The details are worse

by: Mike Lux

Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 12:00

I wrote my initial post in such a hot rage over the proposal the cut Social Security and Medicare benefits that I didn't take the time to edit my blog post (sorry about those strange sentence structures), or take the time to look at the details of the proposal. So now that I have calmly taken some time to do that, I have to admit that I was wrong: this thing is even worse than I originally thought, and I way understated the problems with it. The co-chairs and staff found every conceivable way to screw the middle class in ways big (very big) and small, but barely nicked the bankers who caused the meltdown of the economy, or the wealthy whose massive tax cuts ended the big budget surpluses as far as the eye could see coming out of the Clinton years. Look at some of the different ways middle class and poor people will be gauged by this proposal (and I am probably missing some):

1. Raises the retirement age for Social Security and Medicare to 69.

2. Cuts Social Security benefits.

3. Ends the mortgage tax deduction.

4. Ends the tax deduction for workers' health benefits.

5. Freezes salaries for federal workers for 3 years.

6. Establishes co-pays for veterans at VA health services.

7. Raises fees to visit the national parks and the Smithsonian.

8. Merges the Small Business Administration into an agency (Commerce) that has always prioritized helping bigger businesses, and cuts their budget.

9. Eliminates the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools.

Bowles and Simpson claim that they are being progressive by raising the Capital Gains Tax, but they make up for that by cutting corporate taxes and flattening the tax rates, so there is actually less progressivity in the tax code. They do claim some savings in defense spending and contracting, but a bare fraction of what could be saved if you got serious at all about reforming government contracting. And what they don't do is stunning: they don't go back to the Clinton era's tax rates on the wealthy that actually helped balance the budget. They don't impose a financial transactions tax on the speculative trading that did so much to crash this economy. They do nothing to create the jobs of the future that would actually spur the economic growth of the 1990s that were key in creating the budget surpluses of that era.

You know what is most bizarre: all this pain for the economically stressed working and middle class, and they still don't actually balance the budget until 2037. This is one of the worst policy documents I have ever seen- and I lived through the George W. Bush era! The President that Erskine Bowles, Bruce Reed, and I worked for dug our way out of the big budget deficits of the Reagan/GHW Bush era and created a balanced budget and long term surpluses by doing modest budget cuts, taxes on the wealthy, and strong economic growth. Clinton did it without gouging the middle class in all the terrible ways listed above. We have a bigger hole to dig out of now because of the economic crisis of the George W. Bush era, but we can create a long term balanced budget with the same kind of formula, plus adding a financial transactions tax that would help curb dangerous financial speculation. There is absolutely no call for punishing the very people who have taken all the pain of the economic policies of the last decade. My old friends Erskine and Bruce should know better.

Another old friend of mine, Jon Cowan, writes today in Politico that this proposal is "the only game in town" for reducing the deficit. Not to put too fine a point on it, but what a crock. All we have to do is revisit the policies of the 1990s, minus the financial deregulation. The middle class has been burdened enough to pay for the excesses of Wall St and government contractors. Let's reduce the deficit the right way: by finally asking the people who caused it- the wealthy who got huge tax increases, the big banks who caused the economic collapse, and the government contractors who rip off taxpayers- to make things right.  

Mike Lux :: The details are worse

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

"The Only Game In Town" (0.00 / 0)
is the only game they can win with this crock!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

Just one more blatant illustration of the Class Warfare being conducted against working people. n/t (4.00 / 4)
First we had the Hopium, (4.00 / 8)
and now we get the Changium.  It's starting to remind me of the 3-drug cocktail they "administer" to those being executed.  

This was avoidable; there was no need for Obama to set up the Catfood Commission.  

The middle class has decisively lost the class war. (4.00 / 1)
Now it's time for us to be raped, beaten and enslaved by the victors.

That attitude (4.00 / 5)
amounts to offering neoliberals vaseline, brass knuckles and shackles.  

No thanks - I prefer to fight with what means I can.  There are, after all, good Democrats who are already fighting tooth and nail right now.  If the rest of the party doesn't want to face a repudiation that will make 11/2/10 look like a game of paddy-cake, they'll be forced to follow.  

[ Parent ]
I wish it were otherwise, but you're not facing reality. (4.00 / 3)
The Democratic Party is firmly on the side of the enslavers. ALL of it. Whatever is to be done now, whatever ways we can fight back, that party cannot have a role in it. I am through with the Democrats.

[ Parent ]
This Is CLEARLY Delusional (4.00 / 6)
The Democratic Party is firmly on the side of the enslavers. ALL of it.

Jan Shakowsky:

"This is not a package that I could support,"

Nancy Pelosi:

Simply unacceptable.


"gutting Social Security & Medicare... not a recipe for a healthier American economy."

Obviously, you are no longer a member of the reality-based community.

My condolences.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Talk is cheap. When's the last time (4.00 / 4)
Any of them didn't cave when the chips were down?

We saw just what the Progressive caucus is worth during the health care fight. Whoever relies on them is truly the delusional one.

[ Parent ]
Sigh! (0.00 / 0)
That's evidence of intense pressure from above from one faction of the party.  As I've said a gazillion times, the Democratic Party is a site of struggle. Always has been. Used to be dominated by racists, in fact. Not anymore.  It changed because people inside fought to change it.

You're just a reality-challenged quitter, that's all.

Sarah, is that you?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
I'm starting to think (4.00 / 3)
That the insistence of some liberals on working through the existing Democratic Party structure is kind of like the war on drugs or the war on terror. It just goes on out of inertia, despite massive evidence that it's not working at all.

Now if you're talking about taking over the party precinct by precinct the way the Goldwaterites did the GOP, that's a whole different story. And I'd love to get involved in that. But I see no evidence of that kind of discipline on the left. We'd rather continue to squabble amongst ourselves, go off in 20 different directions on 20 issues, and beg for crumbs from the table. Show me I'm wrong about that- I WANT to be wrong.

[ Parent ]
And now you want to go off in 20 directions? (4.00 / 3)
Let Evan Bayh and his blue dogs quit the party - or get thrown out. I, and hopefully the rest of the progressive movement, will stay on and gladly take the levers of power.

I refer you to something Mark Ames wrote:

I think this is why so many Gen-X/Yers turned against Obama: because he made them look stupid. They made themselves vulnerable to looking stupid by believing in him-and he jilted them. That's how they see it-not that politics is a long ugly process that has nothing to do with self-esteem and everything to do with money and brawling-it was more like an "indie" consumer choice...

Substitute the Democratic Party for Obama and we have EA Hanks you in a nutshell. Welcome to the long ugly process of taking the party back. Being betrayed a few times is part of the ride. Yes, getting betrayed is some serious butthurt.

In the meantime, I look forward to a Democratic caucus in the house that will be more single-mindedly progressive than anything we've seen in a long time.

The MSM has tagged Independents the party of swing-voting 'centrism.' If Democrats no longer represent your liberal values, show America there is still a Left by registering for another left-aligned party.

[ Parent ]
I'm 55 and I've been a Democrat for a LONG time. (4.00 / 1)
If you think this is the end of a brief infatuation you're quite wrong. I too resisted drawing this conclusion for a very long time. But I'm a scientist and I'm trained to change my beliefs in accordance with the facts, not the other way around.

[ Parent ]
Well I appreciate... (0.00 / 0)
that you're setting the site of the struggle a little further out than the Democratic party - probably in a 3rd party effort- but I see more possibility for better results by continuing the fight right here among the Dems. Michael Moore speculated that if the Republicans are challenged from the right by a Tea Party candidate in 2012 then a challenge to Obama from the left might be able to win. I'll consider that if it develops. We'll see.

The MSM has tagged Independents the party of swing-voting 'centrism.' If Democrats no longer represent your liberal values, show America there is still a Left by registering for another left-aligned party.

[ Parent ]
I'm on the executive committee (0.00 / 0)
of my county party. How about you?

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Tell us some things you've accomplished (0.00 / 0)
To make the party more progressive. I mean that seriously, without snark. I'd like to learn from them.

[ Parent ]
Alas, not much, yet. (4.00 / 4)
Beyond a few intra-committee squabbles about things like "Do we really want to be using the RW frame that the other guy raised taxes when he was mayor, like that's a bad thing? Really?"

But I am encouraged by the recent purge of Blue Dogs. There is a candidate I want to recruit to run against our new teabagging Congressman. He's a solid progressive who ran for state senate against a scion of my county's machine a few years ago, and lost, but only barely. Only by the margin of the turnout of my home county versus his own. I figure if he had my county behind him this time, plus his own, who knows?

I've been working the grapevine trying to figure out a way to get in touch with him but no luck yet.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Good luck. (0.00 / 0)
And again, I mean that with the utmost sincerity.

[ Parent ]
In case you haven't noticed... (4.00 / 3)
...none of the people you just quoted seem to be in charge of running things in the Democratic Party. I know they seem as if they are supposed to be, but they aren't. If they were, we'd at a minimum have a robust public option for health care, and preferably Medicare for All. We'd have the repeal of DADT. We'd have the repeal of DOMA. We'd have extended unemployment benefits, and the 99ers wouldn't be cut off.

Bottom line? You're dealing in rhetoric, not reality.  

[ Parent ]
I'm with you (0.00 / 0)
...not that I'm advocating a third party, but this is no time to be coddling the Democrats.

The history of bad Dems is longer than Obama and the Blue Dogs. I'm thinking Clinton and his Wall Streeters who passed the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, allowing for de-regulaton and paving the way for events that led to the Great Recession of today.

[ Parent ]
hey remember when everyone voted against the health care bill because it lacked a public option, as they promised to do? (4.00 / 2)
eh, what's that?

[ Parent ]
What you say is historically ignorant (4.00 / 3)
Slaves represent the ultimate case of a group of people who lacked power in terms of getting people to do what they would prefer not to, the ability to set political agendas and control of the way in which people understood the parameters of the politically possible, i.e., hegemony.  

Yet without the actions of slaves, slavery would never have been abolished when it was.  This is just one example, a limit condition at that, among many.  

I for one refuse to duck my head in the sand like an ostrich and, in the language of Candide, tell myself that this is "the best of all possible worlds." People have often found themselves in situations over which they felt they were powerless; yet those situations have changed in ways that the powerful could not anticipate and much to their detriment: keep your chin up and fight.  

[ Parent ]
I don't propose to surrender. (4.00 / 3)
Wasting any more precious time on a sellout political party IS surrendering.

I spent a LONG time trying to deny this reality. But my worst suspicions have been proven true every goddamn time.

Organize. Demonstrate. But NOT under the worthless Democratic banner.

[ Parent ]
Sherrod Brown is worth fighting for (4.00 / 2)
I could name many others as Paul did above.  

Your prescription amounts to surrendering the judiciary; good luck with a SCOTUS, federal and state-level bench nationwide that will make Roger B. Taney look like Thurgood Marshall.  

[ Parent ]
We keep fighting for these people (4.00 / 3)
And things just keep getting worse. Just when do you propose to reconsider that strategy? Is there ANYTHING that could make you reconsider it?

[ Parent ]
Sherrod Brown isn't "these people" (4.00 / 3)
so what you say has nothing to do with any strategy I need to reconsider.  

Anyhow, there isn't a magic bullet-type solution to the massive problem of neoliberal consensus hegemony.  But the solution in a two-party system is most certainly NOT to abandon a major party without a broad, popular movement that reflects deep social agreement about a specific agenda that can be sustained via a third party over multiple electoral cycles.  

[ Parent ]
I like Sherrod Brown more than most of them, of course. (4.00 / 1)
But Bernie Sanders he ain't.

But what have he and other Democrats like him actually accomplished? There has been a continuous slide to the right since 1976 and it's reached the proportions of a true national disaster. I ask again, at what point do you admit that working through the Democratic Party just isn't accomplishing anything? If there is no such point you're operating on faith rather than strategy.

[ Parent ]
So Give Us Your 10-Point Plan To Turn The US Into Vermont Already (0.00 / 0)
and stop wasting all our time with your anti-reality kvetching.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
If you want to make any headway within the party (4.00 / 2)
You have to do what the Goldwaterites and later the Christofascists did with the GOP: the long hard slog of taking it over, precinct by precinct, at ground level. That takes years of grinding effort and he willingness to see the party lose a lot of elections. THAT would be a serious plan, even if anything but an easy one. But in the long run it could accomplish things that begging for crumbs will never accomplish. In the meantime, work to get people in the streets- without that FDR would never have been the FDR we know.

[ Parent ]
So give us /your/ 10-point plan to stop the US turning into Somalia (4.00 / 4)
or knock off the strawmen. Thinking that we have to turn the US into Vermont in order to get a liberal populist agenda passed is just as silly as accusing Atrios of wanting to turn the US into Manhattan, just because he wants walkable neighborhoods.

And anti-reality seems to be in the eye of the beholder around here.

[ Parent ]
Your reproducing Obama's strategy from the left (4.00 / 2)
but don't realize it.  He too has abandoned the principles which made the Democratic party and liberalism hegemonic.  Sherrod Brown certainly hasn't, nor has Pelosi, Grijalva, etc.  

Hell, even Byron Dorgan was a useful Senator in many tangible ways. Anyhow, all the best - I've made myself clear and don't feel like playing Sonny Rollins to this rather thin reed you keep blowing on.  

[ Parent ]
You Deserve An Extra "4" (4.00 / 1)
For the Sonny Rollins reference.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Democratic betrayal (4.00 / 2)
As some one who has for the most part supported Democrats in my voting life: Carter, Anderson, (moved;didn't register), Dukakis, Clinton, Nader, Nader, Kerry, Obama; I agree with Steve that they are a lost cause and are in fact a central part of the problem. And reform from within is a truly delusional goal. Enjoy the occasional scrap sent your way, but stop asking others to lick their hand. Even an abused dog doesn't believe the sweet voice is any more than a trick.    

Liberals like to talk big (4.00 / 2)
About their influence and supposed champions within the party.

Reality: we can no longer even elect a non-corporatist mayor in the most Democratic cities in America.

[ Parent ]
The Chairs Proposal is SO horrible (4.00 / 1)
it almost reminds me of psychological conditioning. Give "the people" a taste of what might be in store for them. Show them the tools that will be used to dismantle the world they have come to depend upon. Then propose something less that the most horrible and watch them smile as they accept it.

I may have been influenced by this documentary. At one point it describes how the inquisitors would display the tools of torture to the victim before using them, and many "confessed" at this point. The documentary used this "display of tools" as an analogy for the interrogation techniques employed in these cases.  

In many ways, this DOA laundry list of drastic slashes and cuts could be described in similar terms.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

Only One Part to Ten Point Plan (4.00 / 2)
Primary his ass. When I see that, I'll believe the Democrats understand that change is needed. Until then, you're just a useful idiot whose support and loyalty Obama cherishes because there's no need to do anything progressive and the Left can be slapped hard without fear of reprisal.

It seems these folks are simply doing what the Dems should have done on HCR: (4.00 / 9)
Stake out the extreme position and negotiate towards compromise from there. Within the context of the DC Press Corpse, it makes perfect sense. On Main Street, however, this looks rather foolish. They're offering up all the rebuttals one needs to shoot them down:

"This isn't about deficit reduction. It's about making the rich richer."

So on, so forth, etc.

Obama is an idiot of epic proportions. HIS commission just painted a big target on Obama's back going into the next election cycle. The base will not walk away, it will run away from him.

Heckuva job!

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates

I wish this was a staking out of the most extreme position in order to then negotiate (4.00 / 2)
but I've been watching CNN today and Versailles is all behind this as the reasonable thing that we must do.  Lawrence O'Donnell was supporting it last night on MSNBC too.

Educate, Agitate, Organize, Mobilize, Act!

[ Parent ]
Of course. If they intend to get 80% of this horribleness, they have to push hard. (4.00 / 1)
And WTF is up with Larry? One minute he says he's a "socialist," the next he's a braying Neo-Lib. He looks worse all the time.

What they don't seem to appreciate is that this is going to play very badly on Main Street. That is, of course, if the message gets out just how bad this really is. We have work to do in that regard.

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates

[ Parent ]
But TARP (4.00 / 2)
didn't play well on mainstreet either, yet Versailles ignored that and was convinced that it had to be done.

I will do all I can to stop this, but I'm afraid that the establishment has already decided to do it and will turn a dear ear to whatever we do.

Educate, Agitate, Organize, Mobilize, Act!

[ Parent ]
I agree. (4.00 / 1)
I'm not really concerned with a tone-deaf establishment. I'm just concerned that Main Street really understand what's being done to them by these drones of the oligarchy. In the end, any hope for positive change down the road rests in democratizing the polity.

So I don't care what they do. I assume the worst. I just want people who aren't plugged-in to start understanding all this a lot better. That's our only hope down the road, methinks.

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates

[ Parent ]
of course people understand (4.00 / 3)
People in the Eastern bloc understood what the Communists were doing to them.  They just didn't feel like they could do anything about it.

The function of propaganda is not just to convince people of a position but also to convince people that other people buy into the propaganda.  

[ Parent ]
Now on his show Barney Rubble (0.00 / 0)
is promoting the thing.  ::sigh::

Educate, Agitate, Organize, Mobilize, Act!

[ Parent ]
Obama's intelligence (0.00 / 0)
Again, for the 99th time: Obama is not stupid or incompetent. He knows exactly what he's doing, and it's all about playing the sane moderate adult against a gang of crazies investigating his Christmas card list. It's a re-election strategy, and it's a proven winner. When the public sees who the Republican nominee will be (a Tea Party loyalist), pragmatic Americans that they are, they will hold their noses and vote for BHO. Obama is the oligarchy's boy. They love him and he has been promised four more years.  

"A proven winner" (0.00 / 0)
Because any tactic that works once in history will always work a second time.

Just ask the Japanese about Pearl Harbor, a replay of a sneak attack they had used on the Russians 37 years earlier.

Seriously, does anybody take history courses any more?  The first lesson of history is not 'he who doesn't learn history is doomed to repeat it' but rather 'Things change!'  If Obama thinks doing the same things Bill Clinton did will make him a successful and popular president, he doesn't know a damned thing about history.  For starters, Clinton didn't have an economic crisis of the same size.  Secondly, Obama is mired in wars that Clinton didn't have to deal with.  

People didn't vote for Clinton in '96 because he was a sensible centrist.  They voted for him because Newt Gingrich had proven himself to be an inveterate dick, completely incapable of beating Clinton in a head-to-head PR battle.  Bob Dole was an afterthought, rolled out to serve as a placeholder.  

Democrats who think that the GOP wouldn't possibly run a viable candidate in 2012 are deluding themselves.  Why this generation of DLC-hypnotized leaders think that they have a viable long-term strategy is beyond me.  F*cking over your constituency is a bad long-term strategy.

And that doesn't even address the fact that, on a substantive level, the GOP leaders are wrong about everything.

[ Parent ]
Clinton (4.00 / 4)
This may be a little off topic, but what is this business of Clinton being so great?  The guy that gave us NAFTA and the repeal of Glass-Steagall?  And what's so great  about "balanced budgets as far as the eye can see?"  All that does is prevent us from having a universal welfare state.  Besides, it is not even true-tax rates were still too low (not 90%) and defense spending too high (the constantly increasing defense budget began in 1998, not 2001) so the root causes of the great deficit were/are still there, ready to re-emerge as soon as a recession hits.

You are not too bad a guy, Mike, but you are still too starry-eyed about Clinton.  Obama-and I know that I will be hated about this, but here goes-could still be a more interesting president, his main problem is that he still is too closely tied to Clinton's apron strings-his choice of economic advisors, for example.  He should break with the Big Dog and his dismal example.  

Lux worked for Clinton (4.00 / 1)
although, to hear Mike tell it, he was always out of the room whenever the Big Dawg started triangulating us into oblivion

[ Parent ]
Mike must have been the odd guy out at every meeting (0.00 / 0)
"So I was thinking that we should really try to reach a deal with Gingrich on cutting welfare-"

"SHHH!!  Wait five minutes; that's when Mike's going on his lunch break."

[ Parent ]
I'm with you (0.00 / 0)
This is no time to coddle the Democrats.

Make 'em work, do politics on the GOP, if they ever want to hold power again!

Dems have the money for campaigns. Let's make them campaign for something that might actually get them some votes.

[ Parent ]
Obama is a worse version of Clinton... (4.00 / 1)
...if you think Obama could be more interesting...good luck.

Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me-and I welcome their hatred. - FDR

[ Parent ]
Reply (0.00 / 0)
That's too bad, FL.  I still think that our first African-American president could be different.  It would be nice if some detail were offered re the "worse version" shtick. By the way, I like your FDR quote.

[ Parent ]
Disagree (0.00 / 0)
Barack Obama so far is still much better than Bill Clinton was his whole eight years.  But when Obama deregulates Wall Street, throws poor welfare recipients out on to the streets or bans same-sex marriage to win reelection, I might be persuaded to change my mind.

[ Parent ]
Mortgage deduction (4.00 / 1)
Eliminating the mortgage interest tax deduction is one of the few points of this plan I like. I don't considering it "screwing the middle class." The mortgage interest tax deduction is regressive; it gives the largest benefit to people with larger houses (and these people aren't poor), while it gives nothing to renters (who are relatively poor).

Eliminating this deduction in a revenue-neutral way by lowering the rates on the lowest couple of marginal tax brackets (or raising the personal exemption) would be a progressive move. Furthermore, it would be good for the environment, as the current tax structure incentivizes large houses, which lead to sprawl and higher energy use for heating/cooling.

It's not happening, of course. People love this deduction to such an extent that even progressives like Mike proclaim getting rid of it as a way to "screw the middle class."

yeah I don't see the problem with eliminating anti-drug propaganda programs (0.00 / 0)
then again I'm an actual progressive under 50

[ Parent ]
now, now, Mike (4.00 / 1)
"Before anybody starts shooting down proposals, I think we need to listen, we need to gather up all the facts," Obama told reporters.

He added: "If people are, in fact, concerned about spending, debt, deficits and the future of our country, then they're going to need to be armed with the information about the kinds of choices that are going to be involved, and we can't just engage in political rhetoric."

we just can't understand, you see, they're dealing with, like, reality, man, the world as it is, man.

not everything worth doing is profitable. not everything profitable is worth doing.

wow! - (0.00 / 0)
and y'all still haven't figured out this 'working inside or outside the party stuff' -
and I thought this discussion was finally over and everybody agreed - It's all about 'the economy' (again?) - AND 'the policy'? - So nix more 'left' or... 'left'-  just what 'the peoples' want -(with the only problem we have to solve - which 'peoples' and what do they really want? -
(besides some 'party' back?)

That may be the most coherent comment you've ever written (4.00 / 3)
but don't feel too down about it.

[ Parent ]
damn - (0.00 / 0)
wait for my next one!

[ Parent ]
"class warfare" (4.00 / 2)
If somebody even hints that they want the tax cuts on the wealthy to expire, the words "class warfare" are tossed about with the vehemence formerly reserved for Communists and/or terrorists (that's basically the same nameless anger of the 'other' in both cases).

This is class warfare.  What Bowles and Simpson want to do.  It's a full-bore frontal assault on the middle class.

The economic Class War has been won -- by the rich. (4.00 / 2)
Now what they're doing is salting the earth so that no liberal politics can grow in the soil of these United States.

Will it work?


Open Left Campaigns



Advanced Search

Powered by: SoapBlox