Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Statement of NOW President Terry O'Neill

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 09:36 AM
Original message
Statement of NOW President Terry O'Neill
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 10:25 AM by flyarm
Statement of NOW President Terry O'Neill


http://www.now.org/press/03-10/03-21b.html

Health Care Reform Victory Comes with Tragic Setback for Women's Rights

Statement of NOW President Terry O'Neill

March 21, 2010

As a longtime proponent of health care reform, I truly wish that the National Organization for Women could join in celebrating the historic passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It pains me to have to stand against what many see as a major achievement. But feminist, progressive principles are in direct conflict with many of the compromises built into and tacked onto this legislation.

The health care reform bill passed by Congress today offers a number of good solutions to our nation's critical health care problems, but it also fails in many important respects. After a full year of controversy and compromise, the result is a highly flawed, diminished piece of legislation that continues reliance on a failing, profit-driven private insurance system and rewards those who have been abusive of their customers. With more than 45,000 unnecessary deaths annually and hundreds of thousands of bankruptcies each year due to medical bills, this bill is only a timid first step toward meaningful reform.

Fact: The bill contains a sweeping anti-abortion provision. Contrary to the talking points circulated by congressional leaders, the bill passed today ultimately achieves the same outcome as the infamous Stupak-Pitts Amendment, namely the likely elimination of all private as well as public insurance coverage for abortion. It imposes a bizarre requirement on insurance plan enrollees who buy coverage through the health insurance exchanges to write two monthly checks (one for an abortion care rider and one for all other health care). Even employers will have to write two separate checks for each of their employees requesting the abortion rider.

This burdensome, elaborate system must be eliminated. It is there because the Catholic bishops and extremist abortion rights opponents know that it will result in greatly restricting access to abortion care, currently one of the most common medical procedures for women.

Fact: President Obama made an eleventh-hour agreement to issue an executive order lending the weight of his office to the anti-abortion measures included in the bill. This move was designed to appease a handful of anti-choice Democrats who have held up health care reform in an effort to restrict women's access to abortion. This executive order helps to cement the misconception that the Hyde Amendment is settled law rather than what it really is -- an illegitimate tack-on to an annual must-pass appropriations bill. It also sends the outrageous message that it is acceptable to negotiate health care reform on the backs of women.

Fact: The bill permits age-rating, the practice of imposing higher premiums on older people. This practice has a disproportionate impact on women, whose incomes and savings are lower due to a lifetime of systematic wage discrimination.

Fact: The bill also permits gender-rating, the practice of charging women higher premiums simply because they are women. Some are under the mistaken impression that gender-rating has been prohibited, but that is only true in the individual and small-group markets. Larger group plans (more than 100 employees) sold through the exchanges will be permitted to discriminate against women -- having an especially harmful impact in workplaces where women predominate.

We know why those gender- and age-rating provisions are in the bill: because insurers insisted on them, as they will generate billions of dollars in profits for the companies. Such discriminatory rating must be completely eliminated.

Fact: The bill imposes harsh restrictions on the ability of immigrants to access health care, imposing a 5-year waiting period on permanent, legal residents before they are eligible for assistance such as Medicaid, and prohibiting undocumented workers even to use their own money to purchase health insurance through an exchange. These provisions are counterproductive in terms of controlling health care costs; they are there because of ugly anti-immigrant sentiment, and must be eliminated.

Fact: The bill covers only 32 million of the 47 million uninsured in this country, does not contain a meaningful public option and provides no pathway to a single payer system like Medicare for all. Democratic negotiators crumpled before powerful business interests and right-wing extremists, and until they get a spine there will be no true competition to help rein in costs.

The bottom line is that everyone -- citizen and non-citizen, undocumented immigrant and visitor -- has a fundamental human right to health care. This right has been denied in the U.S. for far too long, while the rest of the industrialized world moved ahead to assure universal and affordable care for their people.

We call upon President Obama and elected officials in both houses to commit to a process of steady improvement of our health care system that will result in true reform with universal coverage, realistically affordable rates and no discrimination. We still have a lot of work to do before we can genuinely celebrate.

###

For Immediate Release
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
1. Someone should sent Terry a dictionary as she has no clue what the word "fact" means
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frazzled Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Boy, you're not kidding
To give just a few examples:

"the likely elimination of all private as well as public insurance coverage for abortion": first of all, there hasn't been any public insurance coverage for abortion. They Hyde amendment has prohibited public funding for abortion for years. This bill, or the executive order, doesn't change that at all.

" The bill permits age-rating": the bill actually lowers age-rating, considerably. Currently, insurance companies charge up to 7x higher premiums for older Americans. This will limit them to 3x. Do we wish it could be done away with altogether? Sure, but the fact is that people over 50 use up most of the medical care. I know this from experience. Never had a problem in my life until I hit over 50, at which point things have started to break down a bit.

As Nancy Pelosi said, this bill is the best thing for women that has come along.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
29. If you are going to criticise other's facts you should read more carefully
the word private was in the quote.

the likely elimination of all private as well as public insurance coverage for abortion

Clearly this quote assumes no public coverage of abortion it is stating that there will also be no private coverage as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #2
31. Oh, for fuck's sake. Don't outlaw murder. Just require that insurance companies
--murder fewer people. Because insurance companies are useless mass murderers who refuse to take risk sharing all the way, the goddam fucking GOVERNMENT has to ratify that policy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #2
44. Turn on Bill Moyers PBS tommorrow night Terry O'Neil will be on discussing this!
I just got off phone with the contact person on this ..AT THE LINK..i WAS ASSURED THIS WAS NOT OPINION but fact!

Terry O'Neil Pres Of NOW will be on Bill Moyers PBS show tommorrow night discussing this!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. and you have the "FACTS" more than she does? If you do bring them on!! come on..post them! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. What she has is opinions that she is trying to pass off as facts
I am not going to engage in any sort of similarly intellectually flawed exercise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. prove she is wrong or that they are opinions..prove it! I would trust Terry more than anyone here to
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 10:40 AM by flyarm
have read the bill and have full understanding of it..


Now prove your accusations! You made the accusations..now prove them!

You are a fool if you think she is going to post this at the NOW web site if it is just her "OPINION"!


But then again...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. you'll trust *anyone* who shits on the bill, this much is true...
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 10:39 AM by dionysus
what's next, a jane hamsher encore?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #7
39. how dare you! what i want is Real Health "CARE" reform..not this piece of shit!
Edited on Thu Mar-25-10 08:42 AM by flyarm
how dare you "think" you know what i want..I have lived in Canada upwards to 22 years on an off..I know their Coverage is not perfect..but it damn sure is better than this bill.

What i want is other Americans to have Care..not insurance that is unaffordable to them and mandated ..not for Care ..but for insurance and covers very little in terms of "CARE"

What i do understand is real Reform..this is not that!

I believe "CARE" is a right ..a born right..are there some things in this bill good..yes..but it is more an Insurance give away ..than "HEALTH CARE"

Why should any American be taxed at 40% for having good Health Care?
Why not elevate all to good Health Care..instead of penalizing with a 40% tax, those who have good Health Care? And those who gave up salary increases and went on strike and were locked out and made sacrifices for good health care.
Why not elevate up ..instead of pushing down the quality of care??
Why are women going to be charged more than men for Health Care?
Why should women have to write two checks for Health Care?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. I think it's pretty clear many of her "facts" are in actually opinion
if you think I am wrong- PROVE IT!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. .
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. no dear..you made the accusation..you prove your accusation! that is how it is done! or are you
pissing on our legs again and telling us it is raining????????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. Prove WHAT?
I know one thing for sure...if this "bill" was passed during the last administration, democrats would have come unhinged. That's a FACT.

The bill legitimizes discrimination against women. The bill legitimizes discrimination based on gender. Yippee!!! I think we ought to throw a fucking party. :eyes:

Repubs, without casting a single "yea" vote have triumphed...all the way around. How the hell did that happen? Nevermind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #13
32. And it legally discriminates ON AGE!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. golf clap
regardless of the validity of her OPINIONS, clearly she is stating OPINION and PREDICTION as fact

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #8
37. I don't find that clear at all! In FACT I will call NOW today to find out
if or how much is opinion.

You can do that as well a contact number is under the letter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. Bwahahahahahahahaha!
What a joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
17. Actually the thing about the two checks and the gender rating is true.
But some don't have a problem with it. I do, and apparently so do others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. see post #2. see, no matter how big the font or red the text, a lie is still a lie.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
22. What part isn't true? Women do have to write a seperate check and the gender rating is true.
What is a lie?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #1
42. I just got off the phone with Now and the representative noted as the contact on this statement
By Terry O'Neil at NOW :Contact: Mai Shiozaki

I was assured by Mai Shiozaki of NOW that these are FACTS and NOT OPINIONS of Terry O'Neil.

Ms Shiozaki also told me that Terry O'Neil will be on Bill Moyers PBS show tommorrow night discussing these FACTS!!!!!!!!!!!


So for all those accusing Terry or NOW of just using their OPINIONs..I think you owe NOW and those who post this an appology!

or better yet ..call NOW Yourself and confirm this!..that is if you can bother to do any research yourselves!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
12. Wow, what a lot of ignoreds on this thread! Thanks for posting flyarm.
You sure can bring them out! K & R for an important statement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
15. K&R
:kick: against those that belittle women and LGBT rights on this board on a much too frequent basis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
16. In my opinion, the bill is hardly reform but more in the area of adjustments
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 03:30 PM by mmonk
with some subsidies. I cannot be made to like it, even with all the insults leveled at progressive groups pushing for real reform. On the abortion issue, it seems to me the anti-abortion forces could possibly force any company on the exchange to drop coverage altogether since it is the "cough" public exchange.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ncteechur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. Well I challenge NOW to find a slate of new candidates to take the places of those,
particularly those women who voted for the HCR. If they want to pull their support, pull it. It seems that NARAL and Planned Parenthood are being a bit more pragmatic about the HCR and the executive order than NOW is.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Pragmatism follows no choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
19. knr - Related post here ...
"Fact: The bill contains a sweeping anti-abortion provision. Contrary to the talking points circulated by congressional leaders, the bill passed today ultimately achieves the same outcome as the infamous Stupak-Pitts Amendment, namely the likely elimination of all private as well as public insurance coverage for abortion. It imposes a bizarre requirement on insurance plan enrollees who buy coverage through the health insurance exchanges to write two monthly checks (one for an abortion care rider and one for all other health care). Even employers will have to write two separate checks for each of their employees requesting the abortion rider..."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8008227&mesg_id=8008962


To the NOTHING'S CHANGED crowd...

It's true that the EO didn't change the language in the bill, but it's not true that the language in the bill "just" extended Hyde to the exchanges.

Previously, the abortion could not be paid for, directly, with federal funds. Now, even women buying insurance with their OWN MONEY cannot get a policy that covers abortion without jumping through accounting hoops, and making the insurance company jump through accounting hoops. The bill's language extends the effect of Hyde to PRIVATE money.

Many people believe that insurance companies will just stop covering abortions - for anyone, not just customers paying their premium in part with subsidies. I don't have a crystal ball, so I won't claim that (although I think it's likely - in the states that already require abortion coverage to be bought separately, there are no abortion coverage riders offered). It also may require women in group policies to affirmatively state that they are buying coverage for abortions. That's not clear, but seems to be suggested by the structure of the "separate funds."

What's changed is that abortion coverage has been taken out of "comprehensive insurance" - even for people paying with THEIR OWN MONEY - and put in a special little boat all by itself. You may call it "symbolic" but it also serves as a precedent to define abortion as something OTHER than "health care" and to segregate women's rights from everybody else's rights.

And spare me the cries that "abortion is cheap!" Yes, first trimester abortions are relatively inexpensive, as medical procedures go. But later abortions required to protect the woman's health (not covered by the exceptions) ARE NOT CHEAP.

By offering and signing this Executive Order, Obama put his stamp of approval on all that."




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
20. Agree -- and thanks for the info -- !!! Needs a lot of discussion . ..!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
23. A big K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
24. Planned Parenthood says exactly the opposite.
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 06:06 PM by ProSense
“As a trusted health care provider to millions of women and families across the country, Planned Parenthood applauds the fact that this legislation would extend health care coverage, including family planning, to tens of millions of women and families, guarantee access to affordable life-saving screenings for cervical and breast cancer and other serious health problems, protect women against gender discrimination by private insurers, end the practice of dropping coverage because of pre-existing conditions, and significantly increase access to reproductive health care. The proposal also includes a commonsense provision to expand family planning under Medicaid, which would significantly increase access to essential preventive health care for millions of women.

link


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. and NARAL confirms what NOW stated , although they stand with the bill .
but they are targeting anti choice democrats.




http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/news/press-releases/2010/pr03212010-finalhousehcr.html
What They're Saying: House Votes on Health-Care Reform
By
Molly
on March 23, 2010 2:48 PM |
Here's a quick news round-up on the passage of health reform.

Watch Donna Crane, NARAL Pro-Choice America's policy director, explain to the viewers of ABC News 7 (DC local station - WJLA) why the two-check system in the new health system is unworkable:

snip:

"The legislation includes an onerous provision that requires Americans to write two separate checks if the insurance plan they choose includes abortion coverage. This unacceptable bureaucratic stigmatization could cause insurance carriers to drop abortion coverage, even though more than 85 percent of private plans currently cover this care for women. Our message to our allies in Congress and in the White House is clear: We do not accept this bill as the final word on how abortion coverage will be defined in the new health-care system. We are committed to finding opportunities to repeal these unacceptable restrictions as the new system takes shape.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. Naral and Planned Parenthood
continue to fight to repeal the Hyde amendment. Still, nothing in the bill changes any prior to its passage.

Naral also says the exact opposite of the OP:

"At the same time, we recognize that the bill will bring more than 30 million Americans into a system that includes affordable family-planning services, better access to contraception, and maternity care. It also outlaws some discriminatory insurance-industry practices that make health care more expensive for women. We applaud this tremendous progress, but we will continue to work toward a day when these kinds of achievements can be made without undermining women's access to abortion coverage. American women should not have to sacrifice their right to choose in order to make progress in other areas of health care.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. your link to Planned Parenthood also states the following..which is a neutral statement of what NOW
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 07:32 PM by flyarm
Statement says.

You just confirmed what NOW is saying.
from your link:

“Nonetheless, we regret that a pro-choice president of a pro-choice nation was forced to sign an Executive Order that further codifies the proposed anti-choice language in the health care reform bill, originally proposed by Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska. What the president’s executive order did not do is include the complete and total ban on private health insurance coverage for abortion that Congressman Bart Stupak (D–MI) had insisted upon. So while we regret that this proposed Executive Order has given the imprimatur of the president to Senator Nelson’s language, it is critically important to note that it does not include the Stupak abortion ban.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #24
43. Turn on Bill Moyers PBS tommorrow night..Terry O'Neil will be on his show discussing this
if you had bothered to do any reasearch into the matter you would have know >>Terry Is 100% correct on this!

Watch PBS BILL MOYERS tommorrow night!

I just talked to the contact for Terry at NOW>.all of the information in this op is FACT..not opinion ..i was assured, by Mai Shiozaki of NOW..the contact for this release.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
27. K & R nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeJG Donating Member (304 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
30. Keep up the great work fly!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
33. R
Threads like this show clearly who supports women and who is willing to compromise anything to whatever degree necessary to get a win for the team.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
34. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
35. K& R. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
36. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 07:51 AM
Response to Original message
38. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
golddigger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
40. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
41. For those questioning this Statement by Terry O'Neil and it being "OPINIONS" they are NOT
I just got off the phone with Now and the representative noted as the contact on this statement By Terry O'Neil at NOW :Contact: Mai Shiozaki

I was assured by Mai Shiozaki of NOW that these are FACTS and NOT OPINIONS of Terry O'Neil.

Ms Shiozaki also told me that Terry O'Neil will be on Bill Moyers PBS show tommorrow night discussing these FACTS!!!!!!!!!!!


So for all those accusing Terry or NOW of just using their OPINIONs..I think you owe NOW and those who post this an appology!

or better yet ..call NOW Yourself and confirm this!..that is if you can bother to do any research yourselves!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC