Palin's ABC Interview: Stumped On Bush Doctrine, Seems To Contradict McCain On Pakistan (VIDEO)

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Palin's ABC Interview: Stumped On Bush Doctrine, Seems To Contradict McCain On Pakistan (VIDEO) stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

The Huffington Post   |  Seth Colter Walls and Sam Stein
First Posted: 09-11-08 07:13 PM   |   Updated: 10-12-08 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Pppp

In her first major interview as the Republican vice presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was stumped when asked about the so-called "Bush Doctrine," unable to answer whether she agreed with the six-year-old U.S. policy of military preemption.

Asked by ABC News' Charlie Gibson whether she supported the Bush Doctrine, Palin stared blankly for a moment before turning the question back on Gibson. "In what respect?"

The ABC anchor responded, "Well, what do you interpret it to be?" clearly testing her knowledge of the policy that has been in place since September 2002, before the Iraq war.

Palin couldn't say, offering an answer that didn't even mention preemption. "I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell-bent in destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made, and with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better."

Gibson, who clearly felt he had not received a sufficient answer to the question he had asked, proceeded to define the Bush Doctrine for the governor. According to Bush's National Security Strategy from September 2002: "While the United States will constantly strive to enlist the support of the international community, we will not hesitate to act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of self defense by acting preemptively against such terrorists, to prevent them from doing harm against our people and our country."

Thus, Gibson pressed Palin. "The Bush Doctrine is we have the right to self-defense, pre-emptive strike against any country we think is going to attack us," he noted. "Do you agree with it?"

Finally, Palin came close to offering an opinion on preemption. "Charlie, if there is enough intelligent and legitimate evidence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country," she said.

Story continues below
advertisement

Later in the interview, Palin was asked why exactly being the governor of Alaska made her an expert on Russia -- a claim that the McCain campaign has used to justify her national security bonafides. Her response was to cite geographic proximity, claiming that from some points in her home state, one could actually see the increasingly confrontational nation.

PALIN: We have to keep our eyes on Russia. Under the leadership there.


GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions does the proximity of the state give you?

PALIN: They're our next door neighbors. And you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska.

There were times during her appearance on ABC that Palin seemingly did not have a full grasp of McCain's own foreign policy positions. For example, when pressed by Gibson whether, in efforts to combat terrorism, the United States should target al Qaeda figures in Pakistan without that country's permission, Palin tried to circumvent the question. The ABC host attempted to pin her down with a yes or no answer, to which Palin seemed to suggest that it would be an American imperative to make such an un-sanctioned attack.

"In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America, and our allies, we must do whatever it takes, and we must not blink, Charlie. In making the tough decisions of where we go, and even who we target. she said.

The response, though hardly definitive, seemed to put her at odds with McCain, who has harshly criticized Obama for saying he would target terrorist leaders that are replenishing their ranks in northwest Pakistan.

In her first major interview as the Republican vice presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was stumped when asked about the so-called "Bush Doctrine," unable to answer whether she agreed wi...
In her first major interview as the Republican vice presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was stumped when asked about the so-called "Bush Doctrine," unable to answer whether she agreed wi...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
2876
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next › Last » (70 pages total)
- Politiking I'm a Fan of Politiking 3 fans permalink

Her response to Charlie Gibson was correct! Even the experts have opinions about the Bush Doctrine. If anyone on this post really knows exactly what the Bush Doctrine is, then you should be the VP running mate of McCain. Stop Bashing Palin. Dems will regret denouncing Palin and dishonoring McCain because of their fanatical support of Obama and 8 years of hatred of Bush.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26687065/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:35 PM on 09/13/2008
- nomobull I'm a Fan of nomobull 45 fans permalink
photo

and she didn't know any

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 AM on 09/14/2008

I wonder if someone can help me. What is the Bush Doctrine? The Boston Globe says "The Bush Doctrine - born on Sept. 20, 2001, when President Bush bluntly warned the sponsors of violent jihad: 'You are either with us, or you are with the terrorists'- is dead. " I hate to sound simple, but in actually researching it in good sources, I'm still confused. Is it really that clear?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:36 PM on 09/13/2008
- freedog I'm a Fan of freedog 2 fans permalink

The problem is this..Char­lie is the first journalist to coint bush's national defense policy as the "Bush Doctrine". All the pundits on all the other channels were commenting that they had never heard of it before and neither has anyone on this post. So if you're trying to make this an issue..sor­ry.

Why McCain will be our next President:

1. Obama's inability to connect with middle america (cling to guns and bible quote...ma­jor gaffe)
2. Obama's lack of any backbone
3. Obama's "philosophizing" ....he's a mental masturbator come on...143 "present votes"? For God's sake, please make a decision.
3. Should have picked Hillary
...and the closing factors...
4. Nancy Pelosi
5. Harry Reid

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:19 PM on 09/13/2008
- gladys46 I'm a Fan of gladys46 236 fans permalink

You need to keep up with the latest projected electoral count!!! You don't see Obama's crowds drindle when his VP pic is on the road campaigning ... where's Sarah, can she campaign on the road alone ... no ... can McCain campaign on the road to any appreciable audience NO!!!

Give your nonsense a break for a day ... why don't ya ... ENOUGH!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:42 PM on 09/13/2008

FreeDog,

Just do an internet search to find that The Bush Doctrine has been discussed before over and over.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:47 PM on 09/13/2008

freedog, your main point is completely incorrect. I've been hearing about "The Bush Doctrine" ever since he decided it was OK to attack any country that had not attacked us, or Pre-Emptively.

Maybe you McC supporters are simply the ones who DO NOT PAY ATTENTION. How could you support that ticket otherwise? Think about it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:09 PM on 09/13/2008

Please.

1) I am "middle" America. I grew up in the city, moved to the country. I hunt. I look to the bible for advice. I support Obama.

2) How does he lack backbone? Knowing where to pick your battles, when to stand is half of having a spine. Childish attacks are laughed at; "lipstick on a pig?" EVERYONE is making fun of the McCain camp for that. "Sex Ed for kindergarteners?" Even "The View" saw through that. Obama beat Clinton the same way he'll beat McCain. "We are the party of Roosevelt. We are the party of Kennedy. So don't tell me that Democrats won't defend this country. Don't tell me that Democrats won't keep us safe." Powerful statement for a guy with no "backbone.­"

3) Philosophizing? Making absolutely sure the bill you support is a bill that will work? For example: let's say there was a bill that is funds for an orphanage, and there wasn't enough money in it; would you strike it down and be labled an orphan hater, or would you accept it and be labeled heartless for throwing only pennies towards those children? No, you'd vote present and bring the bill back to drafting and try to get more money in there. You'd do the right thing.

4) Biden was the smart choice. Hillary's campaign was mismanaged, mangled, and had numerous power struggles. She also might've negated Obama's declaration of not accepting lobbiest money.

5) Pelosi /Reid? No effect.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:28 PM on 09/13/2008
- mdbmama I'm a Fan of mdbmama 18 fans permalink

What are you talking about?? Maybe that's the problem with those of you who still support bush and McBush. You don't pay attention. You don't read the papers. You don't listen to the news - excpet maybe the Faux News Channel which makes at least 2 factual errors / 10 minutes. That's certainly one explanation. No one I know has not heard of the Bush Doctrine. Every single one of us knew EXACTLY what he was asking Palin. Do you agree that preemptive strikes are ok and is it ok with you to go against the rest of world? The fact that she didn't know that is another indication of problems. I totally disagree with ALL of her stands on the issues that matter to me. And thus, will not be voting for McCain. By the way, I'm a white woman, college educated, professional, mother and grandmother. But, I have an actual brain that functions. Obama/Biden '08

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:43 PM on 09/13/2008
- reggie1298 I'm a Fan of reggie1298 3 fans permalink
    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:59 AM on 09/13/2008
- reggie1298 I'm a Fan of reggie1298 3 fans permalink

Let's see if Huffies are bolder than their candidate. Because he's scared of the facts, Obama will not join McCain in the town hall meetings he agreed were a good idea. Will you read the whole article by the person who coined the phrase "Bush Doctrine"? It's even from the Washington Post!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457_pf.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:51 AM on 09/13/2008
- fistbump I'm a Fan of fistbump 5 fans permalink

Really? Krauthammer? Why don't you quote Richard Pearl or Doug Feith next?

Try to reference less of a nutjob next time, why don't you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:10 PM on 09/13/2008

do you really want to have your candidate look lifeless next to obama?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:08 PM on 09/13/2008
photo

The main reason McCain wanted Obama on the road with him was to get butts in the seats. He is well aware of the lack of enthusiasm among his supporters. He picked Palin now, so he can at least draw a crowd. He also bores people to tears when he gives speeches, and this is an area where Obama does well. Thus his second motive to tie up Obama's agenda was to keep him in a forum that McCain feels he has an advantage in. Finally, Obama never said he would do the town hall tour, he said he would think about. McCain now acts the part of a scorned lover - even admitting, on the View, and on Letterman, that his character assassination of Obama is the result of Obama's refusal to do the town hall meetings with him.

But none of that matters. What does matter is that half of all Americans are ignorant enough to vote for Bushian incompetence and Christofascist, jingoistic faux patriotism and war again. The economy, the needs of the people, and the reputation of America in the world be damned.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:27 PM on 09/13/2008
- nomobull I'm a Fan of nomobull 45 fans permalink
photo

like a child who gets mad because the other child refuses to be bullied into doing things his way.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:09 AM on 09/14/2008

GIBSON DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THE BUSH DOCTRINE IS, PEOPLE. This is a verifiable fact. Krauthammer defined it before 9/11:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457_pf.html
This article is just another slant towards the left. Whats new....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:48 AM on 09/13/2008

Thank you very much, Miss South Carolina

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:11 AM on 09/13/2008
- Dap I'm a Fan of Dap 51 fans permalink
photo

McCain is spending millions of dollars to buy Palin a "clue".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:06 AM on 09/13/2008

Gibson and HuffPo bloggers Walls and Stein don't appear to know what the Bush Doctrine is either.

It's not about military "preemption," something every country inarguably has the right to engage in, rather the Bush Doctrine is about "preventive war," a very different sort of thing.

If tomorrow Canada starts massing troops on our border in preparation for an invasion, we have the absolute right to "preempt" that invasion by going over the border to attack them first. The question posed by the Bush Doctrine is whether or not we have the right to make war and invade other countries to "prevent" their becoming a threat in the future. That's not exactly a minor distinction, and Gibson, Wall and Stein seem to have neglected to follow the first rule of ambush style journalism: in order to avoid making a fool of yourself, make sure you know what you are talking about before going on the attack.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:36 AM on 09/13/2008

Calm down, already. It's not as if he could read.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:05 PM on 09/12/2008

To The person below me i hope you respond to this: First of all, i wanted to say that anyone who watched the interview, specifically when she was asked about the bush doctrine, should be able to see visibily that she had no clue what the policy of her own country's president was. And i respect your opinions, as I believe everyone should, we live in a country where we can all talk about things and argue and still have a beer at the end of the day, but are you really going to "call out" Charles Gibson? He is an interviewer, whose job is to get answers. Would you prefer if we had someone on the far right to interview him, like Mr. OREILLY? (i bet you would) or on the left side- Stephen Colbert? Sorry if you dont like the fact that the republican vice presidential nominee doesn't know about her own leaders polcy's, or much about any policy (especially foreign), other than the bridge to no where.
And i love jesus too, but here is a quote i want to leave you with, just to seep in one more time

GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They're our next door neighbors. And you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska.

WOW. she must know a lot about russian, she can actually see it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:34 AM on 09/13/2008

Not sure what 4 yrs of higher education has to do with your knowledge of "the bush doctrine".­..but if it means you knew that 'the doctrine' has been ever changing..­.revised for a 4th time about 20 months ago, then you knew more about it than 99.9% of the people watching the interview, including the interviewer, Charlie Gibson. I have a feeling that Charlie has been riddled w/ emails throughout the day, giving him the education he deserves. He may as well have asked Palin who the President of Mexico is...would have been just as obvious to most intelligent viewers tha he was merely attempting to belittle her. Most psychologists would say that Charlie has an ax to grind with the 'right' in this country, and that he was most likely belittled by his father on a regular basis as a child. Sad.
I'd venture to say that there were more registered voters waking up today who will be casting their votes for McCain/Palin than there were at 6pm yesterday.
By the way, if you're snickering at my user name, let me end my post with a healthy comment:: Jesus, whom I love and would defend to my death, was never a community organizer.­..He rarely stayed in one place long enough. He was a carpenter, a teacher, and a son. Simple stuff really.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:03 PM on 09/12/2008
- Darkdonnie I'm a Fan of Darkdonnie 5 fans permalink

Reasoned salient points! You know they won't like you in here.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:10 PM on 09/12/2008
- optech007 I'm a Fan of optech007 6 fans permalink

Jesus was also the King of Kings which I think ranks higher than governor.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:19 PM on 09/12/2008

to bad you don't read the Bible because Jesus Christ could have been considered a community organizer. By the way, If it was not for community organizers, mostly pastors, like Martin Luther King Jr. this country would still be living in Jim Crow days. Community Organizers are the voice for the poor and unheard. Just like the Lobbiest are for the Republicans.


"New Rule: Republicans must stop saying Obama is an elitist and just admit you don't like him because of something he can't help, something that's a result of the way he was born. Admit it---you're not voting for him because he's smarter than you."
---Bill Maher

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:59 PM on 09/12/2008

I don't at all think that Gibson was trying to belittle her. He was trying to do his job and show the American people what she knows (or doesn't) about foriegn policy. If she answered the question perfectly, i'm sure you wouldn't have any complaints. And no, most people don't know the Bush Doctrine word for word but since she may potentially be the next Vice President and maybe even president, i would HOPE that she at least knew what it was. it seemed as if she had never heard of the bush doctrine in her life? "his world view?" lol

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:01 AM on 09/13/2008
- freedog I'm a Fan of freedog 2 fans permalink

Why McCain will be our next President:

1. Obama's inability to connect with middle america (cling to guns and bible quote...ma­jor gaffe)
2. Obama's lack of any backbone
3. Obama's "philosophizing" ....he's a mental masturbator come on...143 "present votes"? For God's sake, please make a decision.
3. Should have picked Hillary
...and the closing factors...
4. Nancy Pelosi
5. Harry Reid

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:26 PM on 09/13/2008

Charlie isn't the one running for VP.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:49 AM on 09/13/2008
- optech007 I'm a Fan of optech007 6 fans permalink

So, Charlie Gibson had to tell Palin what the Bush Doctrine is. I guess this is sorta like when Stephanopoulos had to remind Obama what religion he practices.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 PM on 09/12/2008

Not even close.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:10 PM on 09/12/2008
- optech007 I'm a Fan of optech007 6 fans permalink

You're right that they're not close.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:19 PM on 09/12/2008
- Tommygun264 I'm a Fan of Tommygun264 198 fans permalink
photo

You're pathetic.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:25 AM on 09/13/2008
- reggie1298 I'm a Fan of reggie1298 3 fans permalink

How so? I don't see a lot of articles here about that gaffe. I don't see the Republicans using it the way the libs would.

If I were a lib I'd be real careful about pouncing on slips of the tongue - Joe Biden is on the loose!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:57 AM on 09/13/2008

The "Bush Doctrine" could mean one of a few things. How about some specificity on the interviewer's part? Its a good, fair question, but at least make it possible to answer.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:32 AM on 09/13/2008
- pattio66 I'm a Fan of pattio66 8 fans permalink

From another article on this site, the "he" in question is Todd Palin:

"Despite holding no government position, he attends official meetings and is copied on e-mails concerning state business."

Why does it appear that I'm the only person concerned about this, particularly in a national-security sense? Someone please explain to me when it became okay to carbon copy official e-mails to a spouse?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:19 PM on 09/12/2008
- Darkdonnie I'm a Fan of Darkdonnie 5 fans permalink

Because you are a paranoid fanatical zealot.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:54 PM on 09/12/2008
- Tommygun264 I'm a Fan of Tommygun264 198 fans permalink
photo

Deflection - not even an attempt at an excuse, but it's not like the pubs have ever played by the rules?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:27 AM on 09/13/2008

You're not the only one. People across the country are very concerned. Especially because one report says he learned let's say "sensitive information" from Todd.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:57 PM on 09/12/2008
- mdbmama I'm a Fan of mdbmama 18 fans permalink

You are NOT the only one, believe me!! I saw that line and it jumped out at me like it was in bold, italic letters! I almost had a heart attack! HOLY COW!! Can you imagine what the Republicans would say and do if they saw something like that in relation to Senator Obama and Michelle say? Or remember how hysterical they became when President Clinton had Hillary working on Health Care? I do. Honest to GOD!!! The hypocrisy grows thicker and thicker. I almost cannot breathe!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 PM on 09/13/2008

On the Charles Gibson ABC interview with Sarah Palin, on the 2nd segment tonight, toward the end of the interview, Gibson asked Palin do you think someone with 5 children and a new born can do it all? Palin gave this blanket answer, Of course!" What Gibson show have asked is, but can you do it well? Anybody can say they are raising 5 children, including that of a child with special needs. But are the needs being met. You see people on welfare, with lots of kids, you see bad parents with lots of kids..yet they claim they are raising them, because they see them in the house or in and out of the house. But raising successful children is another thing. My mother had a plack on the wall in our kitchen, it was a quote from Jacqueline Kennedy "If you bungle up raising your children, nothing else matters" Caroline Kennedy is a wonderful example, of a role model. So is Chelsey Clinton. I raised two successful children, inspiring them; by example; the hard work ethic., finishing a college education. I inspired them to get exposure to the world, and other cultures around the world, the Arts and History.. A curiosity for knowledge outside their bubble. These were all things we inspired in our children .The stupidity of being a high school dropout and getting knocked-up, was never a consideration, as my daughter now tells me. Thank you sweetheart!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:01 PM on 09/12/2008

If national security begins and ends with oil. Is the Iraq war about oil?
Well, well, well, (pun intended) I guess Sarah truly does understand the Bush Doctrine.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:45 PM on 09/12/2008

I have to sigh every time I say this.....T­he Iraq war was started in 1991 after Saddam invaded Kuwait, for their oil. We were only doing what the UN said we could do and drove him out. Then, after 8 years of Clinton (a former Governor of a small state) doing nothing and letting the UN inspectors get treated like dirt, we finally got a president with some balls to take the fight to Saddam who had ALREADY used WMD's on the Kurds...so he had them. But Bush spent many many months getting UN approval and the Congress' approval to go after Saddam and he got it. He was MORE than patient and let the diplomats work much longer than he should have. He has NEVER wavered in his plan and we all know what he is going to do, he doesn't mince words. I believe Palin will do the same, but I can't figure out what Obama will do, can you? If this was a war about oil, why is gasoline so expensive?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:51 PM on 09/12/2008

You honestly think Sarah will tell you the truth? In no uncertain words? Believe me, the points you made about GWB are exactly why I voted for him. I believed that no matter how bad it got he would just tell you. Whether you liked it or not, you'd at least know. That's NOT the case with Sarah. Sarah plays 'shell' games. If she can snow you with words you will be had.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:08 PM on 09/12/2008
photo

There's a lot more to this than it seems you are aware of, you should read this.

http://www.studyworld.com/biography/historical_figures/saddam_hussein.htm

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:14 AM on 09/13/2008
- mdbmama I'm a Fan of mdbmama 18 fans permalink

Oil is so expensive, sigh, because the bush administration has worked tirelessly to remove all regulations from the industry, to allow speculators to come in and set the price (the best reason), and to line their pockets (remember they are OIL MEN) and those of their buddies!!! Get your ears turned on!!! There are plenty or non-partisan sites that will explain this to you - yet again!!! Unless of course, you really are not interested in catching the truth!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:53 PM on 09/13/2008

republicans don't like history because it doesn't fit into their nice little neat box of how the world works. Saddam did not invade Kuwait necessarily for oil, it was also due to the fact that iraq refused/refuses to acknowledge the existance of kuwait as a state. it was to take back land (yes that had oil). clinton (who you think doesnt have balls) ordered air strikes in late 1998 on specific targets in iraq. It was a huge success--but at a cost: America lost the ability to have contacts in iraq so they never really knew how much damage was done. The UN subsequently didn't find anything because THERE WASN'T ANYTHING LEFT--the air raids destroyed them all. Bush then relied on iraqi exiles who fled the country in order to justify his reasoning for war. Too bad our friends in England, Germany, Italy amongst others warned us that these exiles knew nothing and they shouldn't be trusted. Bush lied to get us into war (to divide and conquer the oil fields) and the rest is history. KNOW YOUR HISTORY AND THINGS WILL BE A LOT CLEARER.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:23 PM on 09/13/2008
- Darkdonnie I'm a Fan of Darkdonnie 5 fans permalink

Oil is another word for energy which drives the world’s economy! Its very elementary, destabilize oil supply, collapse the worlds economy and then Darfur would be a cake walk. Say about One hundred million de@d inside six weeks! Oil = National Security I would say so!!!!!!!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:01 PM on 09/12/2008

Then why did it take 30 years (since the oil embargo of the seventies) for us to think about doing something about it. Oh that's right Ronnie Reagan and Bush 1 had to makes sure their "oil buddies" got rich first.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:03 AM on 09/13/2008
- fistbump I'm a Fan of fistbump 5 fans permalink

Kuwait was about oil, Iraq was about oil, Georgia is and will be about oil.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:18 PM on 09/13/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next › Last » (70 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect