Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 56

Thread: Nothing funny about ‘Sicko’ - a healthcare system in shambles

  1. #31
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    11,682

    Default

    Yeah, that's their real agenda which is so obvious to everyone but themselves.

  2. #32
    Elite Member Voodoo Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Sweet Down Under!
    Posts
    12,646

    Default

    I watched this last night and it honestly made me want to move to the UK and or France! I'm not even joking. I actually ended up watching it twice.

  3. #33
    Gold Member frecklered's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    743

    Default

    I'm ashamed to say I haven't actually seen this yet - but I work for a nonprofit that is working for Universal Single-Payer healthcare. I do research and organizing for them now and canvass for them in the warmer months. There's no end to the heartbreaking stories out there. It's unbelieveable that we don't have a form of universal health care yet...our system is so backwards.

  4. #34
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Default

    'Sicko': Heavily Doctored, By Kurt Loder

    Michael Moore may see himself as working in the tradition of such crusading muckrakers of the last century as Lincoln Steffens, Ida Tarbell and Upton Sinclair — writers whose dedication to exposing corruption and social injustices played a part in sparking much-needed reforms. In his new movie, "Sicko," Moore focuses on the U.S. health-care industry — a juicy target — and he casts a shocking light on some of the people it's failed.


    There's a man who mangled two of his fingers with a power saw and learned that it would cost $12,000 to save one of them, but $60,000 to save the other. He had no health insurance and could only scrape together enough money to salvage the $12,000 finger.


    There's a woman whose husband was prescribed new drugs to combat his cancer, but couldn't get their insurance company to pay for them because the drugs were experimental. Her husband died.


    Then there's a woman who made an emergency trip to a hospital for treatment and subsequently learned her insurance company wouldn't pay for the ambulance that took her there — because it hadn't been "pre-approved." And there's a middle-aged couple — a man, who suffered three heart attacks, and his wife, who developed cancer — who were bankrupted by the cost of co-payments and other expenses not covered by their insurance, and have now been forced to move into a cramped, dismal room in the home of a resentful son. There's also a 79-year-old man who has to continue working a menial job because Medicare won't cover the cost of all the medications he needs.


    Moore does a real service in bringing these stories to light — some of them are horrifying, and then infuriating. One giant health-maintenance organization, Kaiser Permanente, is so persuasively lambasted in the movie that, on the basis of what we're told, we want to burst into the company's executive suites and make a mass citizen's arrest. This is the sort of thing good muckrakers are supposed to do.


    Unfortunately, Moore is also a con man of a very brazen sort, and never more so than in this film. His cherry-picked facts, manipulative interviews (with lingering close-ups of distraught people breaking down in tears) and blithe assertions (how does he know 18,000* people will die this year because they have no health insurance?) are so stacked that you can feel his whole argument sliding sideways as the picture unspools. The American health-care system is in urgent need of reform, no question. Some 47 million people are uninsured (although many are only temporarily so, being either in-between jobs or young enough not to feel a pressing need to buy health insurance). There are a number of proposals as to what might be done to correct this situation. Moore has no use for any of them, save one.
    As a proud socialist, the director appears to feel that there are few problems in life that can't be solved by government regulation (that would be the same government that's already given us the U.S. Postal Service and the Department of Motor Vehicles). In the case of health care, though, Americans have never been keen on socialized medicine. In 1993, when one of Moore's heroes, Hillary Clinton (he actually blurts out the word "sexy!" in describing her in the movie), tried to create a government-controlled health care system, her failed attempt to do so helped deliver the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives into Republican control for the next dozen years. Moore still looks upon Clinton's plan as a grand idea, one that Americans, being not very bright, unwisely rejected. (He may be having second thoughts about Hillary herself, though: In the movie he heavily emphasizes the fact that, among politicians, she accepts the second-largest amount of political money from the health care industry.)


    The problem with American health care, Moore argues, is that people are charged money to avail themselves of it. In other countries, like Canada, France and Britain, health systems are far superior — and they're free. He takes us to these countries to see a few clean, efficient hospitals, where treatment is quick and caring; and to meet a few doctors, who are delighted with their government-regulated salaries; and to listen to patients express their beaming happiness with a socialized health system. It sounds great. As one patient in a British hospital run by the country's National Health Service says, "No one pays. It's all on the NHS. It's not America."
    That last statement is even truer than you'd know from watching "Sicko." In the case of Canada — which Moore, like many other political activists, holds up as a utopian ideal of benevolent health-care regulation — a very different picture is conveyed by a short 2005 documentary called "Dead Meat," by Stuart Browning and Blaine Greenberg. These two filmmakers talked to a number of Canadians of a kind that Moore's movie would have you believe don't exist:


    A 52-year-old woman in Calgary recalls being in severe need of joint-replacement surgery after the cartilage in her knee wore out. She was put on a wait list and wound up waiting 16 months for the surgery. Her pain was so excruciating, she says, that she was prescribed large doses of Oxycontin, and soon became addicted. After finally getting her operation, she was put on another wait list — this time for drug rehab.
    A man tells about his mother waiting two years for life-saving cancer surgery — and then twice having her surgical appointments canceled. She was still waiting when she died.


    A man in critical need of neck surgery plays a voicemail message from a doctor he'd contacted: "As of today," she says, "it's a two-year wait-list to see me for an initial consultation." Later, when the man and his wife both needed hip-replacement surgery and grew exasperated after spending two years on a waiting list, they finally mortgaged their home and flew to Belgium to have the operations done there, with no more waiting.
    Rick Baker, the owner of a Toronto company called Timely Medical Alternatives, specializes in transporting Canadians who don't want to wait for medical care to Buffalo, New York, two hours away, where they won't have to. Baker's business is apparently thriving.


    And Dr. Brian Day, now the president of the Canadian Medical Association, muses about the bizarre distortions created by a law that prohibits Canadians from paying for even urgently-needed medical treatments, or from obtaining private health insurance. "It's legal to buy health insurance for your pets," Day says, "but illegal to buy health insurance for yourself." (Even more pointedly, Day was quoted in the Wall Street Journal this week as saying, "This is a country in which dogs can get a hip replacement in under a week and in which humans can wait two to three years.")
    Actually, this aspect of the Canadian health-care system is changing. In 2005, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled in favor of a man who had filed suit in Quebec over being kept on an interminable waiting list for treatment. In striking down the government health care monopoly in that province, Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin said, "Access to a waiting list is not access to health care." Now a similar suit has been filed in Ontario.


    What's the problem with government health systems? Moore's movie doesn't ask that question, although it does unintentionally provide an answer. When governments attempt to regulate the balance between a limited supply of health care and an unlimited demand for it they're inevitably forced to ration treatment. This is certainly the situation in Britain. Writing in the Chicago Tribune this week, Helen Evans, a 20-year veteran of the country's National Health Service and now the director of a London-based group called Nurses for Reform, said that nearly 1 million Britons are currently on waiting lists for medical care — and another 200,000 are waiting to get on waiting lists. Evans also says the NHS cancels about 100,000 operations each year because of shortages of various sorts. Last March, the BBC reported on the results of a Healthcare Commission poll of 128,000 NHS workers: two thirds of them said they "would not be happy" to be patients in their own hospitals. James Christopher, the film critic of the Times of London, thinks he knows why. After marveling at Moore's rosy view of the British health care system in "Sicko," Christopher wrote, "What he hasn't done is lie in a corridor all night at the Royal Free [Hospital] watching his severed toe disintegrate in a plastic cup of melted ice. I have." Last month, the Associated Press reported that Gordon Brown — just installed this week as Britain's new prime minister — had promised to inaugurate "sweeping domestic reforms" to, among other things, "improve health care."
    Moore's most ardent enthusiasm is reserved for the French health care system, which he portrays as the crowning glory of a Gallic lifestyle far superior to our own. The French! They work only 35 hours a week, by law. They get at least five weeks' vacation every year. Their health care is free, and they can take an unlimited number of sick days. It is here that Moore shoots himself in the foot. He introduces us to a young man who's reached the end of three months of paid sick leave and is asked by his doctor if he's finally ready to return to work. No, not yet, he says. So the doctor gives him another three months of paid leave — and the young man immediately decamps for the South of France, where we see him lounging on the sunny Riviera, chatting up babes and generally enjoying what would be for most people a very expensive vacation. Moore apparently expects us to witness this dumbfounding spectacle and ask why we can't have such a great health care system, too. I think a more common response would be, how can any country afford such economic insanity?


    As it turns out, France can't. In 2004, French Health Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy told a government commission, "Our health system has gone mad. Profound reforms are urgent." Agence France-Presse recently reported that the French health-care system is running a deficit of $2.7 billion. And in the French presidential election in May, voters in surprising numbers rejected the Socialist candidate, Ségolčne Royal, who had promised actually to raise some health benefits, and elected instead the center-right politician Nicolas Sarkozy, who, according to Agence France-Presse again, "plans to move fast to overhaul the economy, with the deficit-ridden health care system a primary target." Possibly Sarkozy should first consult with Michael Moore. After all, the tax-stoked French health care system may be expensive, but at least it's "free."


    Having driven his bring-on-government-health care argument into a ditch outside of Paris, Moore next pilots it right off a cliff and into the Caribbean on the final stop on his tour: Cuba. Here it must also be said that the director performs a valuable service. He rounds up a group of 9/11 rescue workers — firefighters and selfless volunteers — who risked their lives and ruined their health in the aftermath of the New York terrorist attacks. These people — there's no other way of putting it — have been screwed, mainly by the politicians who were at such photo-op pains to praise them at the time. (This makes Moore's faith in government medical compassion seem all the more inexplicable.) These people's lives have been devastated — wracked by chronic illnesses, some can no longer hold down jobs and none can afford to buy the various expensive medicines they need. Moore does them an admirable service by bringing their plight before a large audience.
    However, there's never a moment when we doubt that he's also using these people as props in his film, and as talking points in his agenda. Renting some boats, he leads them all off to Cuba. Upon arrival they stop briefly outside the American military enclave on Guantanamo Bay so that Moore can have himself filmed begging, through a bullhorn, for some of the free, top-notch medical care that's currently being lavished on the detainees there. Having no luck, he then moves on to Cuba proper.


    Fidel Castro's island dictatorship, now in its 40th year of being listed as a human-rights violator by Amnesty International, is here depicted as a balmy paradise not unlike the Iraq of Saddam Hussein that Moore showed us in his earlier film, "Fahrenheit 9/11." He and his charges make their way — their pre-arranged way, if it need be said — to a state-of-the-art hospital where they receive a picturesquely warm welcome. In a voiceover, Moore, shown beaming at his little band of visitors, says he told the Cuban doctors to "give them the same care they'd give Cuban citizens." Then he adds, dramatically: "And they did."


    If Moore really believes this, he may be a greater fool than even his most feverish detractors claim him to be. Nevertheless, medical care is provided to the visiting Americans, and it is indeed excellent. Cuba is in fact the site of some world-class medical facilities (surprising in a country that, as Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar noted in the Los Angeles Times last month, "imprisoned a doctor in the late 1990s for speaking out against government failure to respond to an epidemic of a mosquito-borne virus"). What Moore doesn't mention is the flourishing Cuban industry of "health tourism" — a system in which foreigners (including self-admitted multimillionaire film directors and, of course, government bigwigs) who are willing to pay cash for anything from brain-surgery to dental work can purchase a level of treatment that's unavailable to the majority of Cubans with no hard currency at their disposal. The Cuban American National Foundation (admittedly a group with no love for the Castro regime) calls this "medical apartheid." And in a 2004 article in Canada's National Post, writer Isabel Vincent quoted a dissident Cuban neurosurgeon, Doctor Hilda Molina, as saying, "Cubans should be treated the same as foreigners. Cubans have less rights in their own country than foreigners who visit here."

    As the Caribbean sun sank down on Moore's breathtakingly meretricious movie, I couldn't help recalling that when Fidel Castro became gravely ill last year, he didn't put himself in the hands of a Cuban surgeon. No. Instead, he had a specialist flown in — from Spain.

    * The figure cited in the original posting of this review — 18 million — was radically incorrect.

  5. #35
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Default

    One sick flick

    Peter Foster, Financial Post
    Published: Tuesday, July 17, 2007

    "There's no doubt that a documentary by someone of Michael Moore's stature will help the world see the deeply humane principles of Cuban society." -- Jose Ramon Balaguer, Cuban Health Minister


    Michael Moore has said he wants to make movies from which people emerge saying, "I don't believe what I just saw." He has certainly hit the mark with Sicko. His latest attack on the American way of life is, literally, incredible -- a typical combination of bent facts and leftist grandstanding. It's not that health-care policy is not an important issue in any modern society, it's that Mr. Moore does not address it in a serious way.

    According to Sicko, what is scandalous about America's greater reliance on private health insurance is not that so many have no insurance, but that the system makes its profits by systematically denying the needs of its clients. Mr. Moore parades a pageant of woe across the screen: couples who have lost their homes, individuals who have lost their limbs, mothers who have lost their babies -- all allegedly due to the greed and heartlessness of a profit-based system that has the Washington political establishment bought and sold.

    The American system is contrasted with the socialized medical nirvana that allegedly exists in Canada, Britain, France and, most remarkably, Cuba. In these government-run systems, wait times are short, the most technically elaborate care is instantly available and doctors make house calls.

    Mr. Moore plays the heartstrings like a virtuoso. He doesn't just find sick Americans, he finds sick Americans who became sick as a result of working at Ground Zero in the wake of 9/11. He doesn't just find health care for them, he finds it in Cuba! The scene of him standing on a boat in Guantanamo Bay, demanding via loud hailer that his American heroes be given the same medical attention as al-Qaeda detainees, is a classic. When that-- obviously-- doesn't work, he takes his shipmates to Fidel Castro's Communist paradise for treatment, which is instantly, lavishly, and cheaply available. Somehow, Cuba's poverty and political repression don't make it on camera.

    However, the ultimate paradise portrayed by Mr. Moore is not Canada, England or Cuba. It is France, and, in particular, Paris. To refute the notion that state care goes with high taxes, a couple are brought forth who live in circumstances that would not shame Donald Trump, but whose combined income is reportedly US$8,000 a month. The French government even sends someone round to do new mothers' laundry! Mr. Moore's take on life in Paris is about as credible as that of a far better recent movie, Pixar's Ratatouille, in which a talented rodent establishes that "anyone can cook." Mr. Moore suggests that anyone can design a health-care system. Only those money-grubbing private health-care providers stand in the way.

    The fundamental problem, according to Mr. Moore, is that there is not enough "we" in the American system. The solution is simple: "true" democracy, in which the land of milk and antibiotics is achieved simply by demanding it -- screw human nature and history. To bolster this view, Mr. Moore brings on screen Tony Benn, the former English peer and Labour Cabinet minister who, significantly, is very much yesterday's man in his own country. The French system, too, is praised for its tendency to take to the streets. All this is opposed to an American electorate reputedly kept in its place by fear.

    There are profound issues at the root of Sicko that demand to be addressed, but aren't. If private health care is so awful, why do so many want it? Are there no preventable deaths or examples of malpractice under socialized systems? Moreover, the "right wing" argument is not against the universal provision of basic health insurance, it is against the state monopoly of health provision. Under a purely tax-based, state-administered system, rationing and lengthening wait times become inevitable. States systems also tend to become top heavy in administration, and to provide more scope for public-sector unions who are more concerned with their members' ease than with patients' welfare.

    The notion that profit should be made out of treating the sick seems to jar with a powerful belief that delivering care is a humanitarian duty. But the fact is that the self-interested principle that famously motivates "the butcher, the brewer and the baker," to the benefit of their customers, also motivates the physician, the nurse and the hospital owner/administrator.

    The basic moral issue is that under a purely socialized system your body, and your life, is no longer your own. The fantasy that lies behind Michael Moore's movie is that of the caring and competent state that eschews self-interest and provides efficiently for all its citizens' health needs. Where such delusions end up is not in the airbrushed fantasy of Sicko, but in the nightmare reality of Cuba.


    © National Post 2007

  6. #36
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Default

    Quack Michael Moore has mad view of the NHS

    Minette Marrin


    The fourth estate has always had a bad name, but it seems to be getting worse. Journalism should be an honest and useful trade, and often still is. But now that journalism has more power than ever before, it seems to have become ever more disreputable. In recent years it has been brought lower and lower by kiss-and-tell betrayals, by “reality” TV, by shockumentaries and by liars, fantasists, hucksters and geeks of every kind, crowing and denouncing and emoting in a hideous new version of Bunyan’s Vanity Fair.
    Outstanding among these is Michael Moore, the American documentary maker. He specialises in searing indictments, such as Fahrenheit 9/11 and Bowling for Columbine, and has, without a doubt, a genius for it. Although his films are crude, manipulative and one-sided, he is idolised by millions of Americans and Europeans, widely seen as some sort of redneck Mr Valiant-for-truth.


    Nothing could be further from the truth. His latest documentary, Sicko, was released in cinemas last week. Millions of people will see it and all too many of them will be misled.


    Sicko, like all Moore’s films, is about an important and emotive subject – healthcare. He contrasts the harsh and exclusive system in the US with the European ideal of universal socialised medicine, equal and free for all, and tries to demonstrate that one is wrong and the other is right. So far, so good; there are cases to be made.


    Unfortunately Sicko is a dishonest film. That is not only my opinion. It is the opinion of Professor Lord Robert Winston, the consultant and advocate of the NHS. When asked on BBC Radio 4 whether he recognised the NHS as portrayed in this film, Winston replied: “No, I didn’t. Most of it was filmed at my hospital [the Hammersmith in west London], which is a very good hospital but doesn’t represent what the NHS is like.”


    I didn’t recognise it either, from years of visiting NHS hospitals. Moore painted a rose-tinted vision of spotless wards, impeccable treatment, happy patients who laugh away any suggestion of waiting in casualty, and a glamorous young GP who combines his devotion to his patients with a salary of Ł100,000, a house worth Ł1m and two cars. All this, and for free.
    This, along with an even rosier portrait of the French welfare system, is what Moore says the state can and should provide. You would never guess from Sicko that the NHS is in deep trouble, mired in scandal and incompetence, despite the injection of billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money.


    While there are good doctors and nurses and treatments in the NHS, there is so much that is inadequate or bad that it is dishonest to represent it as the envy of the world and a perfect blueprint for national healthcare. It isn’t.


    GPs’ salaries – used by Moore as evidence that a state-run system does not necessarily mean low wages – is highly controversial; their huge pay rise has coincided with a loss of home visits, a serious problem in getting GP appointments and continuing very low pay for nurses and cleaners.
    At least 20 NHS trusts have even worse problems with the hospital-acquired infection clostridium difficile, not least the trust in Kent where 90 people died of C diff in a scandal reported recently.


    Many hospitals are in crisis. Money shortages, bad management, excesses of bureaucrats and deadly Whitehall micromanagement mean they have to skimp on what matters most.


    Overfilling the beds is dangerous to patients, in hygiene and in recovery times, but it goes on widely. Millions are wasted on expensive agency nurses because NHS nurses are abandoning the profession in droves. Only days ago, the 2007 nurse of the year publicly resigned in despair at the health service. There is a dangerous shortage of midwives since so many have left, and giving birth on the NHS can be a shocking experience.
    Meanwhile thousands of young hospital doctors, under a daft new employment scheme, were sent randomly around the country, pretty much regardless of their qualifications or wishes. As foreign doctors are recruited from Third World countries, hundreds of the best-qualified British doctors have been left unemployed. Several have emigrated.


    As for consultants, the men in Whitehall didn’t believe what they said about the hours they worked, beyond their duties, and issued new contracts forcing them to work less. You could hardly make it up.


    None of these problems mean we should abandon the idea of a universal shared system of healthcare. It’s clear we would not want the American model, even if it isn’t quite as bad as portrayed by Moore. It’s clear our British private medical insurance provision is a rip-off. I believe we should as a society share burdens of ill health and its treatment. The only question is how best to do that and it seems to me the state-run, micromanaged NHS has failed to answer it.


    By ignoring these problems, and similar ones in France’s even more generous and expensive health service, Moore is lying about the answer to that question. I wonder whether the grotesquely fat film-maker is aware of the delicious irony that in our state-run system, the government and the NHS have been having serious public discussion about the necessity of refusing to treat people who are extremely obese.


    One can only wonder why Sicko is so dishonestly biased. It must be partly down to Moore’s personal vainglory; he has cast himself as a high priest of righteous indignation, the people’s prophet, and he has an almost religious following. He’s a sort of docu-evangelist, dressed like a parody of the American man of the people, with jutting jaw, infantile questions and aggressively aligned baseball cap.


    However, behind the pleasures of righteous indignation for him and his audience, there is something more sinister. There’s money in indignation, big money. It is just one of the many extreme sensations that are lucrative for journalists to whip up, along with prurience, disgust and envy. Michael Moore is not Mr Valiant-for-truth. He is Mr Worldly-wiseman, laughing behind his hand at all the gawping suckers in Vanity Fair. Don’t go to his show.

  7. #37
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    yeah sorry, the national post is a right wing rag mouthpiece. it's a joke in canada.

    the guy who owned it is currently in jail for fraud
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  8. #38
    Elite Member crackho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Playin' up in muh pussah
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lurkur View Post
    ^^ He suggested marrying a Canadian.

    Grimm - will you please marry me?

    My my, didn't we all just dip our tongues in some acid today.

  9. #39
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Default

    So Grimm, you pan a right-winged commentary of a left-winged movie? Um hmmm...

  10. #40
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    No, I put absolutely no stock in right wing anything, most of all commentary because it's usually lies, misinformation, or straight up propaganda.

    The National Post is a national joke. It's about as concerned with truth as FOX news is.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  11. #41
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    33,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    It's about as concerned with truth as FOX news is.

    Are you saying they're not fair and balanced
    It's no longer a dog whistle, it's a fucking trombone


    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  12. #42
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    No, I put absolutely no stock in right wing anything, most of all commentary because it's usually lies, misinformation, or straight up propaganda.
    You just accurately described this movie. Thank you and good night!

  13. #43
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    I don't buy Moore's account anymore than I buy any right wing rag's bloated rhetoric about it.

    I'll say it again: Most conservatives aren't worried about media or reporting being factual; they're worried if it's conservative or not.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  14. #44
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Default

    ^^ Well this conservative distrusts all media, including the alleged conservative FOX.

  15. #45
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    My god.. WE'VE FOUND A MUTATION!

    She's 'the one'

    *gets you an Obama sticker*
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 21
    Last Post: June 29th, 2007, 11:38 PM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: June 27th, 2007, 05:47 PM
  3. Kate Moss hits duff note writing for Shambles
    By TheMoog in forum Gossip Archive
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: March 14th, 2007, 08:35 AM
  4. Replies: 8
    Last Post: April 11th, 2006, 11:02 AM
  5. Bush gives healthcare speach at Wendy's
    By buttmunch in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 23rd, 2006, 04:39 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •