Runboard.com
You're welcome.
Community logo






runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

 
Zakzzz5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Thoroughfare


 
1330 hours we meet
not knowing what the outcome
will be nor that Cheney
and Rumsfeld those two Shakespearean
actors have conspired

The Vice-President erect
a moral man not physically
brave ducked Vietnam five
times but a hawk in war
planning and beating drums
a grim visage so brave
so brave

Conspired to dunk Colin
Powell like a Puritan
multilateralist in the wrong
town D.C. in the turning
lane when there is but one
way to go to war in Iraq


Last edited by Zakzzz5, Feb/21/2010, 1:26 pm
Feb/21/2010, 9:11 am Link to this post Send Email to Zakzzz5   Send PM to Zakzzz5
 
pjouissance Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


Hi, Zak,

Very interesting! I especially like the last three lines, which I was lucky enough to have an aha moment over when I realized what straight ahead would mean!


1330 hours we meet
(I never did figure out who "we" is)(like the military time)

not knowing what the outcome
will be nor that Cheney
(now I'm looking for the meeting but it doesn't happen in the poem)

and Rumsfeld those two Shakespearean
actors have conspired
(I like this end, and would like to see the "conspired" in the 3d stanza eliminated so this connects to that)

The Vice-President erect
a moral man not physically
brave ducked Vietnam five
times but a hawk in war
planning and beating drums
a grim visage so brave
so brave
(I can't tell if this is sarcastic?)(anyway, have you thought about putting this middle stanza into italics? then the poem would look cool as you continued the "conspired" from the first stanza and made it into an enjambment wityh the 3d stanza)

Conspired to dunk Colin
Powell like a Puritan
multilateralist
(this was confusing. I thought, what is a Puritan multilateralist?)(loved the "dunk" image. It was horrible to see Powell take the fall by making the wmd case on tv for you know who. He was so loyal that even disagreeing, even I think knowing it was all a bunch of hooey, he got up there and deliberately ruined his reputation and career out of rigid loyalty. IMHO. After that I could only cringe when I saw him)

 in the wrong
town D.C. in the turning
lane when there is but one
way to go to war in Iraq
(I don't get your politics here. Either you're being sarcastic, or you believe the only way to go to war in Iraq is to get 'er done fast and hard, shock 'n awe)

So I'd clear up where this is coming from, Zak. But I feel a little uncertain about my opinion, so don't give it too much weight. Others may see things more clearly.

Thanks for the posting,

Auto


Feb/21/2010, 3:54 pm Link to this post Send Email to pjouissance   Send PM to pjouissance
 
Terreson Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


This is solid, in your face stuff. Prosodically and poetically I have no crit.

S1. I get putting two political characters where they belong: on a stage. This clearly comes through, or how power brokers love playing to an audience.

S2. The irony comes through. This too is Shakespearean stuff. It involves the cowardlinness of Richards 2 & 3. Two coward kings who didn't mind sending boys into battle to serve their own political and ideaological ends. This is cardinal in the poem.

S3. While I disagree with the assessment of character here, that is none of my business. You got a poem in hand, man. Do please put it out. I got no crits in terms of poetics. This message in a bottle needs to be sent out.

Tere

quote:

Zakzzz5 wrote:

 
1330 hours we meet
not knowing what the outcome
will be nor that Cheney
and Rumsfeld those two Shakespearean
actors have conspired

The Vice-President erect
a moral man not physically
brave ducked Vietnam five
times but a hawk in war
planning and beating drums
a grim visage so brave
so brave

Conspired to dunk Colin
Powell like a Puritan
multilateralist in the wrong
town D.C. in the turning
lane when there is but one
way to go to war in Iraq



Feb/21/2010, 6:33 pm Link to this post Send Email to Terreson   Send PM to Terreson
 
Zakzzz5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


pjouissance wrote:

Hi, Zak,

Very interesting! I especially like the last three lines, which I was lucky enough to have an aha moment over when I realized what straight ahead would mean!


1330 hours we meet
(I never did figure out who "we" is)["we" could be Powell's second in command, a guy named Armitage, or it could be one of his other staff members, sources for books and articles on Colin Powell] (like the military time)

not knowing what the outcome
will be nor that Cheney
(now I'm looking for the meeting but it doesn't happen in the poem)[It's all time present and time past]

and Rumsfeld those two Shakespearean
actors have conspired
(I like this end, and would like to see the "conspired" in the 3d stanza eliminated so this connects to that) [That might be a tall order, not technically easy.]

The Vice-President erect
a moral man not physically
brave ducked Vietnam five
times but a hawk in war
planning and beating drums
a grim visage so brave
so brave
(I can't tell if this is sarcastic?)[Would it be sarcastic to say the man got five deferments when he could have gone to war (he wasn't a pacifist)yet beats the drums for war?](anyway, have you thought about putting this middle stanza into italics? then the poem would look cool as you continued the "conspired" from the first stanza and made it into an enjambment wityh the 3d stanza)[Not sure what you mean here. I'm trying to understand this.]

Conspired to dunk Colin
Powell like a Puritan
multilateralist
(this was confusing. I thought, what is a Puritan multilateralist?)(loved the "dunk" image. It was horrible to see Powell take the fall by making the wmd case on tv for you know who. He was so loyal that even disagreeing, even I think knowing it was all a bunch of hooey, he got up there and deliberately ruined his reputation and career out of rigid loyalty. IMHO. After that I could only cringe when I saw him) [I've read two books on Powell and several articles, and to my knowledge he fully backs what he did, saying he did it based on CIA information. At another point, though, he sort of qualifies his statement. I believe he says that they should have started a few steps back from where they did, and questioned "everything."]

 in the wrong
town D.C. in the turning
lane when there is but one
way to go to war in Iraq
(I don't get your politics here. Either you're being sarcastic, or you believe the only way to go to war in Iraq is to get 'er done fast and hard, shock 'n awe) [Neither. I think it's difficult to be sarcastic when people really believe in what they are doing, as Cheney and Rumsfeld did. On the other hand, I'm referring to Colin Powell being boxed in so that there was but one thing to be done, which was to go to war.]

So I'd clear up where this is coming from, Zak. But I feel a little uncertain about my opinion, so don't give it too much weight. Others may see things more clearly.

Thanks for the posting,

Auto

[Auto, I'm surprised to get this kind of response from you, considering that most of the post-modern stuff we get is so much more dense than this. People are basically guessing at the meaning. So why can't you guess here. This might be unclear at one level but it's considerably more clear than the other material we often see (especially at TCP). It's actually kind of a paradox. And don't tell me that this is a different type of poem that is supposed to be understood. If this is supposed to be understood, then all poems, even the postmodern ones should be understood. Am I making any sense here? I mean, do you read one poem for understanding and another poem for wavy vibes only? Sorry for going off on a tangent. I do appreciate your comments, and that you did take the poem seriously. Zak

 

Feb/22/2010, 6:56 pm Link to this post Send Email to Zakzzz5   Send PM to Zakzzz5
 
pjouissance Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


Hi, Zak,

Here's what I meant about handling the double "conspired":


  1330 hours we meet
not knowing what the outcome
will be nor that Cheney
and Rumsfeld those two Shakespearean
actors have conspired
(all this stays as it is)

The Vice-President erect
a moral man not physically
brave ducked Vietnam five
times but a hawk in war
planning and beating drums
a grim visage so brave
so brave
(this stanza in italics)

to dunk Colin
Powell like a Puritan
multilateralist in the wrong
town D.C. in the turning
lane when there is but one
way to go to war in Iraq
(the first stanza now continues in an interesting way)

Gosh, I don't know how to answer your last question, Zak. This poem doesn't appear to be a "wavy vibe" poem. It doesn't deal with mythical images or symbols or abstractions at all, apparently. It looks to me like it has a point it wants to make. It has real people, real situations, and strong specific ideas, so I looked at it that way. Fragmented syntax or a strange form (not that this is a strange form) does not a wavy-vibe poem make. Abstraction in the thinking, and myth and symbolism does add up to wavy-vibe, IMHO (just one opinion of course).

What I was saying was that the point wasn't clear to me, though. I honestly can't tell what the politics of this political poem are. I hope that helps explain my comment, Zak.

Take care,

Auto


Feb/22/2010, 8:07 pm Link to this post Send Email to pjouissance   Send PM to pjouissance
 
Katlin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


Hi Zak,

I am taken in by the first stanza. I like the use of military time and the reference to C & R as Shakespearean actors. FWIW, I read S2 as satirical. I read S3 as a twist on the Puritan/witches debate back in Salem. In this case, it's the Puritan multilateralist Powell who gets dunked. I've heard interviews with his former chief of staff Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, in which Wilkerson claims Powell suspected he was being duped but went ahead with the UN speech anyway, but only after asking Tenet to sit behind him when he gave it.

Although much of it is clear, I like that there is some mystery/confusion in the poem. Otherwise, I think it would sound perhaps too much like propaganda. I know you said the "we" could be someone who worked for Powell, but I thought the we could be any military personnel who got together to watch the speech, not knowing what their future fate would be.

This morning on the radio I heard an interview with Garry Wills, author of "Bomb Power: The Modern Presidency and the National Security State." Wills had some interesting things about Cheney and Rumsfield, both during the Reagan adminsration and during the second Bush presidency. Two Shakespearean characters for sure. Sound observation.

P.S. Coming back to comment on the title which I take to be a reference to the road not taken in S3, but which I also take to be ironic in light of the fact that the information that lead to the war in Iraq was anything but a public road, i.e. public knowledge, public record, but instead cooked up data.

Last edited by Katlin, Feb/24/2010, 6:49 pm
Feb/23/2010, 2:31 pm Link to this post Send Email to Katlin   Send PM to Katlin
 
pastel Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


quote:

1330 hours we meet
not knowing what the outcome
will be nor that Cheney
and Rumsfeld those two Shakespearean
actors have conspired

The Vice-President erect
a moral man not physically
brave ducked Vietnam five
times but a hawk in war
planning and beating drums
a grim visage so brave
so brave

Conspired to dunk Colin
Powell like a Puritan
multilateralist in the wrong
town D.C. in the turning
lane when there is but one
way to go to war in Iraq



While this is a poem, my criticism is that it's existence is almost entirely dependent on a familiarity with American politics. I've no doubt that in ten/twenty years time, the rest of the world will have not forgotten America's involvement in Iraq, but will they remember Powell and incidentally, whether he was a puritan or whatever.

Good luck with the revision.

pastel
Feb/24/2010, 12:35 am Link to this post Send Email to pastel   Send PM to pastel
 
Zakzzz5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


pjouoissance,

I think I agree on two points, whether you stated them or implied them: 1) We should read each poem for how it is trying to communicate (the methods, structure); and 2) We should take into account whether it is trying to make a "point" and to what degree it is working toward that end.

I find it difficult, however, to determine whether a more traditionalist poem (relatively) like this one can be said to try to make as explicite a point as you seem to imply. Some people read the "points" very easily and clearly, whereas others don't. Hopefully this is one of the strengths of this type of poem. I think I left enough wiggle room in there because nothing in this political world is as simple as it at first appears to be. Again, thanks, Zak

quote:

pjouissance wrote:

Hi, Zak,

Here's what I meant about handling the double "conspired":


  1330 hours we meet
not knowing what the outcome
will be nor that Cheney
and Rumsfeld those two Shakespearean
actors have conspired
(all this stays as it is)

The Vice-President erect
a moral man not physically
brave ducked Vietnam five
times but a hawk in war
planning and beating drums
a grim visage so brave
so brave
(this stanza in italics)

to dunk Colin
Powell like a Puritan
multilateralist in the wrong
town D.C. in the turning
lane when there is but one
way to go to war in Iraq
(the first stanza now continues in an interesting way)

Gosh, I don't know how to answer your last question, Zak. This poem doesn't appear to be a "wavy vibe" poem. It doesn't deal with mythical images or symbols or abstractions at all, apparently. It looks to me like it has a point it wants to make. It has real people, real situations, and strong specific ideas, so I looked at it that way. Fragmented syntax or a strange form (not that this is a strange form) does not a wavy-vibe poem make. Abstraction in the thinking, and myth and symbolism does add up to wavy-vibe, IMHO (just one opinion of course).

What I was saying was that the point wasn't clear to me, though. I honestly can't tell what the politics of this political poem are. I hope that helps explain my comment, Zak.

Take care,

Auto





Feb/24/2010, 7:59 am Link to this post Send Email to Zakzzz5   Send PM to Zakzzz5
 
ChrisD1 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


hi Zak,

The first two parts of the poem read well, work well for me. Shakespearean conspiritors
in the sense of casting long shadows, playing powerful roles in this contemporary drama. (funny how reality is produced and presented to us as drama, isn't it? I suspect these men are in fact, utterly banal but I digress.)

I do get tangled in S3:

"to dunk Colin
Powell like a Puritan
multilateralist in the wrong
town D.C. in the turning
lane when there is but one
way to go to war in Iraq"

Was Colin Powell dunked (as in water-boarded) while in D.C.? Was he dunked in(to) D.C. itself? Was he dunked in(to) the turning lane while in D.C.? I'm sorry if this sounds like a series of absurd questions, my grammer is not the best. This is just how I get tangled in the structure of the sentence. And this does read like a sense-making poem to me.

Powell always seemed to me the most complex and compromised character in the drama. Motives utterly, hopelessly mixed. A thought provoking poem, Zak. Thanks.

Chris
Feb/24/2010, 9:08 am Link to this post Send Email to ChrisD1   Send PM to ChrisD1
 
Zakzzz5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


 ChrisD1 wrote:

hi Zak,
 
I do get tangled in S3:

"to dunk Colin
Powell like a Puritan
multilateralist in the wrong
town D.C. in the turning
lane when there is but one
way to go to war in Iraq"

Was Colin Powell dunked (as in water-boarded) while in D.C.? Was he dunked in(to) D.C. itself? Was he dunked in(to) the turning lane while in D.C.? I'm sorry if this sounds like a series of absurd questions, my grammer is not the best. This is just how I get tangled in the structure of the sentence. And this does read like a sense-making poem to me. [Chris, I don't think it's essential for the stanza to be clear. I think it's ok if you make a choice on your own (and stick to it). You can make your own sense, if necessary. Certainly not like making sense from a post-modern poem, but maybe several degrees below that.]
Powell always seemed to me the most complex and compromised character in the drama. Motives utterly, hopelessly mixed. A thought provoking poem, Zak. Thanks. [Yes, he's a complex character in complex times. Was he a goat, a hero, a victim, or an opportunist gone awry? That's part of the question, I think. I've read the books, the opinions and they're all over the place. Thanks, Zak]

Chris

Feb/24/2010, 10:59 am Link to this post Send Email to Zakzzz5   Send PM to Zakzzz5
 
Terreson Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


Zakman, I hope you will allow this. You've made the info public so I can say I know you are a Nam vet. It suddenly occurs to me what your poem is chasing down. Unless I am wrong it is chasing down ethos. Damn but I love it when a poet takes on the essential themes. When Lang Po starts to do the same maybe I'll start to pay attention, but not until.

In my mind the question concerning Colin Powell is settled. And I figure history will bear me out. To be a good soldier is not always the same as being a good man. This is what your poem comes down to for me. And this: the conflict in ethics between being a good soldier and a good citizen.

I wonder if you've ever read the case of Daniel Ellsberg, the Marine who put out the so-called Pentagon Papers, who knew combat even as a civilian, who worked for MacNamara in the Pentagon, and who ended up xeroxing the whole sordid Nam fiasco from the standpoint of decision makers.

Every man and every woman is faced with the existential moment of truth. The test is always pass/fail. Ellsberg passed. Did the good soldier Powell?

And, Pastel, welcome to the board. The point you make is worth thinking about.

Tere

Last edited by Terreson, Feb/24/2010, 9:47 pm
Feb/24/2010, 9:30 pm Link to this post Send Email to Terreson   Send PM to Terreson
 
Zakzzz5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


 
Pastel -- While this is a poem, my criticism is that it's existence is almost entirely dependent on a familiarity with American politics. I've no doubt that in ten/twenty years time, the rest of the world will have not forgotten America's involvement in Iraq, but will they remember Powell and incidentally, whether he was a puritan or whatever. Good luck with the revision.

Zak responds -- With all due respects, are you suggesting your own poetry is going to last longer than ten or twenty years? That's quite an ego. We'll have to wait and see the quality of your work. My own poem may not last another day, but you never know about Colin Powell. For people who read history, these characters have some longetivy. The Puritan thing was a metaphor.

Thanks for commenting, and welcome to the board. Zak

Feb/25/2010, 9:13 am Link to this post Send Email to Zakzzz5   Send PM to Zakzzz5
 
pastel Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


Zakzz as you state, it would be arrogant of me to assume that my poetry would last beyond a week. My point though, was that certain themes do encourage a more universal appeal. To assume that the whole world is familiar with, or interested in American politics, is also arrogant. Off course you're quite entitled to limit the interest of your work, that's entirely up to you.

Regards,

pastel
Feb/25/2010, 11:08 am Link to this post Send Email to pastel   Send PM to pastel
 
Zakzzz5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


 

Pastel -- To assume that the whole world is familiar with, or interested in American politics, is also arrogant.

Zak responds -- Yes, it would be arrogant if I assumed that. But I don't. We're a small tribe. However, I have read New Yorker pieces in the past that were somewhat parochial. Again, thanks. Zak

 
 

Feb/25/2010, 12:32 pm Link to this post Send Email to Zakzzz5   Send PM to Zakzzz5
 
Zakzzz5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


Terreson,

Here and at TCP sometimes some people felt there was a bit of ambiguity. There might have been. After all, this is a poem, and not an essay. (I'm a fine one to speak; I will at times assail people for ambiguity. I guess it all depends.) I think you make some fine points. Yes, I followed the Ellsberg revelations to some extent. And yes to your comments about Powell. I firmly believe that following generations are going to have a treasure trove of material for literature from era beginning with the Kennedy assassination to Nixon and to the current imbroglios. Thanks for commenting. Zak

quote:

Terreson wrote:

Zakman, I hope you will allow this. You've made the info public so I can say I know you are a Nam vet. It suddenly occurs to me what your poem is chasing down. Unless I am wrong it is chasing down ethos. Damn but I love it when a poet takes on the essential themes. When Lang Po starts to do the same maybe I'll start to pay attention, but not until.

In my mind the question concerning Colin Powell is settled. And I figure history will bear me out. To be a good soldier is not always the same as being a good man. This is what your poem comes down to for me. And this: the conflict in ethics between being a good soldier and a good citizen.

I wonder if you've ever read the case of Daniel Ellsberg, the Marine who put out the so-called Pentagon Papers, who knew combat even as a civilian, who worked for MacNamara in the Pentagon, and who ended up xeroxing the whole sordid Nam fiasco from the standpoint of decision makers.

Every man and every woman is faced with the existential moment of truth. The test is always pass/fail. Ellsberg passed. Did the good soldier Powell?

And, Pastel, welcome to the board. The point you make is worth thinking about.

Tere



Mar/4/2010, 7:09 pm Link to this post Send Email to Zakzzz5   Send PM to Zakzzz5
 
Zakzzz5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


Katlin,

I guess I had missed thanking you for the comments. You make some very good observations, some that hadn't occurred to me. I much appreciate your comments and the time you took to read this. Zak

quote:

Katlin wrote:

Hi Zak,

I am taken in by the first stanza. I like the use of military time and the reference to C & R as Shakespearean actors. FWIW, I read S2 as satirical. I read S3 as a twist on the Puritan/witches debate back in Salem. In this case, it's the Puritan multilateralist Powell who gets dunked. I've heard interviews with his former chief of staff Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, in which Wilkerson claims Powell suspected he was being duped but went ahead with the UN speech anyway, but only after asking Tenet to sit behind him when he gave it.

Although much of it is clear, I like that there is some mystery/confusion in the poem. Otherwise, I think it would sound perhaps too much like propaganda. I know you said the "we" could be someone who worked for Powell, but I thought the we could be any military personnel who got together to watch the speech, not knowing what their future fate would be.

This morning on the radio I heard an interview with Garry Wills, author of "Bomb Power: The Modern Presidency and the National Security State." Wills had some interesting things about Cheney and Rumsfield, both during the Reagan adminsration and during the second Bush presidency. Two Shakespearean characters for sure. Sound observation.

P.S. Coming back to comment on the title which I take to be a reference to the road not taken in S3, but which I also take to be ironic in light of the fact that the information that lead to the war in Iraq was anything but a public road, i.e. public knowledge, public record, but instead cooked up data.



Mar/4/2010, 7:11 pm Link to this post Send Email to Zakzzz5   Send PM to Zakzzz5
 
Katlin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


I have been thinking about Pastel's comments on this thread (BTW, welcome to the board, Pastel. LWU: Lurkers of the World Unite!):

quote:

While this is a poem, my criticism is that it's existence is almost entirely dependent on a familiarity with American politics. I've no doubt that in ten/twenty years time, the rest of the world will have not forgotten America's involvement in Iraq, but will they remember Powell and incidentally, whether he was a puritan or whatever.

Good luck with the revision.



and:

quote:

Zakzz as you state, it would be arrogant of me to assume that my poetry would last beyond a week. My point though, was that certain themes do encourage a more universal appeal. To assume that the whole world is familiar with, or interested in American politics, is also arrogant. Off course you're quite entitled to limit the interest of your work, that's entirely up to you.



Boy, lots of thoughts on this. First, should every poem be universal? Second, I am not sure what arrogant Americans are going to think about the Iraq war in 10 or 20 years, or what they will remember/make of Powell's contribution to the cause. He was a pivotal player in many ways in the run up to the war. If he had not given the speech but had taken a stance against the dodgy intell, I wonder if that would have made any difference ultimately. In light of Pastel's comments, it occurs to me that Powell is a kind of Shakespearean character in this drama as well and that this is something that could be brought out more if, Zak, you want to go that way in a rewrite. Unwittingly or not, Powell goes down as one of the King's (as in King George) men in all of this.
  

Last edited by Katlin, Mar/7/2010, 10:55 am
Mar/7/2010, 10:53 am Link to this post Send Email to Katlin   Send PM to Katlin
 
pastel Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


quote:

Katlin wrote:

IBTW, welcome to the board, Pastel. LWU: Lurkers of the World Unite!

Thank you for the welcome Katlin.

Unwittingly or not, Powell goes down as one of the King's (as in King George) men in all of this.

And let's hope all the King's horses and all the King's men, couldn't put him back together again.



Pastel Le Lurker
Mar/7/2010, 12:19 pm Link to this post Send Email to pastel   Send PM to pastel
 
Katlin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Reply | Quote
Re: Thoroughfare


And let's hope all the King's horses and all the King's men, couldn't put him back together again.

Amen to that. Karl "Turdblossom and Spinmeister" Rove has recently been trying.

Pastel Le Lurker

That has a certain ring to it; I like it. emoticon

Last edited by Katlin, Mar/7/2010, 12:33 pm
Mar/7/2010, 12:32 pm Link to this post Send Email to Katlin   Send PM to Katlin
 


Add a reply





You are not logged in (login)