The Scrutinator: Dishonest Darrin Bell
I usually delete cryptic e-mails that contain nothing but a URL. Especially when, as in the case of the one I got this morning, the URL is accompanied by a phrase like "Click here to be amazed and shocked." You just know the next thing you see, if you follow directions, is likely to get you fired if you're at work, or divorced if you're at home. But for some reason, I just couldn't help myself this morning. Something told me to click on that URL.
What I saw was more amazing and shocking than the three-legged amazon twin sister contortionists the Web usually offers you. Here it is (I've bold-faced and italicized the amazing part, to make sure you don't miss it):
The Scrutinator: Dishonest Darrin Bell
Darrin Bell, author of the comic Candorville, makes this blatantly false claim about Condoleeza Rice:
In fact, she didn't say "bracket insert name bracket."
President Bush, 2002 State of the Union address:
"Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom. ...
States like these [Iraq, Iran, and North Korea], and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.
We will work closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the materials, technology, and expertise to make and deliver weapons of mass destruction. We will develop and deploy effective missile defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack. And all nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security.
We'll be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons."
Those words are as relevant today as they were then.
I suppose nobody claims Candorville is serious analysis. But at least he could be honest (especially with "candor" in the title). Alas, I ask for so much.
-James (Something-or-Other), a.k.a. "The Scrutinator"
This might be an incorrect assumption on my part, but I think maybe they've never heard of "satire" on this guy's planet. It's no thong-wearing, three-cheeked ass, but it's as weird as anything else on the Internet.
47 comments:
It scares me to know that the bar measuring stupidity gets lowered a little more every day.
People like "The Scruitinator" give all bloggers a bad name. Reading comprehension should be a requirement for anyone wanting to post on the Internet.
LOL! Maybe he meant to call himself "The Stupidnater," but he misspelled it.
Wow. Just... wow.
Mr. Bell: Don't let this dork get to you. You're probably right-- he's never heard of Satire. Even if WE don't agree, I can see what you are driving at. I found it quite funny--I find your lampoons worthy of defense. And I, for one, even as a GOP member, know that Freedom of Speech must remain highly prized-- or we, sure as we exist, will lose it.
Kudos, Mr. Bell. I'm a Republican, voted twice for Bush (but wouldn't again in light of everything that's happened in the past 2 years). I won't be voting for any Republican this November, and that's the first time in my life for that. It took me long enough to realize they're not conservative at all. Now that you know where I'm coming from, I just want to say I appreciate your humor and your intelligent observations even when I disagree with them, and just wanted to let you know that you're not the only one who's amazed at such a ridiculous reading of the cartoon.
People will bend over backward to find something wrong when they don't like what they see. There's no arguing with that cartoon, so they try to pick it apart and create a problem where none exists. That's me giving "Scrutinator" the benefit of the doubt. I'd rather not believe people are that stupid.
Have you ever thought "Scrutinator" might be a liberal parody of conservative bloggers? I mean, that's got to be a joke, right? Nobody's that dumb.
"Tiffany said...
Kudos, Mr. Bell. I'm a Republican, voted twice for Bush (but wouldn't again in light of everything that's happened in the past 2 years). I won't be voting for any Republican this November, and that's the first time in my life for that."
I always Examine what is said. Then I compare to what I believe. It's probably the biggest reason that I keep winding up on the GOP side. But, when I find a MAJOR issue on which I cannot agree, I check on the other candidates. One time, I voted for a DFLer for Governor--and was promptly reward with higher taxes. I've voted for 3rd party more than once, I've supported a DFLer's campaign. In my mind, I am not a "Traitor" to that which is normally the party of my choice, but a moderating influence. On some issues I made Reagan look like a liberal. On others, I made Carter look conservative. Of course, that was years ago. I've drifted a bit to the right...but Consider: 3rd party, 1980. DFL for Gov. 1986 (my biggest goof!) 3rd party 1992.
Wavered between GOP and 3rd Party, 1996, before finally choosing GOP.
Supported DFLer campaign, 1998. 3rd Party, Governor, 1998.
Supported Elizabeth Dole, 2000, but didn't get the opportunity.
I suspect that this makes me a rather unusual Republican. Current choices for 2008? Rice, Powell, North. McCain isn't even on my short list!
In a quick answer to ABQ...it COULD be a parody. Not necessarily a "Liberal Parody", unless you don't mean "Liberal" as in "Done by a Liberal". I've never seen either party quite THAT nasty to a non-politician!
To politicians, sure.
Remember: Politics: Poly=Many
Tic- blood sucking creature....
Nah, I just read through "Scrutinator's" last 7 or 8 posts, and he seems for real to me. I don't think it's a parody of conservative blogs.
Darrin:
You mean that Ms. Rice never actually said that stuff? It certainly sounded like it rang true ...
Oh, I am so confused!
I suppose I'll never grok this thing that you call "satire." How can you tell the truth so well, without quoting others verbatim?
Keep it up. ;-)
Greetings, Scrutin-haters! It's me, the object of your antipathy.
So I'm hearing that my clunky segway went over like a lead baloon. (One reason I haven't quit my day job.) How does my new one fly?
Satire is "irony, sarcasm, or caustic wit used to attack or expose folly, vice, or stupidity." "Straw man" wasn't on that list, so I missed the satire angle. Very nuanced. You got me. (Or, um, since "straw man" isn't there, is it satire?)
Chuck: "... Freedom of Speech must remain highly prized..."
I agree completely.
Tiffany: "I always Examine what is said. Then I compare to what I believe. ... But, when I find a MAJOR issue on which I cannot agree, I check on the other candidates."
Excellent.
Chuck: "I've never seen either party quite THAT nasty to a non-politician!"
I've just been called "[lowering the] bar measuring stupidity"; "giv[ing] all bloggers a bad name"; "Stupidnater"; "dork"; "I'd rather not believe people are that stupid."; "Nobody's that dumb." and now "nasty" by you? You're paying attention, aren't you? Maybe there's a little double-standard at work--after all, I deserve it!
Cheers!
Well, well- another country heard from. Scutinator, I'm constantly called "Dork" at work. I happen to be able to take it in stride. (It's rather interesting, since I've always been rather thin-skinned.) I've also been called "Idiot", "Moron", "Fool", and certain Bosnian terms that I won't mention here.
I believe you can say the following about this particular strip: Many of the speeches we hear COULD be delivered with just minor changes of a word or two, and they take on a whole different meaning at that point.
Or have you not noticed that?
::sigh:: It seems that satire or lampooning is lost on you. So, what do we do?
What do you know, it wasn't a parody after all.
Sorry, "Scrutinator," but there are no straw men in that cartoon that I can see. It rightly pointed out that that same rhetoric used to scare up support for the Iraq War has been used recently by Rice and the rest of the administration about Iran. That's all I see in that cartoon, and it's not a straw man argument.
Maybe "dumb" is too harsh to say about you, though, and I apologize for that. But I think the term "desperate" would apply to your attempt to debunk a perfectly sound comic strip.
Scrutinator said:
"So I'm hearing that my clunky segway went over like a lead baloon. (One reason I haven't quit my day job.) How does my new one fly?"
I checked it out, and it still doesn't make any sense. The cartoon was about how she substituted Iran for Iraq, not Honduras or Switzerland. And even reading the most into it, the cartoon looks to be saying that the Adminstration will use that rhetoric for whatever country they have beef with, which nobody sane would figure includes Honduras and Switzerland. You may have noticed they've said the same stuff about Venezuela, for instance, that they used to say about Iraq ("They're destabilizing the region," "they must be contained," etc...).
It's almost as if they have a script and they just plug in names. Either "[insert name] is a strong ally in the war on terror" or "[insert name] is destabilizing the region." They never talk about countries in any unique way, they just use these recycled phrases. Never in my 58 years on this planet have we had an administration as generic and bad at foreign relations as this one. Bush makes me long for Nixon, for god's sake.
hey, it's great when people make your point for you... fell off his segway while trying to make a segue? you just gotta laugh... or else cry!
Chuck,
Here's a link to the site that discusses the Thomas Jefferson quote:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/loc/madison.html
It was really hard to find, you know. Typing in "divided we stand, united we fall - Thomas Jefferson" required a lot of keystrokes.
I could've lowered the bar for my search and inaccurately called you a liar, but I like my standards set high.
Here's another one for you to consider from Mr. Jefferson:
"I have examined all the known superstitions of the word, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth."
Some food for thought from a very wise man. Perhaps you can relate.
Or at least I can dream.
Chuck: "I happen to be able to take it in stride."
I expect it. Whenever you take a stand for something you get derided. Don't sweat the name-calling, folks. And I don't really think you're "Scrutin-haters." I'll quit it. Sorry.
Chuck: "It seems that satire or lampooning is lost on you. So, what do we do?"
Make me laugh with some real satire. There's plenty out there. (And read the rest very, very carefully.)
a.b.q.: "It rightly pointed out that that same rhetoric used to scare up support for the Iraq War has been used recently by Rice and the rest of the administration about Iran."
Recently as in Bush's State of the Union four years ago? Did you read my post?
Anonymous: "the cartoon looks to be saying that the Adminstration will use that rhetoric for whatever country they have beef with, which nobody sane would figure includes Honduras and Switzerland."
Eureka! I hope you don't mind that you just called the Bush administration sane.
Anonymous: "You may have noticed they've said the same stuff about Venezuela... It's almost as if they have a script and they just plug in names. Either "[insert name] is a strong ally in the war on terror" or "[insert name] is destabilizing the region.""
(My eureka moment ends...) Try my Honduras/Switzerland exercise on your "destabilizing the region" quote. Don't blame Bush for praising allies: that's not really a vice, is it?
Maude: Thanks for the correction. It wasn't my first mistake and won't be my last. Are mistakes like this your final judge of an argument's merit? I mean, it's a free country, so that's certainly your right. I know I don't have the standing with you to ask this, but are you familiar with the Style over substance fallacy? You might want to think about it--for no one's sake but your own.
Satire is fine. Satire isn't fair. Noboby (including me) expects it to be. Distortions often even make caricatures funnier (if more absurd). Further, cartoonists can have bad days--everybody has bad days. No problem.
I hate to belabor the definition of satire, but there's a little more light to shed. When, instead of "folly, vice, or stupidity," you substitute "the satirist's own complete fabrication," then attack that with "irony, sarcasm, or caustic wit," it's not really satire. (I offer this as unsolicited feedback from a non-fan. I hope it's constructive, particularly if you find find yourself having trouble breaking into new markets.)
Sure, you may have been calling it satire for years. It may stroke your prejudices and pathologies just like (what you've always called) satire. But is it really?
And does having your prejudices and pathologies stroked really make you a better person? Not just more comfortable, but better?
Alas, I ask for so much.
I'm a comic fan and a Candorville fan in particular. In following the thread on the linked-to blog, I noticed that the Liberal guy there went on to criticize the "Scrutinator" for discussing a comic strip "as if it were serious," or something like that.
I just want you to know that some of us can recognize that just because political satire is funny or presented in the form of a comic strip, that doesn't mean it shouldn't be taken seriously. I've found that some of the best political commentary I've ever read came in the form of humor, from Mark Twain to Doonesbury, Bloom County and now Candorville.
I just want to say thanks for continuing that tradition, and giving me a little dose of funny with the serious political commentary every day.
"a.b.q.: "It rightly pointed out that that same rhetoric used to scare up support for the Iraq War has been used recently by Rice and the rest of the administration about Iran."
Recently as in Bush's State of the Union four years ago? Did you read my post?"
Yes, I read your post. What you seem to be missing is Bush's SOU speech from '02 doesn't refute what Candorville said, it REINFORCES it. The Bushies paint their enemies with the same brush. Why you insist on trying to deny that obvious fact is beyond me.
"Satire is fine. Satire isn't fair. Noboby (including me) expects it to be. Distortions often even make caricatures funnier (if more absurd). Further, cartoonists can have bad days--everybody has bad days. No problem.
I hate to belabor the definition of satire, but there's a little more light to shed. When, instead of "folly, vice, or stupidity," you substitute "the satirist's own complete fabrication," then attack that with "irony, sarcasm, or caustic wit," it's not really satire. (I offer this as unsolicited feedback from a non-fan. I hope it's constructive, particularly if you find find yourself having trouble breaking into new markets.)"
I know you're not talking to me here, but it bugs me when I read this kind of thing. It comes from both conservatives and liberals. When people disagree with satire but can't point out why it's wrong, they resort to calling it unfunny, or saying it isn't really satire. People attack Doonesbury that way, George Carlin, Stephen Colbert, John Stewart, Dennis Miller, etc. etc. etc. But it's a reuse. You just disagree with it and you're trying to find a way to tear it down. I've been guilty of that myself when I've written to Scott Stantis, who does Prickly City (a conservative strip).
Now, you keep trying to say the author fabricated something, but the only thing you have to point to is "[bracket insert name bracket]", which NOBODY sane could ever assume is meant to be taken literally. I'm not sure why you don't understand this. Maybe you're not familiar with parody or satire, in which case, I'd suggest you read more.
I've thought more about it. I'm wrong to use the word dishonest. Darrin, I'm sorry. I'm going to correct my post and apologize there, too. (Thanks to Scott for that challenge.)
Darrin, you sincerely believe what you wrote, and there's nothing dishonest about that.
a.b.q: "Yes, I read your post. What you seem to be missing is Bush's SOU speech from '02 doesn't refute what Candorville said, it REINFORCES it. The Bushies paint their enemies with the same brush. Why you insist on trying to deny that obvious fact is beyond me.
Another thing I articulated poorly, and maybe the real kernel of my complaint.
Maybe the "Bushies" evaluate each nation by its own actions and words. Maybe the reasons Bush gave are why Iraq, Iran, and North Korea earned their place in his "axis of evil." What would it take for you to evaluate them by their actions, instead of glossing over them in reaction to Bush?
a.b.q.: "Now, you keep trying to say the author fabricated something, but the only thing you have to point to is "[bracket insert name bracket]", which NOBODY sane could ever assume is meant to be taken literally."
I hope you're right. Maybe I'm overreacting. But Anonymous sure seems to be toying with it.
Me: "Darrin, you sincerely believe what you wrote ..."
I mean the "jingoistic frenzy" thing, not the "[insert name]" thing.
(Yikes! I almost started this whole row all over again! ;-)
Tem, I suspect my problem may have been that I just didn't type in enough. I believed (in error) that part of the quote would be enough.
I have checked the sites of the URLs you sent. Interesting reading. I have a quote from a book about the Faith of America's Presidents. But it's too long for here. Maybe someday.
Darrin, about your strip today... Normally I can see what's going on.. I'm not so sure about today. The Mayor asks Lemont not to call for her resignation, claiming to be framed. He asks by Whom, and then there's a cut to "Wilfred".
Is this a comment on The people's tendency to judge without the facts, a comment on "Scape-goats", or something else? Highly curious.
All of the above, and more than that -- but primarily it's foreshadowing stories yet to come. That's all I can say about it.
By the way, thanks for posting that poem earlier. Thought-provoking stuff, and well-written.
First, It's nice to know I didn't misunderstand the strip!
Thanks, too, for the compliment on the poem. Hard to believe that I wrote it when I was 18 or 19. 27/28 years ago...and That makes me feel so old. If I read your bio correctly, you might have just started school about that time.
Geez, I'm talking like I've got a foot in the grave, and I am telling someone who's an adult that he is still young.
Ah, well. I may not be a syndicated cartoonist, but I can say I'm a published poet. But a "little talent" can't make a living writing poetry!
"I've thought more about it. I'm wrong to use the word dishonest. Darrin, I'm sorry. I'm going to correct my post and apologize there, too. (Thanks to Scott for that challenge.)
Darrin, you sincerely believe what you wrote, and there's nothing dishonest about that."
Thank you, apology accepted.
I've deleted a few posts, because the author linked to a) an anti-gay hate site, and b) a porn site. I don't allow either of those things here, so please, if you'd like to post here, don't do that.
I heard about this, just yesterday. (Thank goodness for closed captioning!) They seemed to imply that it wasn't likely that they could have done the amount of damage needed to flood the tunnel (53 feet under ground, or was that under the water itself?)
But I was seeing "Lebanon" as the place where the arrests were made. Maybe I missed something?
Truthfully, I have no problem with spying when it's 100% related to national security, but the public shouldn't be kept entirely in the dark, either. (100% related to National Security--this doesn't include wire tapping of American Citizens (without a warrant), or the pressure that Journalists are feeling. But there must be SOME discretion on the part of the journalist, I feel. It's difficult to explain. I'm not sure how We can reconcile being able to have freedom of speech/press, and privacy to boot. If we are unable to protect those investigating something and not tip off the investigated, security is endangered. But if we can't have the right to find out what's going on, civil liberties are endangered. There seems to be no trade-off.
In case anyone's wondering what Chuck's talking about, this was from one of the posts I had to delete because it contained a link to a porn site. Here's the text:
"What do think of spying now since it stopped NYC subway attack and recently and in 2003, or the plot to blow up a Columbus area mall? They also thought they foiled the Sears Tower plot, but there was no plot at all."
Has anyone else noticed the irony here? We've all been supporting (more or less) Civil liberties, including Freedom of the Press, Freedom to be secure in our homes and persons... and I find that our host has turned on Comment moderation because someone has posted links to a porn site, and an anti-gay site.
Don't get me wrong. I believe that it is correct have it on in such a case. It just seems a bit ironic that it has, considering what we've discussed! :)
When I operated my BBS, from 1991-1998, I very seldom used this type of thing. But "The Bucket Brigade" was an unusual BBS, too.
Between the 2 blogs I visit (will increase to 3 soon), and my own, I think I was the first to have it on...but not for that reason. :)
Yeah, it's ironic.
It's only temporary, 'til our friend gets tired of posting these sorts of links. I just don't want to spend the weekend deleting his posts when there are movies to see and loafing to do.
What were those sites?
Hey, the block is off!
Darrin Bell, what's your email address?
So I can send you a message off topic without giving my email address up to the sign up on the discussion forum, that's why. Yes, I promise it won't be mail that's pro republican, it'll just be some opinions.
By the way, what did you think of spying since it did stop several attacks on the nation? You didn't answer that jackass who "porned" you a message.
PS, when I said the block is off, I meant it didn't take time for it to appear.
Support US Troops Network
Support our U.S. military singles 100% join free. Worldwide portal.
“Confronting Iraq” is a powerful new documentary produced by Roger Aronoff, to attempt to set the record straight and to examine some of the big issues related to this war. Did the U.S. really act unilaterally, motivated by greed and politics, in an unnecessary war? Or is it a just and necessary war - part of a larger war - against the unrelenting forces of radical Islam? Was Saddam Hussein’s regime bent on developing and proliferating Weapons of Mass Destruction? Or had he destroyed them all after the first Gulf War? Did the Iraqi government have ongoing relations with Osama bin Laden’s terrorist organization, al Qaeda, among others, or is this a pretext dreamed up in Crawford Texas to justify going to war? The West is engaged, whether it likes it or not, in a clash of civilizations, in a war it never sought. It is unlike any war in our history.
How have the various participants Confronted Iraq. The Bush administration? The Clinton administration? The media? The intellectuals and pundits? The Leftist opposition? Michael Moore? We tackle these complex issues, through dramatic footage and insightful interviews, in a thought provoking, powerful, and at times humorous and ironic manner.
MR DARRIN BELL!!!
How could you let such CONSERVATIVES advertise on your site? Do you support some of the war?
Do you think there is a bright side to it?
>How could you let such >CONSERVATIVES advertise on your >site? Do you support some of the >war?
>Do you think there is a bright >side to it?
Good Gravy! Conservatives are people too, you know!
Darrin: Great strip this morning. Yes, The REAL issues seem to get trivialized about this time every election. It's quite annoying, even to me.
Thanks, Chuck.
"Ihaterepublicans" wrote: "MR DARRIN BELL!!! How could you let such CONSERVATIVES advertise on your site? Do you support some of the war? Do you think there is a bright side to it?"
What exactly are you talking about? What advertisements?
"Darrin Bell, what's your email address?"
darrin at rudypark dot com
Darrin, I think "Ihaterepublicans" (Criminey, I hate that name!) is referring to apparent (Possibly "Google") ads that appear at the top of the page. Sometimes they show anti-Bush Stickers, sometimes pro-Bush, etc...
That, of course, is something over which you have no control! :)
This has been one of those days...I sent my wallet through the washer, destroyed a "Safety pays" bingo card, ruined a checkbook.
Interesting thing: I have noticed that one day you used a "Foaming" guy who was upset over people not speaking English in the country. It came a bit after my "foaming" comment. I assume you do your strips quite a while in advance. Was my comment somehow an inspiration, or was it just a strange coincidence? (I'm guessing coincidence. I doubt that I'm that much of an inspiration!!)
Thanx, Mr. Bell.
ihaterepublicans, don't you think you are being stubborn?
You are so set in the mind of supporting Democrats, that you are trying to demolish republicans at it. Plus, you just watch liberal media, so of course you see what you like. I know that some channels are liberal and others aren't. You also haven't watched whatever movie you're advertising, so you haven't watched the conservatives speak about what they think. My guess is you believed everything in that fairy tale Fahrenheit 9/11 and are waiting for 9/11 1/2. You should know that Michael Moore is an extreme liberal who just worships the 20,000 pounds of food he eats a day. I have a list of stuff he made up. Or maybe you just listen to that smart ass Ann Coulter who think she knows everything, giving conservatives a bad name.
By the way, your web page is blank.
Here we go again. I suspect that "Ihaterepublicans" actually doesn't hate "REPUBLICANS", but the politics of Republicans. I don't hate DEMOCRATS, but I do find some of their politics objectionable. But then again, Politics (As a whole) can be termed objectionable.
--Previous post--My guess is you believed everything in that fairy tale Fahrenheit 9/11 and are waiting for 9/11 1/2. You should know that Michael Moore is an extreme liberal who just worships the 20,000 pounds of food he eats a day.
Having never seen the movie myself, (Not that I want to), I can't say it's entirely fabricated.
But saying Michael Moore "Worships the 20,000 pounds of food he eats per day" is such a pathetic exaggeration.... I'm sure he doesn't eat that much. Did you ever see "The Day After"? I'd call that "Anti-Nuke propaganda". But the fact remains-- We can blow ourselves to kingdom come. What's the estimate-- 12 times the power we need to destroy the world? Thing is, once is more than enough.
We all have a tendency to embellish. We ought to call them THE WAY THEY ARE. If we don't, we're lying to ourselves.
I have been looking for sites like this for a long time. Thank you!
pending divorces in nj secured loan for home owner motorola laptop zoloft for sleep propecia review lowest mortgage rates omaha5941 botanical based skin care custom cell phone faceplates sleepy mattress cadillac blindside in lawyer malpractice new specializing york silk flower wholesalers pay per click software accounting software
I have been looking for sites like this for a long time. Thank you! neurontin and drunkenness Pictures neurontin neurontin post traumatic headache syndrome Mortgage lender umax ppc http://www.asian-sexgirl.info/Free_pics_erotic_adult_hardcore.html Neurontin and acid reflux Fda warning antidepressants kids david cohen farmers insurance Industrial heating element International online merchant account 2002 national fire alarm code book Fiat panda 34 Used mitsubishi mirage in florida neurontin side effect Coats womens childrens and infants wholesale 1997 mustang convertible review v6 Ultimate mattress pad finnish sauna origin percocet addiction symptom What if one ambien does not work
This is very interesting site... Anna nicole smith sex scenes Legal contract signing + its abbreviation + latin http://www.amount-of-gravel-for-driveway.info/drivewaysteeledging.html Real free voyeur pic
Cool blog, interesting information... Keep it UP » »
That's a great story. Waiting for more. Oregon porsche 914 for sale audio conferencing Carolina lottery msnbcmsncom site south Principle skin care Are henckels knives dishwasher safe camouflage pants Used volvo los angeles Protonix wyeth 2 merchant processing account Top proactiv acne http://www.cholesterol-10.info Color accuracy 26 lcd monitors Stores who sell area rugs http://www.ciscowirelessipphone.info mazda ringtone Gerbera und stoffe
Post a Comment