Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Simpson, Bowles Propose $2.4T Reduction  
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12457 posts, RR: 25
Posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1068 times:

Whilst those we elected to perform as legislators do everything in their power to not deal with the deficit, Simpson and Bowles again put out a basic roadmap for meaningful cuts to the defecit:

Quote:

Under the proposal, about one-fourth of the $2.4 trillion in deficit reduction would come from healthcare reforms and another fourth from tax reform.

The remaining reduction would come from a combination of mandatory spending cuts, stronger caps on U.S. discretionary spending, using the Consumer Price Index for inflation-indexed provisions in the budget and lower interest payments.

"The proposal also calls for a parallel process to make Social Security sustainably solvent and further actions to bring transportation spending and revenues in line and limit per capita cost growth in federal budgetary commitment to healthcare to about the growth rate of the economy," according to a summary of the plan.

Overall, the plan seeks to keep the nation's debt under 70 percent of gross domestic product in a decade, and to keep lowering that ratio in the years after.

Seems to me something like this should be the baseline, and if anyone wants to change it, they have to bring the equivalent revenue/cut to the table to counter what they want to change.

Ref: http://news.yahoo.com/bipartisan-com...reduction-143658525--business.html


Inspiration, move me brightly!
40 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineQFA380 From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 2062 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1044 times:

Lets assume a conservative estimate of a trillion dollar deficit a year for the next 10 years, they're shaving off less than a quarter of that. Not enough.

I also have no idea how they intend to keep debt under 70% of GDP when it is already 74%. Again assuming a trillion dollar deficit and 2% growth it'll be 78% next year. It is simple maths, when the debt is growing by 10% a year and the economy by 2%, you can't lower debt to GDP.

Just deckchairs on the Titanic; it will be literally impossible to reign in the deficit.


User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5521 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1030 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
Lets assume a conservative estimate of a trillion dollar deficit a year for the next 10 years, they're shaving off less than a quarter of that. Not enough.

They are offering ANOTHER $2.5T in addition to the $2.4T currently being discussed. Half is a damn good start.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1871 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1028 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Their proposals are always on point. The issue is not always the math its the politics and ideology involved with doing the right thing.


The only valid opinions are those based in facts
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11591 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1022 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
Just deckchairs on the Titanic; it will be literally impossible to reign in the deficit.

The tea people budget proposed by former right-wing VP candidate Paul Ryan would balloon the deficit.

Problem with Simpson-Bowles is: it is bi-partisan. Oh, the horror!! No right-wing tea person candidate would ever submit to bipartisan!



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9945 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1016 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 3):
Their proposals are always on point. The issue is not always the math its the politics and ideology involved with doing the right thing.

Politics has nothing to do with doing the right thing.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5521 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1009 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 5):
Politics has nothing to do with doing the right thing.

Unfortunately it often has something to do with just DOING most anything....

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineaflyingkiwi From New Zealand, joined Nov 2010, 515 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 994 times:

It's a shame that the politicians can't just swallow their pride & accept that this bipartisan plan is what's needed.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 4):
Problem with Simpson-Bowles is: it is bi-partisan. Oh, the horror!! No right-wing tea person candidate would ever submit to bipartisan!

To be fair many on the left are being too precious over spending cuts on entitlements.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11591 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 986 times:

Quoting aflyingkiwi (Reply 7):
To be fair many on the left are being too precious over spending cuts on entitlements.

There are spending cuts that should be made on programs that we pay into (read:entitlements) but there is much more fraud, waste, and abuse in military budgets.

If we were really serious about "entitlements" we, the TAXPAYER, would stop this insane idea that elected officials can give themselves raises and retirement packages. Take back their ENTITLEMENTS!! How much would that save? Limit the travel expense account, take away the life time health care and pay. How much would that save? And make it retroactive! Just the way the right wants with slave wage workers. Make people like McCain, Kerry, et al. give it all up. The way Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison concieved. These right-wingers want to privatize everything so they can raid the retirement funds. Let's raid their retirement and entitlement funds they never paid into. We, the taxpayers, paid into Medicare and Social Security. Congress did not pay into their retirement funds they vote themselves. Let's go after that first.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5504 posts, RR: 29
Reply 9, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 968 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 8):
Just the way the right wants with slave wage workers.

As long as people are more interested in finger-pointing and rhetoric, there will never be a consensus on how to move forward. Eventually, perhaps in our darkest hour, those from all sides of the equation will get past this and work things out, though probably too late to really make a difference. In the meantime, we get soundbites and name-calling. Yes, that will solve a lot.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineQFA380 From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 2062 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 962 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 4):
The tea people budget proposed by former right-wing VP candidate Paul Ryan would balloon the deficit.

Hence why I said impossible... Tax increases have to happen, along with simplification of the tax code which in itself would save billions, the military industrial complex has to be reined in and farm subsidies (and other farm protections) have to end. That right there is the holy trinity of tyranny to many a righty.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 8):
elected officials can give themselves raises and retirement packages.

Isn't US law that Congress only gets a raise when federal employees do? According to Obama who harps on about 'police officers, teachers, firefighters..' being cut if sequestration happens, you surely don't want to limit the payrises of teachers do you?!


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6609 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 918 times:

Why is it always 10 years that are discussed and not this year and next year deficit ? I feel talking about an objective in 10 years time doesn't engage people at all, it's like "we have all the time in the world, no hurry". How many billions have already been lost discussing this ?


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinekngkyle From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 403 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 891 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
I also have no idea how they intend to keep debt under 70% of GDP when it is already 74%. Again assuming a trillion dollar deficit and 2% growth it'll be 78% next year. It is simple maths, when the debt is growing by 10% a year and the economy by 2%, you can't lower debt to GDP.

You can when our debt is financed at a rate lower than inflation. Our government can borrow money at a negative interest rate when you consider inflation. This is why our focus should not be on reducing our deficit, but rebuilding the infrastructure of this country while we can do it so cheaply. This is such a huge missed opportunity. Plus, assuming GDP growth will only be 2% a year for the next 10 years is very pessimistic when you consider 2010 was 3%, 2011 was 1.7% and 2012 was around 2.6%.

Our debt shouldn't be the top priority in this country, the economy should be.


User currently offlineStabilator From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 697 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 880 times:

As a conservative, I must say I am sick of all the partisan BS. Get something done. Cut defense, do something with entitlements and close loopholes. It's like we are sending people to D.C to play a game of "Whose is Bigger". S and B seem to be old timers with experience. There are for too many rash law makers on both sides of the line. Hopefully they can knock some sense into everyone. Obama, Boehner and company make me sick with their partisan bullshit. Perhaps this rant has made me come off as moderate - whatever - Im sick of Obama surrounding himself with school children and first responders at every speech, playing to the emotions of the country, and I'm sick of Boehner looking like he is going to puke at the sound of Obama's voice.

Our country has never been so partisan, and I find myself sick of it!

/rant



So we beat on against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11591 posts, RR: 15
Reply 14, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 869 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 10):
Isn't US law that Congress only gets a raise when federal employees do?

No. Their pay is not linked to inflation, like those on Social Security or teachers or first responders.

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 10):
Obama who harps on about 'police officers, teachers, firefighters..' being cut if sequestration happens, you surely don't want to limit the payrises of teachers do you?!

That's another thing: hard core right-wingers want to privatize everything. If they get their way, police would only respond to those who pay them. And, the police would only be paid $10 an hour or less with no benefits. If they get shot on the job, they would pay for their own care out of their pocket. Teachers would teach what they are told to and be paid minimum wage and buy supplies with their own money. Privatizing everything would save money in the short term, but, long run would cost us all trillions more.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6609 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 867 times:

Quoting kngkyle (Reply 12):
You can when our debt is financed at a rate lower than inflation. Our government can borrow money at a negative interest rate when you consider inflation.

This is artificial and only happening because investors keep some confidence in the US. If nothing is done to curtain the deficit, confidence will be lost and the rates will skyrocket.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 863 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 8):
Take back their ENTITLEMENTS!!

I think this is something most people can agree on... but sadly, it's also something our politicians have a consensus on (in disagreement.) They make the laws, they aren't gonna screw themselves

Ron Paul, love him or hate him, people do have to give it to him, he was all about cutting politician's wages. I do hear arguments against corruption (by keeping wages high) but I think it's safe to say most of the resistance has nothing to do with curtailing corruption



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8491 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 860 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
Lets assume a conservative estimate of a trillion dollar deficit a year for the next 10 years, they're shaving off less than a quarter of that. Not enough.

Yes, but the "government industry" is a hell of a powerful lobby. Medicare, Medicaid, Pentagon... it's mostly businessmen. We have this idea we must fund every single Pentagon and Medicare initiative. So, surprise!! Profit seeking "government industry" players have gravitated to those areas. They want MONEY. They are getting it.

We're all equals. Except some of us tax others at the point of a gun. Otherwise, yeah totally equal. And stuff.

Ross Perot's giant sucking sound is still getting louder.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8226 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 850 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
I also have no idea how they intend to keep debt under 70% of GDP when it is already 74%.

The biggest target for cuts has to be Defense. We simply don't need the Two Wars Budget of the Bush/Cheney Years.

We also ned to look at the reality of the Guns & Butter Economy under Bush/Cheney (plus the Tax Cuts) and how they hit our long term deficit. There needs to be changes at the top brackets to help bring down that glorious government handout to the wealthy. Maybe change that 300+ tax return to a 200+ page tax return.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 8):
Make people like McCain, Kerry, et al. give it all up.

Don't know about McCain or Kerry, but I recall that Ted Kennedy declined his Senate salary. I wouldn't be surprised if Kerry has also

Quoting Aesma (Reply 11):
Why is it always 10 years that are discussed and not this year and next year deficit ?

Ten years was established because it's recognized that many spending programs have to wind down. The Defense is a good example. They are half way through this year and have contractual commitments for a chunk of the balance of the year. Hitting them with a cut now means that their cuts need to me focused on personnel, training and maintenance.

That is far easier than stopping production of a warship that is 80% complete. Try that and see the automatic payments that kick in, starting with rent of the dry dock, unemployment benefits, etc. You can be sure that defense contractors have included plump payments for contract cancellations that are not their fault.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 16):
Ron Paul, love him or hate him, people do have to give it to him, he was all about cutting politician's wages.

He loves that idea? Guess he was rich enough not to need the pay. But for some politicians who do not go to Washington with great wealth their pay has to cover both their DC accommodation as well as their expenses at home. Guess Paul believe that national politics should only be for the rich.


Simpson and Bowles can come up with a lot of good ides, but they take a pretty casual attitude towards entitlements. No problem shrinking Social Security, but they won't touch private retirement accounts at the same time. Same with health care - Medicare & medicaid would take hits, but not the tax free ride of employer nanny care.


User currently offlineStabilator From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 697 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 837 times:

Since "cutting defense" has such a wide variety of possibilities, could someone explain to me where liberals would ideally like to see most money cut from the defense budget?


So we beat on against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5521 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 829 times:

Quoting Stabilator (Reply 19):
Since "cutting defense" has such a wide variety of possibilities, could someone explain to me where liberals would ideally like to see most money cut from the defense budget?

Why only liberals? How about us that are not "Liberal" that also want to see cuts in the defense budgets? I for one would start with military pensions and pay raises that are always increased by a percent or two over what is requested by the service commanders just for political show. I would also increase the contribution from the retiree for TriCare increased to what has been recommended by people like Gates etc.

Now as for specific Programs that could be cut, that is a whole other ball of wax but there are quite few that could be reduced or eliminated. For one how about we start with the C-17 program that the military has been saying for years that they do not need anymore of? Great plane but the need is sated, stop forcing the military to buy them. Or how about the M1A1 MBT? The Army doesn't need anymore, they have over two thousand sitting in the desert holding yards and about as many deployed, but the congress is not willing it shut down the build. There are many examples of the "jobs programs" that the military is not wanting or needing but that keep being funded. I would start there.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinejetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2786 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 826 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting seb146 (Reply 4):
Problem with Simpson-Bowles is: it is bi-partisan. Oh, the horror!! No right-wing tea person candidate would ever submit to bipartisan!

Please, the left is just as partisan as the right.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 8):
If we were really serious about "entitlements" we, the TAXPAYER, would stop this insane idea that elected officials can give themselves raises and retirement packages. Take back their ENTITLEMENTS!!

I don't think the taxpayers expects any of this. The problem is these knuckleheads we elect do it anyways. I read a story last week about how Pelosi thinks she should earn more money because it's a prestigious job. So clearly it is a left and right issue.

Quoting Stabilator (Reply 13):
Our country has never been so partisan, and I find myself sick of it!

Couldn't agree more. The partisonship has pushed me to the middle more and more everyday. I just want something to get done.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 14):
That's another thing: hard core right-wingers want to privatize everything. If they get their way, police would only respond to those who pay them. And, the police would only be paid $10 an hour or less with no benefits. If they get shot on the job, they would pay for their own care out of their pocket. Teachers would teach what they are told to and be paid minimum wage and buy supplies with their own money. Privatizing everything would save money in the short term, but, long run would cost us all trillions more.

I can't think of a single time I have ever heard a "right winger" ever want to privatise the police force. You're going a little extreme on that. With the exception of extreme Libertarians I can't even think of anybody who would propose that. Not many are proposing privatizing the school system either. Wasn't Bush wanting to be the Education president? Obviously he didn't do a great job, but I don't ever remember hearing ,the ultimate enemy of the left, proposing privatizing the whole school system. The private school system is hurting right now. As a recent graduate of a private school I can tell you many in my area might not be around when it comes to my 10 year anniversary. So obviously privatization doesn't work there.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 18):
We also ned to look at the reality of the Guns & Butter Economy under Bush/Cheney (plus the Tax Cuts) and how they hit our long term deficit. There needs to be changes at the top brackets to help bring down that glorious government handout to the wealthy.

Enough of Bush and Cheney, seriously. We keep hearing the sky is falling and it's Bush's fault! President Obama has been in office for over 4 years now. The problems put on him to fix when he took office in 2009 are now his responsibility. If he can't fix it than he needs to surround himself with people that can. The fight to tax the wealthy is crazy IMO. I understand paying your fair share but it is tough to say you aren't paying enough in taxes when the top 10% pay what such a huge portion of the taxes in this country. What we need to do is tidy up the welfare on the bottom half so it is tougher to get and only used in extreme cases and raise the taxes on everyone. Not everyone was gifted wealth by their parents, contrary to popular belief. We shouldn't punish those who have been successful just because they work their tails off.

I hope if this plan doesn't work we can do something else to really fix this problem. We keep talking about the dire need to fix the debt but I have yet to see anything done to actually fix it. Americans seem to have this thought that it will all be fine just give it time. Well unfortunately this isn't a paper cut, it's a knife wound, and if we don't fix it we are going to be in trouble quick, fast, and in a hurry. We may not be up to debt levels that Greece or Spain have experienced, but if we keep going with this careless spending we will be there.
Pat



You push down on that yoke, the houses get bigger, you pull back on the yoke, the houses get bigger- Ken Foltz
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12457 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 825 times:

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 21):
Quoting seb146 (Reply 4):
Problem with Simpson-Bowles is: it is bi-partisan. Oh, the horror!! No right-wing tea person candidate would ever submit to bipartisan!

Please, the left is just as partisan as the right.

Indeed, and the main issue is that no one seems to think they need to compromise with the other as a part of their job description.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineStabilator From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 697 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 821 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 20):
Why only liberals? How about us that are not "Liberal" that also want to see cuts in the defense budgets?

For what its worth, as I stated in my first post in the thread, I am for defense cuts as well. Only recently have I opened up to the idea, therefor I am still deciding my opinion as to where I'd like to see them. The liberal part came in because I'd assume conservatives and liberals would have different opinions as to what needs to be trimmed.

On a different note, how are the branches doing on fighters? How many F-22s are in the various branches, and how many are on order (dont know the ins and outs of military aircraft acquisitions, so maybe someone could enlighten me) Is the F-35 even necessary? Is a lot of money being pumped into the program?

Honestly, if the sequester is supposed to hit March 1st, I do not see anything getting done in time, not with the partisanship of the current administration and congress. The sequester contains broad sweeping cuts to things republicans hold dear and things which democrats hold dear. It's my understanding that S and B are trying to use a scalpel as opposed to an axe (sequester)



So we beat on against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
User currently offlineStabilator From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 697 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 815 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 14):
That's another thing: hard core right-wingers want to privatize everything. If they get their way, police would only respond to those who pay them.
Quoting seb146 (Reply 8):
Just the way the right wants with slave wage workers.
Quoting seb146 (Reply 8):
These right-wingers want to privatize everything so they can raid the retirement funds.

Please, spare the forum your drama! Does it never get old attacking the opposite party? Please provide evidence of any person with an (R) behind their name saying they want a private police force, want slavery or want to privatize everything



So we beat on against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
25 Stabilator : And yet the US spends more on healthcare and pensions. Are you willing to cut those programs if defense is also cut? If your answer is no, why not?
26 tugger : Only the Air Force has the F-22 and they have about 180 and production has ended. No FAS are planned for it at this time due to the nature of its tec
27 Ken777 : I'm a moderate (though some might argue with that) and the first place I would look to for cuts would be those area that were increased for the two w
28 FlyPNS1 : Created largely by "conservatives" who claimed that outsourcing all government activities to private industry would "save money" and make government
29 kngkyle : Like Japan? Debt-to-gdp of over 200% yet still able to borrow money for next to nothing. There is still no safer investment than US treasuries. If co
30 DeltaMD90 : I'm considered conservative by some, I have a lot in me, I'm in the military, and I'm all for defense cuts. They need to be done correctly, of course
31 Flighty : They just need to be prodded. I'd be for a balanced budget nuke. Each time the budget is balanced, the nuclear warhead does not destroy Washington. E
32 Ken777 : The total health care costs in the US is higher than it needs to be because of the overpriced payment structure we use. We also fail to receive the b
33 Stabilator : So you are in favor of a larger welfare state? So just kick the can down the road and pretend no problem exists? This is the exact same problem happe
34 Stabilator : Lets not pretend like the same isn't true for unions.
35 cmf : Doesn't reduce the other problem... Just a sign of how big it is... And then we should add many of the other interests organizations.
36 Boeing717200 : Before they cut anything, I want to see the House and Senate go back to being a part time job. They can have a salary, but no benefits. Career politic
37 Ken777 : I don't consider Medicare to be welfare. Not only did I pay during my working life to help fund the program, but I pay month for the various parts of
38 Post contains images Stabilator : The definition of the "Welfare State" includes many social policies of a government, and primarily refrences the government involvement of in the soc
39 Boeing717200 : My tax return is 237 pages. I own a business. It goes with the territory. You know what irritates me? People who pay no taxes. Everyone should pay ta
40 DeltaMD90 : No no no... you could tax the wealthy to death and we would still have a spending problem. I'm all for a balanced approach, revenue up and spending d
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Vatican Praises Homer Simpson posted Mon Oct 18 2010 19:35:59 by Quokka
Creative Ways To Propose Marriage? posted Sat Oct 16 2010 06:37:43 by Mudboy
Workforce Reduction Day posted Tue Aug 31 2010 08:43:02 by KINDFlyer
Glenn Beck Compares Tiger Woods To OJ Simpson posted Wed Dec 9 2009 20:30:18 by FuturePilot16
Is Banana Good As Weight Reduction Diet? posted Sat Nov 7 2009 02:21:41 by Saleem
Marge Simpson To Pose For Playboy posted Sat Oct 10 2009 14:44:33 by KiwiRob
Jessica Simpson's Weight posted Wed Jan 28 2009 21:04:08 by Tiger119
OJ Simpson Found Guilty On All Counts. posted Fri Oct 3 2008 22:58:30 by VonRichtofen
Homer Simpson Votes For Obama! Or Does He...? posted Thu Oct 2 2008 16:02:39 by Corinthians
Informal Poll: OJ Simpson, Guilty Or Not Guilty? posted Sat Sep 20 2008 22:22:39 by Dougloid