We don't listen; instead, we elect folks like the Clintons who are
beholden to defense contractors, which helps ensure we will have
some war going on somewhere at just about anytime. Right now her
favorite war is Iraq, but she's laid the groundwork for Iran.
--- In Dems2008@yahoogroups.com, lisa pallez <lisapallez@...> wrote:
>
> Let's maybe reread at least George Washington's Farewell Address
(at bottom), dated though some references are (and those are actually
the parts that are reminding me of this group now) . . . do we need
more fault lines in our now entrenched party in this now corporatized
government?
>
>
> http://www.roncorvus.com/partyfree.htm
>
> A prescient quote from George Washington's final "farewell"
presidential address in 1796:
> I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the
State, with particular reference to the founding of them on
geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive
view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful
effects of the spirit of party generally.
>
> This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having
its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under
different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled,
controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen
in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy....
>
> It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the
public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded
jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part
against another; foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens
the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a
facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of
party passion. Thus the policy and the will of one country are
subjected to the policy and will of another.
>
> There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful
checks upon the administration of the government, and serve to keep
alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably
true; and in governments of a monarchical cast patriotism may look
with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in
those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is
a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency it is
certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary
purpose; and there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought
to be by force of public opinion to mitigate and assuage it. A fire
not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its
bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
>
> Moral: Washington thought political parties and political party
dominance was a very bad idea. He wanted it to be about the best
candidate winning. Not about 2 parties taking over and preventing all
other parties â€" no matter how good their candidates â€" from having
a chance. Makes you wonder whether Washington is spinning in his
grave.
>
> With Approval Voting 2-party dominance should be lessened,
consonant with the top expressed wish of George Washington.
>
> A quote from Abraham Lincoln shortly before he was killed:
> I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and
causes me to tremble for the safety of my country... corporations
have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will
follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong
its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all
wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I
feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than
ever before, even in the midst of war. â€" Abraham Lincoln (1809-
1865) letter to Colonel William F. Elkins, 21 Nov 1864.
> Do you think Lincoln's prophecy of moneyed/corporate-powered
political corruption and control came true?
> more
>
> FAREWELL ADDRESS (1796) [below]
> George Washington
> George Washington had been the obvious choice to be the first
president of the United States, and indeed, many people had supported
ratification of the Constitution on the assumption that Washington
would be the head of the new government. By all measures, Washington
proved himself a capable, even a great, president, helping to shape
the new government and leading the country skillfully through several
crises, both foreign and domestic.
>
> Washington, like many of his contemporaries, did not understand or
believe in political parties, and saw them as fractious agencies
subversive of domestic tranquility. When political parties began
forming during his administration, and in direct response to some of
his policies, he failed to comprehend that parties would be the chief
device through which the American people would debate and resolve
major public issues. It was his fear of what parties would do to the
nation that led Washington to draft his Farewell Address.
>
> The two parties that developed in the early 1790s were the
Federalists, who supported the economic and foreign policies of the
Washington administration, and the Jeffersonian Republicans, who in
large measure opposed them. The Federalists backed Secretary of the
Treasury Alexander Hamilton's plan for a central bank and a tariff
and tax policy that would promote domestic manufacturing; the
Jeffersonians opposed the strong government inherent in the
Hamiltonian plan, and favored farmers as opposed to manufacturers. In
foreign affairs, both sides wanted the United States to remain
neutral in the growing controversies between Great Britain and
France, but the Federalists favored the English and the Jeffersonians
the French. The Address derived at least in part from Washington's
fear that party factionalism would drag the United States into this
fray.
>
> Two-thirds of the Address is devoted to domestic matters and the
rise of political parties, and Washington set out his vision of what
would make the United States a truly great nation. He called for men
to put aside party and unite for the common good, an "American
character" wholly free of foreign attachments. The United States must
concentrate only on American interests, and while the country ought
to be friendly and open its commerce to all nations, it should avoid
becoming involved in foreign wars. Contrary to some opinion,
Washington did not call for isolation, only the avoidance of
entangling alliances. While he called for maintenance of the treaty
with France signed during the American Revolution, the problems
created by that treaty ought to be clear. The United States must "act
for ourselves and not for others."
>
> The Address quickly entered the realm of revealed truth. It was
for decades read annually in Congress; it was printed in children's
primers, engraved on watches and woven into tapestries. Many
Americans, especially in subsequent generations, accepted
Washington's advice as gospel, and in any debate between neutrality
and involvement in foreign issues would invoke the message as
dispositive of all questions. Not until 1949, in fact, would the
United States again sign a treaty of alliance with a foreign nation.
>
> For further reading: Burton I. Kaufman, ed., Washington's Farewell
Address: The View from the 20th Century (1969); Paul A. Varg, Foreign
Policies of the Founding Fathers (1963); Alexander De Conde,
Entangling Alliances (1958).
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
>
> FAREWELL ADDRESS
> Friends and Fellow-Citizens:
>
> The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the
Executive Government of the United States being not far distant, and
the time actually arrived when your thoughts must be employed in
designating the person who is to be clothed with that important
trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a
more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now
apprise you of the resolution I have formed to decline being
considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be
made....
>
> The impressions with which I first undertook the arduous trust
were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust
I will only say that I have, with good intentions, contributed toward
the organization and administration of the Government the best
exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not
unconscious in the outset of the inferiority of my qualifications,
experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others,
has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and every day
the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more that the
shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome.
Satisfied that if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my
services they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe that,
while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene,
patriotism does not forbid it....
>
> Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare
which can not end with my life, and the apprehension of danger
natural to that solicitude, urge me on an occasion like the present
to offer to your solemn contemplation and to recommend to your
frequent review some sentiments which are the result of much
reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, and which appear to me
all important to permanency of your felicity as a people....
Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your
hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm
the attachment.
>
> The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also
now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the
edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at
home, your peace abroad, of your safety, of your prosperity, of that
very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee
that from different causes and from different quarters much pains
will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the
conviction of this truth, as this is the point in your political
fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies
will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and
insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should
properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your
collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a
cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming
yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of
> your political safety and prosperity; watching for its
preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may
suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned, and
indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to
alienate any portion of our country from the rest or to enfeeble the
sacred ties which now link together the various parts.
>
> For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest.
Citizens by birth or choice of a common country, that country has a
right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which
belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just
pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local
discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same
religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a
common cause fought and triumphed together. The independence and
liberty you possess are the work of joint councils and joint efforts,
of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.
>
> But these considerations, however powerfully they address
themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which
apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our
country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and
preserving the union of the whole.
>
> The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South,
protected by the equal laws of a common government, finds in the
productions of the latter great additional resources of maritime and
commercial enterprise and precious materials of manufacturing
industry. The South, in the same intercourse, benefiting by the same
agency of the North, sees its agriculture grow and its commerce
expand. Turning partly into its own channels the seamen of the North,
it finds its particular navigation invigorated; and while it
contributes in different ways to nourish and increase the general
mass of the national navigation, it looks forward to the protection
of a maritime strength to which itself is unequally adapted. The
East, in a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the
progressive improvement of interior communications by land and water
will more and more find, a valuable vent for the commodities which it
brings from abroad or manufactures at home. The West derives
> from the East supplies requisite to its growth and comfort, and
what is perhaps of still greater consequence, it must of necessity
owe the secure enjoyment of indispensable outlets for its own
productions to the weight, influence, and the future maritime
strength of the Atlantic side of the Union, directed by an
indissoluble community of interest as one nation. Any other tenure by
which the West can hold this essential advantage, whether derived
from its own separate strength or from an apostate and unnatural
connection with any foreign power, must be intrinsically precarious.
>
> While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and
particular interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail to
find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength,
greater resource, proportionably greater security from external
danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign
nations, and what is of inestimable value, they must derive from
union an exemption from those broils and wars between themselves
which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together
by the same governments, which their own rivalships alone would be
sufficient to produce, but which opposite foreign alliances,
attachments, and intrigues would stimulate and embitter. Hence,
likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military
establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious
to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to
republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be
> considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of
the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other....
>
> Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large
a sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation in
such a case were criminal. It is well worth a fair and full
experiment. With such powerful and obvious motives to union affecting
all parts of our country, while experience shall not have
demonstrated its impracticability, there will always be reason to
distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter may endeavor to
weaken its bands.
>
> In contemplating the causes which may disturb our union it occurs
as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been
furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations--
Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western -- whence designing men
may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of
local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire
influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions
and aims of other districts. You can not shield yourselves too much
against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these
misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who
ought to be bound together by fraternal affection....
>
> To the efficacy and permanency of your union a government for the
whole is indispensable. No alliances, however strict, between the
parts can be an adequate substitute. They must inevitably experience
the infractions and interruptions which all alliances in all times
have experienced. Sensible of this momentous truth, you have improved
upon your first essay by the adoption of a Constitution of Government
better calculated than your former for an intimate union and for the
efficacious management of your common concerns. This Government, the
offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon
full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its
principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security with
energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own
amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your support.
Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in
its measures, are duties enjoined by the
> fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political
systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their
constitutions of government. But the constitution which at any time
exists till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole
people is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power
and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the
duty of every individual to obey the established government....
>
> Toward the preservation of your Government and the permanency of
your present happy state, it is requisite not only that you steadily
discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority,
but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its
principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may
be to effect in the forms of the Constitution alterations which will
impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what can not
be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be
invited remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix
the true character of governments as of other human institutions;
that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real
tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in
changes upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion exposes to
perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion;
and remember especially that for the
> efficient management of your common interests in a country so
extensive as ours a government of as much vigor as is consistent with
the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will
find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and
adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name
where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of
faction, to con-fine each member of the society within the limits
prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and
tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.
>
> I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the
State, with particular reference to the founding of them on
geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive
view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful
effects of the spirit of party generally.
>
> This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having
its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under
different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled,
controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen
in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy....
>
> It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the
public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded
jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part
against another; foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens
the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a
facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of
party passion. Thus the policy and the will of one country are
subjected to the policy and will of another.
>
> There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful
checks upon the administration of the government, and serve to keep
alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably
true; and in governments of a monarchical cast patriotism may look
with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in
those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is
a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency it is
certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary
purpose; and there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought
to be by force of public opinion to mitigate and assuage it. A fire
not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its
bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
>
> It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free
country should inspire caution in those intrusted with its
administration to confine themselves within their respective
constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one
department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends
to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to
create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism.... If in
the opinion of the people the distribution or modification of the
constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected
by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let
there be no change by usurpation; for though this in one instance may
be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free
governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly
overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit which
the use can at any time yield.
>
> Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political
prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain
would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to
subvert these great pillars of human happiness -- these firmest props
of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with
the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could
not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let
it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for
reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the
oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of
justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that
morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded
to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure,
reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality
can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
>
> It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary
spring of popular government. The rule indeed extends with more or
less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere
friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the
foundation of the fabric? Promote, then, as an object of primary
importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In
proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public
opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.
>
> As a very important source of strength and security, cherish
public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly
as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but
remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger
frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it; avoiding
likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of
expense, but by vigorous exertions in time of peace to discharge the
debts which unavoidable wars have occasioned, not ungenerously
throwing upon posterity the burthen which we ourselves ought to
bear....
>
> Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace
and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct. And
can it be that good policy does not equally enjoin it? It will be
worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period a great
nation to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a
people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can
doubt that in the course of time and things the fruits of such a plan
would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a
steady adherence to it? Can it be that Providence has not connected
the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue? The experiment,
at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human
nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?
>
> In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential than
that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations and
passionate attachments for others should be excluded, and that in
place of them just and amicable feelings toward all should be
cultivated. The nation which indulges toward another an habitual
hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a
slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is
sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest.
Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to
offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and
to be haughty and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions
of dispute occur.
>
> So, likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another
produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation,
facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases
where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the
enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the
quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or
justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of
privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation
making the concessions by unnecessarily parting with what ought to
have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a
disposition to retaliate in the parties from whom equal privileges
are withheld; and it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded
citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation) facility to
betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country without odium,
sometimes even with popularity, gilding with the
> appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable
deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good the
base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or
infatuation....
>
> Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to
believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to
be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign
influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.
But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial, else it becomes
the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a
defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and
excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see
danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts
of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues
of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its
tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to
surrender their interests.
>
> The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is,
in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little
political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed
engagements let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let
us stop.
>
> Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none or a
very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent
controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our
concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate
ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her
politics or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her
friendships or enmities.
>
> Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to
pursue a different course. If we remain one people, under an
efficient government, the period is not far off when we may defy
material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an
attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon
to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the
impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard
the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our
interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.
>
> Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our
own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny
with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in
the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or
caprice?
>
> It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with
any portion of the foreign world, so far, I mean, as we are now at
liberty to do it, for let me not be understood as capable of
patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no
less applicable to public than to private affairs that honesty is
always the best policy. I repeat, therefore, let those engagements be
observed in their genuine sense. But in my opinion it is unnecessary
and would be unwise to extend them.
>
> Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on
a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary
alliances for extraordinary emergencies.
>
> Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations are recommended by
policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should
hold an equal and impartial hand, neither seeking nor granting
exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of
things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of
commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing with powers so disposed,
in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our
merchants, and to enable the Government to support them, conventional
rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual
opinion will permit, but temporary and liable to be from time to time
abandoned or varied as experience and circumstances shall dictate;
constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for
disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of
its independence for whatever it may accept under that character;
that by such acceptance it may place
> itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal
favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving
more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon
real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion which experience
must cure, which a just pride ought to discard....
>
> Though in reviewing the incidents of my Administration I am
unconscious of intentional error, I am nevertheless too sensible of
my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many
errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently beseech the Almighty to
avert or mitigate the evils to which they may tend. I shall also
carry with me the hope that my country will never cease to view them
with indulgence, and that, after forty-five years of my life
dedicated to its service with an upright zeal, the faults of
incompetent abilities will be consigned to oblivion, as myself must
soon be to the mansions of rest.
>
> Relying on its kindness in this as in other things, and actuated
by that fervent love toward it which is so natural to a man who views
in it the native soil of himself and his progenitors for several
generations, I anticipate with pleasing expectation that retreat in
which I promise myself to realize without alloy the sweet enjoyment
of partaking in the midst of my fellow-citizens the benign influence
of good laws under a free government -- the ever-favorite object of
my heart, and the happy reward, as I trust, of our mutual cares,
labors, and dangers.
>
> Source: J.D. Richardson, ed., Compilation of Messages and Papers
of the Presidents, vol.1 (1907), 213.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
Try it now.
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Dems2008/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Dems2008/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:Dems2008-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:Dems2008-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Dems2008-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder