dates, and I can find a lot more…

          This Lugar endorsement is just one more in a string of data points I’m drawing from and where the data points lead is to the conclusion that Daniels is a milk toast moderate cut from the same same cloth as Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Erick Cantor and the rest of the statist weenies that are so feckless and cowardly!

          • acat

            Oh wait.

            Mew

          • AceInTX

            or that Daniels would be better than Romney in my mind….that’s a hard one for me…because I think Daniels would be a worse sell out when it comes down to it.

            his shanking of Murdock is just more proof in the pudding

          • aesthete

            There’s no comparison at all between Romney’s simply awful record, and Daniels’ incredible record of conservative successes — none at all. You’re basing your point of view on selective and superficial traits that have nothing to do with conservatism.

            This myopia, btw, is not a critique of your level of conservatism: sadly, all too many conservatives and libertarians are exactly the same, when it comes to candidate evaluation.

          • AceInTX

            as much as I loath Romney….Daniels just gives me the creeps….I don’t trust him….he has establishment written all over him

          • aesthete

            I’m thrilled that you and others could “trust” Bush, Romney, and others with atrocious records over folks who actually have good records. I know that you personally supported Perry, but your buddies in the movement by and large decided in an act of mass stupidity that they “trusted” Santo over Perry in numbers to propel that one-trick pony over a guy with a record that was more conservative in every way. If those are the types of candidates you get by relying on your intuition, then maybe your intuition isn’t actually worth that much when it comes to politicians, eh?

            A company that had the investment record of the so-called “conservative” base would go bankrupt.

            I include myself as someone who’s intuition is very hit-or-miss on these things, which is why I look at RECORDS before trusting something as fickle as my feelings.

          • aesthete

            1) We do need to get over Reagan. He’s dead and buried, and I don’t need political creeps telling me how much they loved him/how their bit role in the Reagan administration makes them an authority on all things conservative. It’s a) a distraction, and b) cult worship of a leader that I’m sure Reagan himself would agree we could do without. I want to know what candidates want to do in specific, not defenses of un-conservative actions and records based on having met Reagan once or twice back in the day.

            2) China is *not* a threat to the US. It is a rival and competitor in certain areas of US interest. We don’t need to attack them or prep for conventional warfare; we need to economically integrate them into the rest of the world while politically isolating them from states that could allow them to further their ambitions in the China Sea or certain other areas that are of importance to us.

            3) Darn right it’s time for a truce on social issues. 99% of the things within Congress and the President’s power in this upcoming election are fiscal in nature. The problems which we can have an impact on are fiscal ones. Social problems are either not resolvable at the federal level (or really, by any governmental unit), or are issues that we can’t have more of an impact on in the short term (abortion, for example). In light of this, wasting our political capital on internecine squabbles is downright stupid.

            None of these statements, btw, has anything to do with conservatism; conservatism as an ideology says nothing about China’s threat level, Reagan worship, or tactical approaches to governance.

          • aesthete

            that made it so that Perry never got anywhere in the primaries, and that prevents conservatives from going anywhere politically. Worse, the tendency to judge someone conservative based on superficial factors, and to backwards reason their conservatism, has made conservatives the Hallelujah choir to a whole slew of politicians who don’t give a damn about conservatism.

      • LibertarianHawk

        You have a picture of Fred Thompson in your sig. Thompson and his wife were on Hannity’s radio show the other day and Hannity asked Sen. Thompson who he’d like to see as Romney’s runningmate.

        The first name he mentioned? Mitch Daniels.

        In fact, I think his exact quote was “Well, I really like Mitch Daniels.”

        If we stick to your logic here, wouldn’t Thompson recommending Daniels for that slot put the lie to the meme that Thompson is a conservative?

        Or perhaps reality isn’t quite so simple. Daniels endorsed Lugar for a very simple reason: Lugar gave him his start in political life back in the 70s. In fact, he said today that he’d have no problem supporting Mourdock — with whom he is also close.

        Mourdock, the state treasurer, was quoted in a National Review story about Daniels a couple years ago that he’d “walk through fire” for the governor. Mourdock was openly begging Daniels to run for president — saying “Mitch, your country needs you.”

        Now, I ask you…why would a decidedly conservative guy like Mourdock say that about some squishy moderate? Why would Fred Thompson push him for veep? Why would Dick Armey, of FreedomWorks, publicly state that he’d endorse Daniels if he ran? Same for Paul Ryan.

        Could it be, perhaps, that you — and not the Daniels sycophants — are the one who’s wrong?

        • AceInTX

          if that’s the case…I didn’t see it.

          so what’s your point…I put Fred up there for the quote he made there. I like the quote….

          I’m a Thompson fan but not a BOT by any means. and on some issues Thompson is not necessarily conservative…no more than I am down the line conservative on every single issue.

          I don’t much care who Fred Thompson wants for VP…so what’s your point? That because I have someone’s picture on my comments…I should be in lock step with them on everything they say and do?

          That may be the way you operate…but I like to think for myself.

          As for loyalty to a person….as opposed to loyalty doing what is right and good for the country?

          I would say…That in large part is what is wrong with our party today isn’t it? Isn’t THAT the very thing we’re all raising so much hell about? One politician selling his constituents down the river…or selling out the Constitution…out of some misplaced and undeserved loyalty to a “Friend” who helped you get where you are through influence peddling….who put you where you are so he can call in the chits you OWE him when his back is against the wall…or some GOD awful law he is backing is about to go down in flames?

          No…I think I’ll believe my lying eyes on this one…Daniels is the one pronouncing truces…and the need to “Get over Reagan”

      • ffc99

        Rick Perry endorsing David Dewhurst has put to bed the “Rick Perry is a Conservative” meme… Right, Ace?

        • AceInTX

          and I’ve got my issues with Perry…so what’s your point?

          • ffc99

            but I’ve seen enough of your “contributions” here to conclude that you lack the capacity to grasp it.

          • AceInTX

            you haven’t seen anything ffc99…how long have you been here?

      • aesthete

        Puts to rest that whole “Reagan isn’t racist” meme, doesn’t it?

        Jim DeMint endorsed Romney in ’08. Puts to rest that whole “DeMint is conservative” meme, doesn’t it?

        Mebbe not so much. Politics and endorsements are funny. I prefer to look at actual record and efforts made by the endorser. Reagan and DeMint’s support of Romney, Ron Paul, and Strom Thurmond was minimal. Daniels’ support of Lugar is non-existent.

        I don’t like that Daniels endorsed Lugar, but I understand it and it doesn’t invalidate the conservative results that he was responsible for.

        • conservativerock5

          Strom Thurmond gets a bad rap but I am not convinced he was a racist. In my book he was a great American, serving in the war and rising to the rank of Major General and then becoming a governor and senator. Thurmond constantly emphasized states rights and should be infinitely praised for that good fight. Meanwhile the confirmed racist Byrd is loved by the liberal media. I also did some independent research on Ron and am far from convinced he is racist. In fact, the actual letters do not have explicitly racist content, then there is the question of whether he wrote them(unlikely). Both were voices for the Constitution and free markets in Congress, which is why Reagan endorsed them.

          Goldwater actually voted against the voting rights act, and Reagan supported him. Goldwater was another pro-Constitution, pro-states rights warrior in Congress.

          • conservativerock5

            Anybody that is….

            *Strong Christian
            *Pro-Constitution
            *Pro-states rights
            *Pro-gun and militia
            *Anti-illegal immigration

            Will be called a racist. I am sad many Republicans hop on the bandwagon(not saying you are)

        • LibertarianHawk

          If anybody has a valid reason for endorsing Lugar in this race –without necessarily making it a statement against Mourdock or what he would like to bring to the office — it’s Mitch Daniels.

          For crying out loud, the guy worked for Lugar for over a decade…starting in his early 20s. And Lugar obviously played a pivotal role in Daniels’ career. How many newly-elected Senators choose 27-year-old Chiefs of Staff?

          Heck, all these people are pulling for Mourdock….and listen to the things Mourdock himself has said about Gov. Daniels. He could hardly be more reverential. And, what’s more, he’s made it clear that he understands why Daniels felt compelled to endorse Lugar.

        • AceInTX

          I get your point…but as I’m pointing out…this isn’t Daniels first foray into moderatville….he’s the one who’s calling for truces…and getting over Regan…and for ignoring the non existent threat to the US posed my China both Militarily and as a trading partner…

          But in this thing…I believe Daniels is just exhibiting more of the same as all the above…either he’s an ideological lightweight…or he’s got a tin ear and a propensity for doing the most asinine things which continually call into question his conservative bonafides.

          • aesthete

            I’ve never been happy with Santo’s decision to endorse Specter, but it isn’t a reason that I thought he was un-conservative. This is consistent with my view above, where I note that I’m not thrilled with Daniels’ endorsement. That said, they are different in that there is a personal loyalty issue tied up in Daniels’ decision, and in that he’s not campaigned for or done much for Lugar besides endorse. In contrast, Santo ran all over the state and bloodied his hands for Specter. Finally, Specter was way, waaaaaay more un-conservative than Lugar (though it was wise to bring both to heel).

            Personally, I don’t really care what people who have absolutely no judgement of conservative results think about Daniels’ conservatism. We’re talking about roughly the same group that discarded Perry in favor of Santorum in two states where Perry could have been competitive with social conservative support.

          • AceInTX

            Please bear in mind, I’m simply playing Devils advocate here….The Santo Endorsement of Specter still sticks in my craw…

            I’m just saying….whats good for the goose is good for the gander….Luger has a personal friendship with both Lugar and Murdock…he chose Lugar over Murdock….so…Was Lugar a better….or closer friend….or did he pick Lugar over Murdock over ideology?

            Or maybe it was a party/power play?

            I don’t care how you slice it…or what excuses you make for him…this doesn’t look good on Daniels

  • LibertarianHawk

    Right after the Howey poll came out (and, it should be noted, Brian Howey is the state’s preeminent political writer…he’s generally supportive of the political establishment and has been very supportive of Lugar throughout the race)…

    Lugar quickly held a press conference. And, I have to say, what he said was pathetic. I’ll not be voting for Lugar next Tuesday, but he is somebody that I respect….which is why it was hard to hear him flail about in desperation. Here are some snippets…

    ***
    Just after the poll?s release, Lugar held a 20-minute news conference where he listed off a set of constituencies ? farmers, labor unions, veterans, Jews, women, and ethnic minorities ? that he said should support him, given what he?s done for them.

    ?I believe that right now, if a majority of Hoosiers were to vote in an election ? that is all Hoosiers, regardless of party, Republicans, independents, Democrats ? I would win. I have a majority support in our state,? Lugar said.

    ?I want everybody in the state to vote for me on Tuesday ? everybody. I?m not asking anybody to cross over. I?m just saying, positively register your vote, because if you do not, I may not be able to continue serving you. At this point, help. I would say it is very, very important that people get there, and they get there fast.?
    ***

    Of course he’s asking people to cross over. And making a plea to labor unions?

    Help?

    • jomo2009

      will be seen, I believe, as the last nail in Lugar’s coffin. One might be able to rationalize a House association endorsing a senior Senate officeholder. But to actively promote the crossover of voters from the opposite party to come to his/her rescue is unforgivable.

  • chrysostom15

    That said, his win would ensure the GOP holds his seat and his loss could potentially throw that seat into play and could decide the fate of Senate Control. Lugar is still far better than McCain, Brown, and several others.

    That said, I think Lugar is likely toast.

    • acat

      Which Dem have they got that you think can beat Mourdock?

      Mew

      • LibertarianHawk

        …I’ll say this much: I’m not sure Rep. Joe Donnelly, the Dem candidate, could beat either Lugar or Mourdock.

        I do think — heck, I know — that Donnelly would much prefer Mourdock to Lugar. There are a lot of voters here — including a healthy number of Dems — who vote for Lugar as an involuntary action.

        But this is also a state that (a) went for Obama in 2008, (b) elected Evan Bayh 5 times…including his last 3 races with more than 60% of the vote, (c) went for establishmentarian Dan Coats in a contested primary during the Tea Party heavy 2010 cycle.

        In other words, it’s not quite as dark red as many think. And most Republicans who have won statewide elections have tended to be relatively moderate.

        I wouldn’t count Donnelly out. I think Mourdock will win. But I wouldn’t bet the farm on it.

        • APA Guy

          Joe Donnelly won’t come within 15 points of Mourdock. Outside South Bend, he’s about as popular as a turd in a punch bowl.

          • LibertarianHawk

            And, like I said, I expect Mourdock will win. I’m not saying otherwise.

            For one thing, the state Democratic Party is in tatters right now. Even they are admitting as much.

            All I’m saying is that Indiana has elected its share of Democrats to statewide office. Heck, how many years was it between Orr and Daniels in the governor’s office? 16?

          • earlgrey

            8 years of Evan Bayh and then O’Bannon won after Bayh left. O’Bannon won a second term in an election year gimmick by removing gas taxes when gas prices spiked. It was a temporary measure, but it got him re-elected and he died in office.

        • acat

          And you’ve hit the major historic problem with Indiana .. and Utah and others. They pick a guy – Lugar, Hatch, etc. – and assume that he or she is doing the job.
          (I could add South Carolina .. Graham needs to go)

          Thing is, voters woke up in 2010 .. and I *don’t* think they’re going to send Lugar back…

          Mew

      • earlgrey

        Okay those two might not go together, but that has always been how she is.

        She is really mad at the outsiders calling for people to support Mourdock, and she thinks they are handing the seat to the democrats by not supporting Lugar.

        I have had to keep my preference to myself on this one, and usually I have been pretty frank with her about my political actiivism. This one has her fired up.

        Of course she is closer in age to Lugar and so he has been a fixture in IN politics for much of her life. That might explain part of it.

        I also got an earful when I was pushing that one guy from IN over Dan Coats. I don’t remember his name, but I think he ran for Congress and won after the Republican resigned due to a sex scandal.

        • LibertarianHawk

          And, yes, he’s now in the House.

          I have to say: your mom might be the first person I’ve ever heard of giving somebody else an earful in support of Dan Coats.

          Don’t get me wrong: I’m glad Coats won the seat…or, at least, that Ellsworth didn’t. But he’s not exactly the kind of pol that arouses too much passion, is he? ;)

          • earlgrey

            but according to my mom he attends their church. Of course I think he lived in NC right before he ran for Senate, but I am not a Hoosier any more and don’t know enough about Coats. I could be wrong.

        • PowerToThePeople

          and the issue with your mom (maybe) and with so many others in this county is comfortable syndrome.

          They know the person’s name, the person is the one they voted for so many times before, they do not keep up with politics much, so they simply stay with what is comfortable. This is why you see so many obviously moderate to conservative folks vote dem. Great Grandpappy voted dem, grandpappy voted dem, daddy voted dem, so they vote dem. Ask them about democratic policies, and they know little and simply regurgitate nonsense they heard somewhere. It is about being comfortable and not rocking the boat.

          The way to approach it most likely is how I had to with some of my family members. Find out what makes them the maddest whether it be spending, abortion, Obamacare, etc. Ask them if they would support someone who supports the things they are so against. Once you get a no answer, let them know the person they have voted for so many times supports the things they despise. Then show them the way the new person would vote and many times it will change their vote.

          Got to be sneaky with the elderly and the comfort voters.

          • earlgrey

            I’ll try it

            I have learned so much in the past few years about how to talk politics with people. Mostly from blogs.

            Some of this is of course through trial and error (lots of error), but I think I am definitely better than I used to be.

  • tngal

    Maybe if they endorsed him, he’d feel a little better about himself and his chances.

    What’s really funny – is Ryan pushed for this guy and *shockingly* the entire republican movement hasn’t rallied to Lugar’s cause. Now he’s dragging out anybody and everybody who even remotely likes him.

    This is just sad.

  • uncmike

    fall either this year, or in the next election cycle. If conservatism is to make headway, the RINOs must either change (doubtful) or be booted out of office and replaced by individuals who put country ahead of self or who put country ahead of loyalty to old RINOs pals–I’m referring to Daniels here.

    • mikeymike143

      its at 12:30 to 2 at the veterans memorial plaza.

      https://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tnmn&__att=iframe#!/events/205803916201325/

      http://connect.freedomworks.org/node/234631

    • LibertarianHawk

      …I’m about as rock-ribbed a conservative as you’re likely to come across.

      We, as a movement, would have to have our collective head examined if we’re going to jettison people like Mitch Daniels to the asheap of RINOism.

      Do you realize how successful he’s been as a conservative governor? And I’m talking about things like a statewide school voucher program…teacher merit pay….vastly expanding charter schools….making Indiana the first rust belt Right-to-Work state….trimming spending all over creation while still (finally) getting the I-69 extension we’ve been waiting decades for underway….making the same public union reforms that Wisconsin did….reforming the state healthcare program into an HSA…..defunding Planned Parenthood….leasing the Indiana Toll Road, putting $4B in state coffers….capping property taxes at 1% of assessed value….

      And, for 6 of his 8 years, he had a Democratic House majority!

      I could go on. Honestly, I have a hard time thinking of what more we could’ve asked of him.

      We may as well sit here and badmouth Reagan and Goldwater.

      • conservativerock5

        But ultimately he gives in to the establishment when pressed.

        • LibertarianHawk

          But, then, so did Reagan.

          Daniels is a pragmatic guy. And I would argue — strongly — that this has been key to his success. He picks certain battles…and pays almost no attention to others. And, more often than not, he has won the battles he’s picked.

          Ultimately, I think too much is made about this “establishment vs. outsider” thing. After all, our goal as conservatives is to *become* the Republican establishment, is it not? Or at least to strongly influence it.

          To do that, there will be times for being antagonistic and other times where we need them to achieve our goals. It’s easy to forget this, but do you realize that Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe could’ve, had they so desired, not only allowed Obamacare to pass more easily…but also the public option Trojan Horse?

          Lieberman tripped that up. All Obama would’ve needed was one more vote. And he didn’t get a single Republican vote. Not the Maine sisters. Not Lugar. Not Scott Brown.

          One of the reasons I so wanted Daniels to run for president is *because* he has the bona fides with the Republican establishment. We need more people of his ideological makeup (and this is a guy who recommends books by Virginia Postrel, Charles Murray, Hayek, and Friedman) with some pull in the Republican establishment.

  • chbroussard

    even old enough to vote? I can smell that flop sweat all the way down here in Texas.

  • hoosierdaddyiu

    Carmel High School is REALLY big! #eyeroll This is one of the saddest most pathetic things I’ve ever seen from a campaign. Also a couple thoughts on Mitch from a Hoosier: Always pay more attention to what he does than what he says. Mitch will lull the opposition to sleep so well with rhetoric that they barely notice he is passing every meaningful conservative reform there is. That is sometimes hard for non Hoosiers to see. Also, no one here blames him for the Lugar endorsement. It was tepid at best and clearly done more on a close personal relationship than politics. For those reasons it hasn’t had much impact.

  • Pingback: Hien Jou

  • Pingback: Alexis Fyler

  • Pingback: Automotive Forum

  • Pingback: alcohol

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: Reverse Number Lookup

  • Pingback: umow sie na randke

  • Pingback: แทงบอล

  • Pingback: umow sie na randke

  • Pingback: randka

  • Pingback: umow sie na randke

  • Pingback: serwis randkowy

  • Pingback: steel strapping

  • Pingback: wielu ludzi w jednym miejscu

  • Pingback: doccia

  • Pingback: distilling wine

  • Pingback: PC

  • Pingback: my latest blog post

  • Pingback: I was reading this

  • Pingback: Why Not Check Here

  • Pingback: breast actives

  • Pingback: Karaoke on sale

  • Pingback: madam lux

  • Pingback: work from home uk

  • Pingback: desain interior rumah

  • Pingback: biaya bangun rumah

  • Pingback: Julie Leiendecker

  • Pingback: Becki Dufrane

  • Pingback: Flooring Installers

  • Pingback: Clint Lamberton

  • Pingback: curriculum vitae

  • Pingback: Livia Celadon

  • Pingback: cv wzór

  • Pingback: Franklyn Solliday

  • Pingback: John Markin

  • Pingback: John Markin

  • Pingback: checking phone numbers

  • Pingback: sofy rozkładane

  • Pingback: John Markin

  • Pingback: Inverter Servo Motion Control

  • Pingback: Teichfolie

  • Pingback: Auto Forum

  • Pingback: why payday loans are bad

  • Pingback: Scooters

  • Pingback: distillation

  • Pingback: koi

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: super randka