Rove: Economy Will Get Better Soon
During the Bush years, the tendency was for people of a progressive bent to have a gloomy take on the state of the economy while those on the right were more likely to produce works like Jerry Bower’s opus The Bush Boom: How a Misunderestimated President Fixed a Broken Economy (answer: by completely destroying it!). Back on January 7, I wondered if this meant we were in store for optimism inversion in which the right would start painting things as gloomy while the left emphasized the positive.
Thus far, that doesn’t seem to be happening. Instead, as part of their argument against the president’s recovery plan, conservatives are minimizing the extent of problems. Thus things like this remark from Karl Rove flagged by Brian Beutler:
[I]f Republicans predict economic doom, they will overplay their hand. The Democratic stimulus will slow recovery, but not stop it. Recessions don’t last forever and, if history is a guide, sometime late this year or early next the economy will rebound on its own.
The politics of this aren’t so difficult to figure out, but it’s an interesting change—or rather, lack of change—in the valence of gloom and doom.
77 Responses to “Rove: Economy Will Get Better Soon”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
February 19th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
True, the politics are really, really, really simple: If the rebound is slower than Rove just predicted, then he can say: “Ha! Obama screwed everything up by passing the stimulus plan! See, see, I said it right here that if we were in charge it would’ve rebounded in 2009, so of course it’s Obama’s fault!”
February 19th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Most entertaining thing about the post — the customer reviews on the link. They are worth it.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
And of course the markets are so thrilled by the ObaStimulator that today they close at their lowest point in six years.
WooHoo! This is good news for Democrats!
And even Matt’s sainted-only-when-they-agree-with-him CBO says that the ObaStimulator will actually impede recovery and growth.
Rove is simply channeling what is, outside the ProgBubble, fairly widely shared expectations.
And if one parses all the ObaMessiahs hems and haws it is fairly apparent that he shares Rove’s notions.
After all the purpose of the Stimulator is simply to raise the water enough to impede Republican advances in 2010.
Talk about playing politics with our kids’ futures…
February 19th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Isn’t Rove’s prediction consistent with the Fed’s? And with the consensus? How is that “minimizing” the problem?
February 19th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Aw man, that seals it. We’re in for a long slump – that guy is completely wrong about everything.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Seriously, check the book link…
February 19th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
This inversion is coming it just doesn’t make political sense right now. Why would the left have any interest in saying anything but the economy is in horrible shape? It won’t help them reform health care, pass progressive budgets, or convince people capitalism is evil. It is much better to wait until 2009 or 2010, when Obama can reasonably take credit, to emphasize the positives. And yes the right will change their position too. So how exactly is politico any worse than a bunch of political hacks (progressives included) whose only motives are how to advance their own preconceived beliefs?
February 19th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
I believe I had that.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
JT:
After all the purpose of the Stimulator is simply to raise the water enough to impede Republican advances in 2010.
Talk about playing politics with our kids’ futures…
The purpose of the Stimulous package + TARP 2 son of TARP + housing/mortgage relief is to avoid falling into a deflation trap and thereby avoid a combo Great Depression/lost decade. I’m betting it works and that Roves’ Republicans become a permanent minority.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
“Bowyer’s book is a sorely needed dose of simple economic truth that things aren’t as bad as the media says. — Donald Luskin, National Review Online Financial”
“Those who wish to debate economic policy on the basis of facts rather than opinion will find this book indispensable. — Richard W. Rahn, Chairman of Novecon Financial and a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute”
I’m *shocked* this book only has 2.5 stars. And the one new copy is $14.88 while used copies start at $59.99. Clearly anyone who’s read the book knows it’s a fucking valuable thing.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
“After all the purpose of the Stimulator is simply to raise the water enough to impede Republican advances in 2010.”
Is this like impeding a low tide from washing over your house? You might wanna check 538 to see what the Senate’s looking like.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
He’s not minimizing the situation, he is just using history as a guide. Recessions don’t last forever, but they certainly will last longer when the leader of the country is talking down the economy and scaring the crap out of everyone. Remember when Bush was criticized for stating that we were in a recession in late 2000, now, Obama claims a depression is coming, when the numbers are not even as bad as in the 82 recession, there is such a thing as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Poor, poor leadership by Obama. And yes, Bush and Paulson were just as guilty of this in late 08.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
My favorite review:
“Reality Hurts, February 7, 2006
By J. Keen – See all my reviews
Leftist reviews pervade this site and we all know how deep thinking the left can be. Yah right. Ask a liberal what they read and it’s strictly left of center rhetoric. There is no true intellectual curiosity from most democrats. They drink from the trough on the left for the most part. This book explains reality and the angry, can’t seem to quite win any election anywhere, crowd hates that and they post great insiteful reviews like HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH. The truth truly can hurt. Good Night And Good Luck party of Dean, Biden, Kennedy, Moore, zzzzzzzzzzz…… ”
I wonder if that’s JT?
“Obama claims a depression is coming”
Sorry, you’re gonna have to give a citation on that one. He’s never once said that.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
It should be pointed out there is also the pessimistic fringe Rightwing (i.e. the craziest of the crazy) who believe we are an deep doodoo and point to the price of gold. They feel it’s all been downhill since the US abandoned the gold standard and created the Federal Reserve Bank.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
At least Karl Rove isn’t talking down the economy. Now if we can only get Obama to stop doing it…
February 19th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Peter K.,
Gold bugs aren’t limited to the far right. James Grant isn’t a right winger, and he’s been bearish on Fed policy and our fiat currency for decades. He’s not the only one. And after the last year, “fringe” isn’t a fair description of this group.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN0749084220081008
February 19th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
“At least Karl Rove isn’t talking down the economy. Now if we can only get Obama to stop doing it…”
Yes, if only we had a president who implored repeatedly that the correct response to a bad situation in the country was for everyone to just GO SHOPPING!!!
Christ, you’re a dolt. For a free market believer you sure seem to think Wall Street lurches on his every word, as though they were incapable of judging the state of the economy for themselves.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
(CNN) — President Obama appeared before a national audience Monday night to make the case for his economic stimulus plan, saying this is not your “run-of-the-mill recession.”
February 19th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Gold bugs aren’t limited to the far right. James Grant isn’t a right winger, and he’s been bearish on Fed policy and our fiat currency for decades. He’s not the only one. And after the last year, “fringe” isn’t a fair description of this group.
I’ll admit my knowledge on the subject is limited, but there isn’t a “Gold Bug” caucus of Republicans in Congress is there? (for example)
February 19th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Christ, you’re a dolt. For a free market believer you sure seem to think Wall Street lurches on his every word, as though they were incapable of judging the state of the economy for themselves.
Maybe they’re hanging on his every word because they don’t think HE believes in the free market and he will impliment policies that stifle that free market.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Clearly, the market in paid trolls like JT is suffering in the wake of the GOP’s pounding last November.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:16 pm
“Maybe they’re hanging on his every word because they don’t think HE believes in the free market and he will impliment policies that stifle that free market.”
Or maybe they know just as much as he does about the actual state of the economy and how much unlike a “run-of-the-mill recession” this is and have zero confidence whatsoever regardless of what he says.
Or, you could just call him a socialist. Which is what you clearly hinted at there. I can think of no quicker way for you to be taken completely unseriously.
Hint: Graham and Greenspan are the most recent ones saying bank nationalization might be necessary. That’d be Greenspan, the literal Ayn Rand lover, if you forgot.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
“Yes, if only we had a president who implored repeatedly that the correct response to a bad situation in the country was for everyone to just GO SHOPPING!!!”
It would be better than what we have now, that’s for sure. The post dot-com, post 9/11 recession was shallow and short because a lot of Americans actually went shopping, bought stocks, etc. New York City was full of patriotic Midwesterners who changed their vacation plans so they could pump some dollars into the City’s economy. The stock market recovered from its post 9/11 lows within a few months.
Talking down the economy has tangible effects on it. Couples decide against going out to dinner; businesses think twice about buying another piece of equipment — millions of little decisions like that depress aggregate demand. To be fair, Bush and Paulson started doing this back in September, in order to scare Congress into passing TARP. They got the bill passed, and then when the market saw it wasn’t what it was cracked up to be, it tanked in November.
Obama tried the same tack in getting his stimulus bill passed, and now we have a similar result, with the market breaking through its November lows today. How many times can you go this same well without doing long-term damage to the economy? Threaten catastrophe to get some huge bill passed; get it passed; let everyone realize you over-promised and under-delivered on the bill’s potential; rinse & repeat.
It’s time for a president to exhibit some competence and confidence, to reassure the nation that it’s in good hands and that we’ll get through this. Is Obama up to that? So far, he doesn’t appear to be. It’s not as if anything on his thin resume would have prepared him for this, but you voted for him, so he’s our president.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Adam @ 4:43,
Nov 2010 is a lifetime away.
Unless the economy improves before then you can expect to see some Republican electoral gains.
Yes ObaMessiah will parrot Bushit’s metric free “Oh but it would have been so much worse!” and “I inherited all this!” but the truth is that by then Barry will OWN the economy and the wars.
After all, 80% of Americans, including Matt, were gung ho for Iraq not very long ago.
And if you’ve ever lived by the water you know what harm a low tide always lapping at your foundations quickly does.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
“I’ll admit my knowledge on the subject is limited, but there isn’t a “Gold Bug” caucus of Republicans in Congress is there? (for example)”
Not that I know of, unless Ron Paul makes a caucus. But Paul’s economic ideas (sound money, Austrian school economics) seem to be getting a more respectful hearing now (on the blogosphere, etc.) than they did during the campaign.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
“And if you’ve ever lived by the water you know what harm a low tide always lapping at your foundations quickly does.”
If that’s the most fearsome the Republican party’s going to get, I think I’ll kindly ask not to be thrown in that briar patch.
Though it would seem a more accurate metaphor would be “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
Anyway, I would predict 3-4 Senate pickups for Democrats and 6-8 House pickups for Republicans. Or more, who cares, it’s a massive lead in the House. It’s hard to look at the Senate lineup though and see anything but trouble for Republicans. Cantor is no Newt, and Obama is no triangulator, as much as you’d like it to be so.
Do continue posting here though, you’re most entertaining.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
Judd:
Remember when Bush was criticized for stating that we were in a recession in late 2000, now, Obama claims a depression is coming, when the numbers are not even as bad as in the 82 recession, there is such a thing as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Poor, poor leadership by Obama. And yes, Bush and Paulson were just as guilty of this in late 08.
In ‘82 were interest rates at Zero? Had the Fed blown its load? (Will you respond? I doubt it.)
Rove and the Republican approach jibes with conservatives’ love of self-help books. Repeat it over and over: “I am getting better every day in each and every way … I am getting better…”
Like in Barcelona:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILxixHrq7Lk&feature=related
February 19th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
“The stock market recovered from its post 9/11 lows within a few months.”
No shit, 9/11 didn’t actually *do* anything. It killed a few thousand people and made people nervous for a few months. It didn’t do anything to the structure of the banking system, and it sure as hell didn’t cause a recession. And if you think Bush was the reason it didn’t cause a recession, then the book in the post would be awesome for you.
“They got the bill passed, and then when the market saw it wasn’t what it was cracked up to be, it tanked in November.”
Bull. The market crashed in September, because the banking system was on the verge of collapse. It had very little change in November (or indeed, since the crash). Stop making up your own facts.
“It’s time for a president to exhibit some competence and confidence, to reassure the nation that it’s in good hands and that we’ll get through this.”
Which is why he has a 67% approval rating, and why 69% of Americans trust him on the economy. Again, you’re not entitled to your own facts, nor to project your weakmindedness on the country, who is surprisingly resilient.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Peter K. @ 4:42
The purpose of the Stimulous package + TARP 2 son of TARP + housing/mortgage relief is to avoid falling into a deflation trap and thereby avoid a combo Great Depression/lost decade. I’m betting it works and that Roves’ Republicans become a permanent minority.
Your bet is that the ObaStimulator will try to claim credit for avoiding a Great Depression? I think that you are correct.
That is one of the reasons Barry has been dressing up as Henny Penny.
You know the metric free Bushit line about us not being attacked for six years?
A totally separate question is “will that bs work?”.
And I think that depends on how things are in 2010.
If they are bad then the Dems will face real challenges.
As to the permanent majority line, well it’s a tale oft told.
Who and when will pay for the massive deficits? And I don’t mean the hidden costs like our cheapening currency. I mean the cuts in services and rise in taxes and fees that are inevitable. The California reality.
Everyone knows this but it is bad tactics to discuss it.
If it is the Dems who are forced to tighten American’s belts I think you might need to rethink the permanent majority Party Line.
It’s a wicked game of musical chairs and I’m not as sure as you that Barry won’t be left seatless.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
“Who and when will pay for the massive deficits?”
Good question! I hope you’ve been wondering that each and every day of the past eight years, since Bush gave the ultra-rich a massive tax cut to destroy Clinton’s balanced budget. Oh, and after he wasted a trillion dollars in the desert.
“If it is the Dems who are forced to tighten American’s belts I think you might need to rethink the permanent majority Party Line.”
In other words, if Democrats do what’s actually best for the economy to get us back on track, they might not be as popular. And you’re fucking CHEERING hoping that the party that’s doing the right thing will lose, so your capital gains tax cut crew can get back in and screw things up again. Because it’s all a game to you.
Pathetic.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
In ‘82 were interest rates at Zero? Had the Fed blown its load? (Will you respond? I doubt it.)
No, but many other indicators were much, much worse. And we may get to that level, especially with a down talking POTUS. Another difference between then and now is the gloom and doom nature of Obama, which I believe is intentional to help pass his leftist agenda, and the optimism of Reagan. Reagan won 49 states in 84, Obama is letting an opportunity for greatness pass strictly on ideological grounds.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Adam,
The previous market low (before the current Obama swoon) was in November. That’s a fact, not one I made up. It’s true that the market initially crashed in September, when Obama’s current Treasury Secretary let Lehman collapse. But it’s also true that it sunk even lower after TARP was passed.
“Which is why he has a 67% approval rating, and why 69% of Americans trust him on the economy.”
The stock market is a leading indicator of the economy. The poll numbers will catch up with it if Obama keeps up his current performance.
“Good question! I hope you’ve been wondering that each and every day of the past eight years, since Bush gave the ultra-rich a massive tax cut to destroy Clinton’s balanced budget.”
Time to smarten up. Clinton didn’t even expect a balanced budget — his initial projections showed deficits for years. What gave us the balanced budget, temporarily, was the dot-com bubble, and the huge tax revenues it generated. There was no way that would have continued after the dot-com bust.
As for Bush giving a “massive” tax cut to the “ultra-rich”. Again, some perspective: After Bush’s “massive” tax cut, the top income tax rate was still higher than where his father had raised it after breaking his “read my lips pledge”. Bush dropped the top bracket from 39.6% to 35% — not exactly a radical or massive change. And everyone who paid taxes got a tax cut; in fact, lower income earners got a proportionately larger one, as a percentage of their income (i.e., the tax cut was progressive).
As for deficits, What was Bush’s biggest deficit, $500 billion? Obama is going to be quadrupling those. He’s going to make Bush look like a fiscal conservative.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
There was no post-9/11 recession. The 2001 recession began in March of 2001.
Be as crazy as you want to be, but you’re just making shit up.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
One of the interesting things about the contemporary Right is its total belief in the power of rhetoric to shape reality. For Judd and Gregg, it’s not that the empirically-discernible indicators of economic crisis — the perfect storm of the collapse of the banking system, the mass extinction of the illusory wealth of the boom, a global deflationary spiral the likes of which hasn’t been seen since — when? 1932? 1873? — it’s not that the many empirical indicators of serious economic crisis matter; instead, the way we spin it does. It contributes to the kind of bizarre cheerleader-mentality (was not Dubya our cheerleader in chief?) that you see in GOP/conservative commentators.
Contra to the understanding of Fred, Judd, et al. (Al probably belongs in here, too), businessmen cannot afford to spin away bad economic news, or bad news of any kind. The ones that do end up dying off as the simple fraudsters they are; you can’t respond nimbly to changing conditions if you think conditions aren’t changing. Indeed, the need in the business community for good and accurate information about the world situation is one of the reasons that, for all of the frequent odiousness of their editorial lines, papers like The Financial Times, the Economist, and the Wall Street Journal have very, very good reportorial divisions.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Should read “Judd and Fred” in the first paragraph r/than “Judd and Gregg.”
The schmohawk’s on my mind, I guess!
February 19th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
The stock market is a leading indicator of the economy. The poll numbers will catch up with it if Obama keeps up his current performance
Other leading indicators are up. The stock market, after all, is a terrible predictor of future events. Just ask Enron investors.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
One of the interesting things about the contemporary Right is its total belief in the power of rhetoric to shape reality.
That is just rich coming from someone who, I assume, supported a man for POTUS whose biggest accomplishments were exactly the words he had spoken. I’ll quote, “just words.”
February 19th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
There is a bright side.
Roved called it the ‘Democratic’ stimulus and not the ‘Democrat’ stimulus.
It appears our war criminals iz learning.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
The politics of this are complex and evolving. The GOP has taken the ‘populist’ high ground by voting against TARP and the stimulus. Never mind they didn’t threaten to veto tarp. Little noticed is they are now taking the lead in bashing the bankers. That is what Graham’s “nationalization” mutterings are.
Then today a CNBC character Rich Santilli let loose with this about the new mortgage plan.
just the first fem moments of the vid you will see him http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1040122255&play=1#
There is plenty do dislike about the plan. Especially since in the end it helps the banksters as much as home owners.
Drudge picked it up today, then Rush. So CNBC, Drudge and Rush are leading a populist uprising.
Obama and the Democrats have to get out front on kicking out the bankers and the Pigmen because the ‘conservatives’ are now ready to, in a night of the long knives sort of way. There is dynamite here.
February 19th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
Judd didn’t even read his own link, because it disproves his assertion. Judd doesn’t know what Obama said about the current economic situation. And now Judd is proud of his ignorance of what Obama did prior to 1/20/09.
Judd is done. Just another disposable conservative.
.
February 19th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Yep. The “revolt” was largely in the Republican House, and they’re a rump parliament confined to Crackerstan. The “populism” that Rush and other millionaires are playing at doesn’t resonate beyond the usual suburban entrepreneur poseurs, and everyone’s sick of them anyway.
.
February 19th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
“Obama and the Democrats have to get out front on kicking out the bankers and the Pigmen because the ‘conservatives’ are now ready to, in a night of the long knives sort of way. There is dynamite here.”
It doesn’t help the Dems that the latest billion dollar fraudster (Stanford) is another big Democratic donor.
February 19th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
I think honestly there was some of this in 2000 too. Democrats wanted to pretend that the Clinton boom had continued until the start of Bush’s term and would have continued forever if it hadn’t been for him. In reality Bush mostly deserves credit for the super weak recovery and for the conditions we see now.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
Stanford donated to Republicans, too, including McCain.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:17 pm
This is the same guy who said that “the math” pointed to a McCain victory.
“Prosperity is just around the corner.”
Where have we heard that before?
February 19th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
From the beginning of the decade, from that narrow two years when the Democrats controlled the Senate. One more reason to be glad Daschle is gone.
Meanwhile, he cultivated Cornyn and took him and his “companion” to Antigua.
Heh.
.
February 20th, 2009 at 2:50 am
The fact is Rove may well be right
I really, really, hope so. When you lay the economic indicators down it doesn’t look like that’s going to happen at all. You lay the decent against other recessions, and it’s the difference between the kiddy roller coaster at the fair and whatever six-flags rolled out this year. I can’t see any way in hell anything gets better in a two year time frame. Maybe there is a bottom in there that will make now look good, but I’m not sure.
February 20th, 2009 at 8:10 am
Perhaps Rove noticed that the Index of Leading Economics Indicators was up for the second straight month yesterda. Perhaps he’s noticed the concensus forecast of economists of -2% GDP this year, +2% the next.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:04 am
Looks like the right is abandoning the “decade-long recession” talk.
I thought Keynesian economics caused the mild recession of 1929-32 to turn into a Great Depression, and that repeating those policies would do the same thing in this decade.
Apparently not. Apparently, we can pass this bill, implement those economic policies, and still have a relatively quick recovery, regardless.
It’s still the John McCain Party – frantically lurching from one talking point to another, even if they completely contradict each other, thinking they’re winning news cycles and grasping desperately at every shred of evidence that their latest gambit is working, while Obama slowly, steadily wins the race.
You guyz are doomed in 2010.
February 20th, 2009 at 10:45 am
GUIDO. I am a Gold Bug. I believe we should return to the gold standard, because keeping a link between a valuable commodity and the value of the dollar will keep the government honest – they won’t be able to go out printing lots of money and causing hyperinflation, which they can do with a fiat currency.
BRUNO. I am a sensible economist. I see your point, Guido. But I have a suggestion: presumably you don’t think we should go back to just using gold coins, so in fact what you want is a stable market price for gold.
GUIDO. Yes, I suppose so.
BRUNO. And the government could sustain this in a number of ways. It could simply make it illegal to sell gold at any but the target price, but that would produce a black market. Better, it could buy and sell gold on the open market, in order to push the price up or down when it veered away from its target.
GUIDO. True.
BRUNO. Or it could achieve the same result by changing the money supply – if it printed lots of money, the price of gold would go up, and if it reduced the money supply, the price of gold would go down.
GUIDO. Yes, that would also be possible.
BRUNO. But, Guido, gold alone is a rather uncertain basis for a monetary system – if a great new supply or demand for gold develops, like a new mine, or a new industrial application, it’s going to put exogenous pressures on our economy that we don’t want. Wouldn’t it be better to have not a gold standard but a “basket of goods” standard? The government’s job would be to make sure that your dollar can always be exchanged not for the same weight of gold, but for the same amount of a selection of stuff. I mean, we don’t actually use a lot of gold, per se, but we use a lot of food and oil and TV sets and IKEA wardrobes and crockery and bicycles and so on.
GUIDO. Hmm. A “basket of stuff” standard. Yes, that makes more sense.
BRUNO. And the government’s job, as we said, would be to alter the money supply to make sure that the basket of stuff always cost the same amount of dollars.
GUIDO. Hang on –
BRUNO. Congratulations, you’ve invented inflation targeting. Which is what all central banks do these days anyway.
February 20th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
I think there are valid doubts about whether the stimulus package will help. Of course, you can argue what will happen if there is no stimulus. But with this stimulus the federal deficit is likely to go even higher. I saw an interesting article, I think, on
http://www.recessioninfocenter.com
March 1st, 2009 at 5:05 am
viagra
Great site. Good info
March 11th, 2009 at 4:17 am
Incredible site!
March 14th, 2009 at 4:59 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
xanax
March 15th, 2009 at 12:22 am
I found your site on google, great site, keep it up. Will return in the future. Submitted this post to Google News Reader.
March 15th, 2009 at 12:32 am
Didn’t know about it. Very nice information. Submitted this post to Google News Reader.
March 18th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Don’t forget to visit my website too, thanks
March 22nd, 2009 at 5:55 am
tramadol
Incredible site!
March 23rd, 2009 at 4:24 am
viagra
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 25th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
I love your blog, I visit in every other day. Hope to see more from you
March 26th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Nice Nice Nice! I like the drill and the adrenalin from rollercoasters. Please feel to visit my rollercoastersite too. I am also looking for linkexchange partner…
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:57 am
Great site. Good info
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:01 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 5th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
I dont usually comment, but after reading through so much info I had to say thanks
April 8th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
VRy interesting to read it
April 9th, 2009 at 4:51 am
thanks !! very helpful post! viagra
April 11th, 2009 at 2:22 am
I like the info and will be linking back to you from my site. Also great looking site.
April 11th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Great post very informative and I will be linking back to your site from mine.