List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

From a source close to the House Democratic caucus, here's a list of Blue Dogs that don't want to vote for this bill because it has a certain date for withdrawal.  

Michael Arcuri (NY-24)
John Barrow (GA-12)
Melissa Bean (IL-08)
Dan Boren (OK-02)
Jim Cooper (TN-05)
Bud Cramer (AL-02)
Brad Ellsworth (IN-08)
Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-20)
Baron Hill (IN-09)
Tim Mahoney (FL-16)
Jim Marshall (GA-08)
Mike McIntyre (NC-07)
Collin Peterson (MN-07)
John Salazar (CO-03)
Joe Sestak (PA-07)
Heath Shuler (NC-11)
Gene Taylor (MS-04)

It's sad to see some freshmen we supported on the list.  Joe Sestak, Kirsten Gillibrand and Michael Arcuri had some online support from the progressive netroots.  Tim Mahoney, Heath Shuler, Brad Ellsworth, and Baron Hill were mostly to nearly all Rahm recruits.

These people are the Democrats that held Pelosi and the progressive hostage on the language for a firm withdrawal.  They are keeping the war going.  They need to be brought over.

UPDATE: Sestak isn't a Blue Dog, and I'm told that Kirsten Gillibrand just wants to see the bill first. Mmmkay. Color me skeptical. A simple public statement would do wonders.

UPDATE AGAIN: Kirsten Gillibrand has publicly stated she will vote for the supplemental.

Tags: Baron Hill, Blue Dogs, Brad Ellsworth, Bud Cramer, Dan Boren, Gene Taylor, Heath Shuler, Iraq, Jim Cooper, Jim Marshall, Joe Sestak, John Barrow, John Peterson, John Salazar, Kirsten Gillibrand, Melissa Bean, Michael Arcuri, Mike McIntyre, netroots, progressive caucus, Tim Mahoney (all tags)



Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

I appreciate what you are doing and I think holding all dems accountable is a good thing.  However, this list is an unintended consequence of the 'elect dems at all cost' strategy that was pushed by this blog and others in 2006.

by aiko 2007-03-13 12:45PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

I couldn't disagree more with the implication that we should have been more selective in 06 - electing someone isn't enough, but it sure is easier to convince someone you elected to do the right thing. Winning these elections moved the ball forward.

Don't mistake me for sounding concilatory - it's just this is what I expected from the Dems. They need pressure from the left to spine them up before they'll take real steps to bring the troops home.

by SteveWFP 2007-03-13 01:41PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Seems to me we enabled the blue dogs and helped them get stronger.  The left built up the center for the sake of the whole.  I guess there is some wisdom in it but then again....

by aiko 2007-03-13 02:19PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

I'd rather fight Democrats than Republicans, but if you've got an alternative than I'm happy to listen.

by SteveWFP 2007-03-13 04:56PM | 0 recs
by blues 2007-03-14 01:53PM | 0 recs

...with a few, extreme exceptions (say, a mythical contest between Zell Miller and Lincoln Chafee), any Democrat is better than any Republican, especially since the existance of these types of Democrats are why we have the majority today.  There are many districts where a Progressive Democrat can not be elected but a Blue Dog can.

In any case, the existance of the veto and filibuster means the Democrats can probably not stop the war in any case, since we don't have 67 (or even 60) Senators and 290 House members.  The only thing that they can do is to refuse to fund it (which only requires 51 Senators and 218 House Reps), but that doesn't bring the troops home, it just means that they won't be paid or given food or bullets (so that will never happen in a meaningful way)-only the President can bring the troops home.  This is the Blue Dogs blinking in this particular game of chicken-understandably so.

by Geotpf 2007-03-13 02:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Well...

"but that doesn't bring the troops home, it just means that they won't be paid or given food or bullets"

See, this is the problem.  You are repeating Republican talking points.  That statement is bullshit, but even progressives are parroting it.  We've already lost when we debate using their conventional (bullshit) wisdom.

by jgarcia 2007-03-13 06:15PM | 0 recs
Okay, then what would happen...

...if Congress simply doesn't pass a supplemental bill for Iraq spending?  The troops magically come home?

A more likely real world scenerio in that case is that Bush keeps them there, spending money Congress didn't give him, and dares Congress to remove him from office; which they won't, since we would need 16 Republican senators to prefer President Pelosi to President Bush, which will never happen.  Most likely though, is that it won't come to that point-enough Dems will crack that they will pass something with toothless restrictions that Bush ignores via a signing statement.

by Geotpf 2007-03-13 06:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Okay, then what would happen...

Heh! Months ago I made a comment right here that if the Congress cut the money, Bush would simply let the troops die in the field for lack of bullets. I have a confession to make. Sometimes I toss these little Molotov cocktails out there just to see what blows up! (Yea, I'm like that sometimes.) Having posted it and having it rebuked by people who questioned my moral fiber, I have had time to ruminate. No. He cannot realistically do that. And even if Bush tries to find financial back doors, that only keeps the bastard out of our hair in other areas. He draws no lines in the sand regarding his own actions.

by blues 2007-03-14 02:02PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Nearly all of them are in largely Republican districts.  I'd rather have a pro-war Democrat who votes with us on 80% of the issues than a pro-war Republican who votes with us on 10% of the issues.

Of course an anti-war Democrat with us on 100% of the issues would be best, but can that person get elected in Oklahoma or Southern Indiana?

by Vox Populi 2007-03-13 12:46PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

And keep getting elected, I should add.

by Vox Populi 2007-03-13 12:46PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Has Melissa Bean been with us 80% of the time, especially on key pieces of legislation. Serious question.

by michael in chicago 2007-03-13 03:27PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

My guess is she has been more than someone like David McSweeny would have been.

by Vox Populi 2007-03-13 04:12PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

But the question is, do you believe that only a Democrat like Bean - one who voted with the GOP often undermining key Democratic party stances - could beat a crack pot like McSweeny and therefor should be supported because of this?

Obama votes way better the Keyes would have. But is that really an argument to be taken seriously? Any Democrat could have beaten Keyes.

I don't think the McSweeny argument in this case is valid, and is not much more than a nice rehtorical trick. It sets up a circular argument in which any elected Democrat can do no wrong because they are better than the Republican candidate they may have run against. Gee, I should hope so. I have higher expectation for Democrats than I do for Republicans.

The question is, are they moving the party forward or hurting the party. This vote, IMO, is another case where Bean is hurting the party by bluring the lines between what Democrats stand for and what Republicans stand for.

by michael in chicago 2007-03-13 05:01PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Bean's district is one of the most Republican in the state.  Your comparison of Bean v McSweeney to Obama v Keyes is not applicable.  Illinois is very Democratic at the state level.

I'm not saying no Democrat can win in a district like Bean's other than Bean.  What I am saying is that for 20-some years (however long Phil Crane was there) the Democrats tried and weren't able to take it.

by Vox Populi 2007-03-13 05:21PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

There were plenty of reason Crane lost, many of them due to promises made to labor that Bean didn't keep. I live right next door to Beans district. Like much of Dupage, it is not the GOP bastion its reputation would have you believe based on 20-year old statistics against a long term GOP incumbent.

Why Democrats won and lost there has more to do with my now supposed support for a Democrat who seems to break ranks with the party when they need to stand up for the party. It's a pattern. If we call BS when Republicans do it, we need to hold our own to account who undermine the party - especially repeatedly as in Bean's case.

And Bean didn't take Crane her first try either. With Rahm's help, she did get in the second time.

by michael in chicago 2007-03-13 07:24PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Dan Boren's seat, despite going 59-41 for Bush in 2004, is a Safe Democratic seat.  The Oklahoma districts are drawn to ensure 4 Safe Republican seats and 1 Safe Democratic seat.  Almost every state legislator in that congressional district is a Democrat.

Boren could vote with the party on this w/o paying big price in his district if he wanted to, he just doesn't want to.

by Nate Willems 2007-03-13 01:03PM | 0 recs

The Democratic majority in the House is greater than 17.

by The Cunctator 2007-03-13 12:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Interestingly

Yes, but only by 15 seats.  Add those 17 defectors to the 201 Republicans, and you get 218 votes against the Democrats' bill, a majority.

by you like it 2007-03-13 01:24PM | 0 recs
Petersen is a Republican

did you mean to say Chris Carney or Tim Holden..those are the only "conservative" Dems in PA that I can think of as Blue Dogs. Can't imagine Sestak being one, or Gillibrand for that matter..but it is what it is

by dantata 2007-03-13 12:53PM | 0 recs
I'm told Gillibrand should NOT be on this list

Matt can you document this further? Did you contact the offices in question?

by Texas Nate 2007-03-13 02:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Petersen is a Republican

I donated to and worked for Gillibrand and celebrated when she was elected as MY congressperson.  Hmmm.  I just got off the phone with her DC office.  The intern (or whatever) didn't make any comment (other than to assure me she would convey my thoughts to her boss), but she did have the good grace to giggle appreciatively when I explained that I and many others in the district voted for gillibrand for one reason and one reason only -  to stick it to these people every minute of every day on every issue as our representative cuz, believe me, if i were in a position to do so, that's what i'd be doing.

we'll see.

by DeeLuzon 2007-03-13 04:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Petersen is a Republican

Patrick Murphy is a blue dog but so far he's been voting with the left on this issue.  So far, so good.

There are 44 blue dogs up from 37.  In 06 out of 40 something Democratic votes for the MCA,25 were blue dogs.

by jd2 2007-03-14 08:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Petersen is a Republican

I suspect Matt has listed John Peterson when he should have listed Collin Peterson from Minnesota, a leader of the Blue Dogs.

by John Mills 2007-03-14 12:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Petersen is a Republican


by Matt Stoller 2007-03-14 01:10PM | 0 recs
Worst Offenders

To me, the worst offends here are Sestak, Gillibrand, and Acuri.  Although all are freshman, their districts are not in the heart of dixie and -- while I believe all retain nominal republican registration advantages -- represent districts that are trending blue, not the opposite.  

by HSTruman 2007-03-13 12:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Worst Offenders

Maybe Sestak's military mind is against a specific date for some reason.

by Vox Populi 2007-03-13 12:57PM | 0 recs

Sestak introduced a bill to bring the troops home by the end of 2007.

There may be some "condition" in the supplemental that Sestak doesn't like but it isn't the date.

H.R. 960, Summary from Thomas (sorry I don't know how to construct a persistent link):


   Enhancing America's Security Through Redeployment from Iraq Act - Requires that, no later than December 31, 2007, all U.S. Armed Forces serving in Iraq be redeployed outside of Iraq, either to locations within the Middle East or Southwest Asia regions or other regions or nations, or to the United States. Provides redeployment exceptions with respect to: (1) special operations forces performing counter-terrorism operations or support operations for Iraqi security forces; (2) military liaison teams; (3) air support operations for Iraqi security forces; (4) counter-terrorism operations in Iraq; and (5) security for U.S. diplomatic missions in Iraq. Allows funds appropriated to the Department of Defense (DOD) for Operation Iraqi Freedom to be obligated or expended after such deadline only for personnel performing such excepted operations.

   Expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should: (1) take a leadership role in diplomatic efforts and negotiations for the long-term stability of Iraq; and (2) convene an international conference to provide economic aid for rebuilding the infrastructure of Iraq and other efforts essential to ensure its long-term stability.

by MH in PA 2007-03-16 02:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Worst Offenders

I believe Gilibrand's district has 80,000 more Republicans than Democrats.

by tigercourse 2007-03-13 01:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Gillibrand, Arcuri, Steve Israel

Three blue dogs from NY, all with Republican registration edges.  Israel is a Blue Dog and probably the most conservative of the three.  He's not on this list.

Gillibrand won by almost 15,000 votes (125,168 to 110,554) and Arcuri won by about 18,000 votes.  This is a vote these two could take.  Republicans like Maffei, Reynolds, and Kuhl are taking a bigger risk in voting with Bush in NY than Gillibrand and Arcuri would take in opposing Bush and the war.

by David Kowalski 2007-03-13 01:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Gillibrand, Arcuri, Steve Israel

"Gillibrand won by almost 15,000 votes (125,168 to 110,554) and Arcuri won by about 18,000 votes.  This is a vote these two could take.  Republicans like Maffei, Reynolds, and Kuhl are taking a bigger risk in voting with Bush in NY than Gillibrand and Arcuri would take in opposing Bush and the war."

You mean Walsh not Maffei : )

The way you frame the argument is something I and many others have never considered.  You must look beyond unfavorable numbers and vote your conciousness. Iraq is one of these critical times.

by optimusprime 2007-03-13 02:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Worst Offenders

Gillibrand and Acuri are in swing districts, but they campaigned on bringing the troops home and got help and votes from the Working Families Party because of it.

My point is I wouldn't assume that bringing the troops home would be unpopular in their districts.

by SteveWFP 2007-03-13 01:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Worst Offenders

Bringing the troops home is not unpopular in Arcuri's district at all, even in Republican households.  I know because I live here.  In fact, Iraq is a big reason why Arcuri won.  Lots of voters showed up for the mid-terms in NY-24 because of Iraq.  

IMO, Arcuri is making a big mistake on this vote and shouldn't be taking the progressive support he received in NY-24 for granted.    

by LionelEHutz 2007-03-14 12:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Worst Offenders

Arcuri and Gillibrand were classic DCCC campaigns, cautious and closed. In fact, I was frustrated by the amount of netroots support they got, considering their positioning. There was nothing netroots about their structure or thinking. I'm not surprised to see their actions in office, although I'd expect both to be like Gillibrand (reserve judgement until it was clear it was a fairly safe vote, then support it). Arcuri's vote just seems dumb.

By contrast, John Hall's campaign was really innovative and forward-thinking, and I don't see him on that list. And his race was much closer than those two.

by BriVT 2007-03-14 01:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Worst Offenders

I was a little harsher than I meant to be ... well, only a little. I'm not huge fans of either of them, but I have liked some of Gillibrand's actions since she got there (open schedule, for one) ...

by BriVT 2007-03-14 01:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Worst Offenders

I live about a thousand miles away from Sestak's district and contributed heavily to his campaign.  He can expect diddly-squat from me in '08.

by hoose 2007-03-13 01:54PM | 0 recs
Matt's post is incorrect.

(that is the nice way of saying it.)

Please see my post above, and here: 75928/709/13#13

by MH in PA 2007-03-16 02:55AM | 0 recs

2-20-07: "Now a Democratic member of Congress from Pennsylvania, Sestak has introduced a bill calling for total withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of 2007, while strengthening the U.S. military presence in the region and in Afghanistan."

Q. What do you propose for Iraq?

SESTAK: First, set a date for withdrawal. "Those who are fighting understand that as we referee this civil war, there's a certain level of violence above which the U.S. military is able to control things. When that lid is taken off, this is the first time leaders of various sides have to accept the consequences. If they go too far, the retaliation against them may go too far.

by Adam B 2007-03-13 02:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Sestak

Checking on this...

by Matt Stoller 2007-03-13 04:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Sestak

Sestak is not a member of the Blue Dogs caucas.

He is working hard to end the war in Iraq and has introduced legislation that goes further than the current bill being proposed by the Democrats.  

Sestak's Bill calls for a date-certain to have the troops re-deploy out of Iraq by this December 31,2007 and calls for cutting off most of the funding for the war by that date.  The Legislation is called "Enhancing America's Security Through Redeployment from Iraq Act."

See these articles:

(1) "Former Admiral Says All American Troops Should Pull Out by Year's End"; /news/nation/16742343.htm

(2)'Congressman Joe Sestak's Bill Would Pull Troops From Iraq"; d=17854136&BRD=1679&PAG=461& dept_id=86218&rfi=6

by sswimtri 2007-03-14 07:18AM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

I keep looking at Boren and thinking of Brad Carson who he replaced. These two seem like complete opposites. Can we possibly do anything to replace Boren with someone who holds the line a little better? Especially on environmental issues, Boren was the only Democrat on LCV's dirty Dozen list

by Trowaman 2007-03-13 01:00PM | 0 recs
Sestak, Gillibrand and Arcuri
You definitely nailed the three that stick out. Sestak is really painful because I really worked to help him, and that is a really blue district. Christ. Might be time for phone calls to those three offices.
by Chris Bowers 2007-03-13 01:03PM | 0 recs
can someone contact Sestak

because this press release says he supported a plan that sure looks to me like it has dates in it.  So what's going on?  It should come from someone in the district... 7_sestak/2_16_07_Iraq_res_vote.shtml

by John DE 2007-03-13 01:16PM | 0 recs
Re: can someone contact Sestak
I have  a message into Sestak's office.
He is not on the Blue Dog Dems list.
by quadmom 2007-03-13 01:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Sestak, Gillibrand and Arcuri

Here in New York, the Working Families Party is talking about running ads in Gillibrand and Arcuri's districts.

Anyone who wants to be in on the planning should email me.

by SteveWFP 2007-03-13 01:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Sestak, Gillibrand and Arcuri

I agree. This is very disappointing. His fellow Blue Dog, Patrick Murphy, sure doesn't have the same position.

by PsiFighter37 2007-03-13 02:08PM | 0 recs
The post is WRONG about Sestak.

Look up HR 960. I've posted it in several places already.

Please note, a little simple fact checking on Matt's part should have avoided this fundamental error about Sestak's position.

by MH in PA 2007-03-16 02:59AM | 0 recs

   I don't believe your source about Joe Sestak.  He's not a Blue Dog.  He never joined their little caucus, even though he though about it.  Patrick Murphy did.  That doesn't mean you're wrong about Sestak's not supporting the bill.  But considering his television appearances, I think you're wrong about him.

by cilerder86 2007-03-13 02:49PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Very interesting and useful.  Following up on David Sirota's piece from the weekend, these are the members that activists should be targeting, not the Dave Obey's (not that I condone his behavior) and Jim McDermott's of the world who have consistently opposed the war.  

By my count, there are 17 members on this list and 232 Dems in the House which means you need to flip 3 (ideally more) to pass the withdrawal language.

by John Mills 2007-03-13 01:04PM | 0 recs
233 Dems

and 201 Reps.

by you like it 2007-03-13 01:27PM | 0 recs
Re: 233 Dems

My bad.  That means we need to flip 2 since this indicates there are 216 votes in favor.  Ideally you'd like to pass this with than a bare 218 but a victory is a victory.

by John Mills 2007-03-13 01:30PM | 0 recs
As an aside,

I don't think its absolutely certain that we wouldn't get one or two Republican defectors, but I wouldn't be willing to count on it.  Also I am far from convinced that only these 17 Dems would bolt.  For the majority party to be unable to pass a bill like this would be very embarrassing.  We need 218 Democratic votes that we can count on.

by you like it 2007-03-13 02:19PM | 0 recs

6 House Republicans originally voted against the war in 2002: xml

I imagine that would be the minimum number of Republican votes on our side for this.

Now, 17 House Republicans voted for the non-binding Sense of the House resolution against the escalation: xml

I imagine that would be the maximum number of Republican votes on our side for this.  I believe the actual number would be closer to 6 than 17, though.

by Geotpf 2007-03-13 02:43PM | 0 recs

That's something that I didn't know.  Are all of those nay voting Republicans still in the House?

Regardless, on tight votes, the Republicans seem to always fall into place.  They did in the 109th Congress at least.

by you like it 2007-03-13 03:31PM | 0 recs
No. Only 2 of the 6 are still there.

Amo Houghton retired and was replaced by Randy Kuhl (NY-29)

Connie Morella was defeated by Chris Van Hollen back in 2002. (MD-08)

John Hostettler was defeated by Brad Ellsworth last November. (IN-08)

Jim Leach was defeated by Dave Loebsack last November. (IA-02)

Ron Paul is still there. (TX-14)

Jimmy Duncan is still there. (TN-02)

by BruinKid 2007-03-14 04:06AM | 0 recs
Re: No. Only 2 of the 6 are still there.

Ron Paul is the great champion of the paleoconservatives, and is an actual presidential contender. Paleoconservatives are nice people who really mean well, but who somehow got sucked up in some conservative cyclone many moons ago. The important thing is that these people are truly well-meaning, and it shows in situations like this.

by blues 2007-03-14 02:15PM | 0 recs
Re: 233 Dems

I wish I knew people in these district b/c I would get on the phone.  I went to school between Gillibrand and Acruri's seats but all of my friends have moved out of the area.

by John Mills 2007-03-13 01:32PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

October 14-15, 2006
How Rahm Emanuel Has Rigged a Pro-War Congress
Election 2006: The Fix is Already In

By JOHN WALSH 6.html

October 24, 2006
Emanuel's War Plan for Democrats
The Book of Rahm By JOHN WALSH

"Last week in CounterPunch (1), I wrote that the chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), Congressman Rahm Emanuel, had worked hard to guarantee that Democratic candidates in key toss-up House races were pro-war. In this he was largely successful, because of the money he commands and the celebrity politicians who reliably respond to his call, ensuring that 20 of the 22 Democratic candidates in these districts are pro-war. So the fix is in for the coming elections.

In 2006, no matter which party controls the House, a majority will be committed to pursuing the war on Iraq--despite the fact that the Democratic rank and file and the general voting public oppose the war by large margins. (I hasten to add that this state of affairs can be reversed even after the sham election between the two War Parties.)..." 6.html

And Rahm is working for Hillary 2008!

by SandThroughTheEyeGlass 2007-03-13 01:09PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

One of the single biggest disappointments in seeing our new congressional leaders is Rahm.  The guy's been in the House for five minutes, yet EVERY single time I see Pelosi speak, Rahm's ugly emaciated face is right there in the camera view.

The fix is in alright:  as long as Rahm Emanuel is in the House as number four leader, progressives won't get any revolutionary changes on any issue, especially foreign policy/war.

by jgarcia 2007-03-13 01:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Whip??

Wow, compare this result with the 12 years of locked-down, air-tight control under the Repubs.  Without a unified caucus, the Democratic Party is a bloated, fetid corpse.  I am beginning to see what my friends mean when they claim there's no practical difference between being governed under a Democratic majority and being governed under a Republican majority.

by leveller 2007-03-13 01:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Whip??

This is so typical with the Dems and it shows not much has changed since 1994 when the Dems last controlled Congress.  Party discipline has never been one of our strengths.

by John Mills 2007-03-13 01:35PM | 0 recs
If party discipline was our strength...

...we'd be Republicans.

That is, Democrats think for themselves and make up thier own minds; Republicans play follow-the-leader and say yes master, whatever you say master.  Of course whipping Democrats in the House is like herding cats.

by Geotpf 2007-03-13 02:46PM | 0 recs
Re: If party discipline was our strength...

It is nice that Dems think for themselves but I do think we need more party discipline.  It is a fine line we are trying to walk but the problems on this vote emphasize the need for following leadership a little more.

by John Mills 2007-03-13 03:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Whip??

Oh please.  I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic, but pushing our folks to the liberal/progressive side is not the sign of a 'fetid corpse'.  Good grief.  

by weinerdog43 2007-03-13 06:59PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Which bill is Sestak opposing and why?
Sestak has repeatedly and forcefully called for an end to the 'tragic misadventure' in Iraq. He has called for a date certain repeatedly. There must be some language in the bill that causes a problem for him.  He wants us out, for a plethora of reasons.

Also, I checked the Blue Dog site - Congressman Sestak is not a member of this "Conservative Democrats" group.

Thanks in advance for clarifying.

by quadmom 2007-03-13 01:43PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

To all the people who kept trying to argue in 2006 that we can't win elections unless we go "moderate". This is the end result. This is why so many of us "aggressive progressives" were throwing a fit at the choice of candidates.

This is why we should stop supporting fake Democrats in the primaries because we're scared me might lose if we support a real progressive.

This is why.

What good is having a majority , if this is what we get out of it?

by ObamaEdwards2008 2007-03-13 01:47PM | 0 recs

What wwe ould be doing right now if we didn't have a majority: Voting on a flag burning amendment.

by MNPundit 2007-03-13 01:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Wrong-O

We would have still won with real progressives and we would have our troops heading home. We would be voting on that.


by ObamaEdwards2008 2007-03-13 02:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Wrong-O

I don't remember any Dems being iffy on bringing the troops home when they were campaigning, so I don't know how you'd have picked out these "real" progressives.

This was the way it was always going to go, we were always going to have to fight with the people we elected.

by SteveWFP 2007-03-13 05:04PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

I gave Sestak $50 and I don't even live in his state.  Not in 2008.  

by littafi 2007-03-13 01:52PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs
Please give Joe a chance.
I really believe that he is working toward a solution.
Joe is not a member of the Blue Dogs:
by quadmom 2007-03-13 01:58PM | 0 recs
Gillibrand huh?

That one hurts, she certainly seemed like one of the darlings this last time around.

by MNPundit 2007-03-13 01:55PM | 0 recs
Sestak Should Not Be On That List

Sestak was on NPR yesterday afternoon saying the date certain was the most important thing an Democratic Congress could do to make progress on Iraq.

Unfortunately my IE has suddenly taken leave of its senses and I can't seem to load to provide a link.

by Professor Foland 2007-03-13 01:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Sestak Should Not Be On That List

by blues 2007-03-14 02:23PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

A lot of these guys should be given a break, especially the freshmen who are in the red districts, and others like Barrow and Marshall who are highly vulnerable.  Some like Taylor and Boren are probably never getting defeated in their districts, and they don't have that excuse.

Sestak has called for withdrawal, I am sure of it.  He must have some issue with this particular bill.

I would rather have a conservative democrat who votes with us 70- 80%  of the time representing a district that would otherwise likely be represented by an ironclad right-winger.  It's better than nothing.

by DemGenii 2007-03-13 02:10PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Taylor's district is Trent Lott's old district so it is GOP.

by robliberal 2007-03-13 02:15PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs
Goddam frustrating to see Salazar's name on that list, but not surprising. He and his weaselly little brother (the man who introduced Alberto Gonzalez to the Senate) are thorns in my blue hide.
What really galls me about this Blue Dog crew is that they have no alternative, nothing to contribute. They just stand in the way and mumble jingoistic platitudes that are basically warmed over stay the course nonsense.
by BlueinColorado 2007-03-13 02:17PM | 0 recs
blue dog's motives

There is this possibility.  If the war can be prolonged until 2008 it will still be a campaign issue for the Democrats. However, if they stop the war now it would no longer be an issue.  Therefore, it is important to create the impression that Democrats are trying to stop the war, but at the same time failing in doing so.

It is immoral.  But could be a useful tactic for winning elections.

by syvanen 2007-03-13 02:33PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Maybe they are not the ones being political. Maybe they are being realistic. Maybe they understand that while the war is misguided and Bush's surge is a bad idea, we have 140,000 Americans over there and picking withdrawal targets to meet the 2008 election calendar may not be the best thing for them or the country. The Democratic leadership is setting themselves up to be blamed when things get worse. We got the political benefit of the war in the 2006 elections. Now is time to figure out a way out of this mess. Dates are not a plan. The country agrees that Bush screwed up, but the country does not agree on how to get out.

by pragamtist 2007-03-13 02:35PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

so the solution is to stay? what are they being "realistic" about? Because from where I sit they're denying the very simple fact that this war is lost, there is no good solution, and setting a date is as good (or more precisely, as least bad) as any other solution that's been proposed. Yes, it's unpopular to tell the American people that this country lost a war. It's also the truth.

by BlueinColorado 2007-03-13 02:41PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

I don't get your comment at all.  Staying as long as we have as only made the situation worse.  No one is talking about pulling all the troops out in the next 10 days.  There's plenty of time for an organized redeployment that fully funds the soldiers as they're removed over the course of 6, 7, 8 months.  

Under  your logic, we could NEVER start bringing the troops home because when we did "it might get worse."  Guess what -- WHENEVER we pull out things will get worse.  B/c we've been sort of keeping a full-fledged civil war from exploding.  But unless you plan on making our troop presence there now permanent, things ARE going to get worse before they get  better.

by HSTruman 2007-03-13 02:55PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Now that is just ridiculous. You are using George W. Bush logic - if you are not 100% with us, then you are against us. There are not just two simple-minded options here. There has to be a strategic and tactical plan to get out. This is not one.

by pragamtist 2007-03-14 06:40AM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

So to be clear, you're arguing that my insistance on a plan for withdrawal that removes the majority of our troops over the course of 6-8 months -- in 2007 --is somehow untenable?  Yet I'm the one using GWB logic?  

My friend, it sounds like you endorse the Lieberman plan for Iraq.  Democrats -- but more importantly the soldiers serving multiple tours in harms way -- have already BEEN infinitely patient in the name of "winning," whatever that means.  The result has been Iraq descending into a full-fledged civil war, which our military is incable of ending for the Iraquis.

Of course we should try to minimize the damage pulling out does.  And OF COURSE we have to leave in way that protects our forces.  But there is no reason that can't be accomplished in 6 months.

What I'd love to know is why you want to stay longer.  What -- specifically -- do you think that will accomplish?  B/c other than comparing me to GWB, you haven't articulated any compelling reasons for staying.    

by HSTruman 2007-03-14 07:14AM | 0 recs
"strategic and tactical"

What is the Blue Dogs' plan then, other than blocking every other one proposed?

by BlueinColorado 2007-03-14 12:52PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

"we have 140,000 Americans over there and picking withdrawal targets to meet the 2008 election calendar may not be the best thing for them or the country"

I'm not even going to touch on the motive behind this comment because what I have to say , is not nice , but I will say this:

That's not what's taking place here. We have been calling for troop withdrawl since 2005 so, this accusation doesn't even fly. Not even on this Blog.

by ObamaEdwards2008 2007-03-13 02:39PM | 0 recs
Doesn't matter...

We can't beat a fillibuster/Bush Veto anyway.

by Fro 2007-03-13 02:40PM | 0 recs
Cop out

So use this to our advantage. Have Bush veto it and tar him and by extension the GOP. Highlight how well his "new" plan isn't working and bring up "stay the course" logic used by the GOP.

Then go and let the Republicans filibuster, and pin that to every Republican running for office. Every. Damn. One. Public opinion is against anyone who wants to stay in Iraq. This one is a win even if we don't get it passed.

And the more public opinion sways behind us on this position, the easier it will be on other positions. Keep up the punches to the body and take the air away from the GOP.

by michael in chicago 2007-03-13 03:32PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Until and unless we have the votes in both houses there will be no way to stop the war until another president is sworn in.

by robliberal 2007-03-13 02:58PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

I see that they've also gotten the language restricting Bush from attacking Iran removed from the bill. What is the advantage of caving in to these folks? Why is it better to pass a neutered bill than to put a real one up for a vote, even if it doesn't pass?

by tatere 2007-03-13 03:05PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Please, don't blame the Blue Dogs as saboteurs.

Our problem is not one element among our fellow Democrats, our problem is that we are too damn timid.

Until the Senate Democrats eliminate the SuperMajority Rule or the filibuster, we will continue to play by the Republican Rule.  Any legislation passed by Congress regarding the Invasion of the Wrong Country, would require both Chambers of Congress to override a presidential veto.  It's not going to happen during the next eighteen months.  The Senate has gotten soft with their Safety Net.

However, the more important alternative is to get all Democratic presidential aspirants to offer out a commitment to us that their first official act will be to deliver to the Pentagon, an Executive Order directing it to commence withdrawal immediately.  

And in doing so, such a commitment sends the 'signal' that the Invasion is officially over, and the voters can take it to the ballot box in 2008 and by their affirming action, reinforces the 'commitment' which poses a considerable risk to the Republicans.  Of course, any Democratic candidate seeking the Party's nomination and who fails to provide the Commitment, is toast.  And a Candidate that does tender a "Commitment" makes it into the first tier, and automatically.

In closing, Clinton is off the tender-hooks for her Invasion vote and Obama is off the tender-hooks too for sucking up/campaigning for Lieberman.  As such, we sweep the table clean and move forward to addressing the important issues/concerns important to all of us.  Party cohesion, and etcetera.

by Jaango 2007-03-13 03:08PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Maybe it is time to take this beyond Congress, maybe it is time for a little direct action.

by Alice Marshall 2007-03-13 03:17PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Joe Sestak is a Vice Admiral and knows more about military affairs than every reader of this blog combined. He campaigned on ending the war. If he is not supporting this bill, he sees a serious problem with the specific proposals or language contained in it. The reality of governing in such a large and diverse government is that the idealism of the "marketplace of ideas" is tempered by nuts-and-bolts procedural maneuvering.

by OfficeOfLife 2007-03-13 03:19PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

I'm surprise Nancy Boyda is not on the list? ress-escalation/

by SandThroughTheEyeGlass 2007-03-13 03:43PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Didn't see Zack Space on there either, and I would have expected to see him there.

by DemGenii 2007-03-13 04:38PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Et tu, Arcuri?

by pjsauter 2007-03-13 05:13PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

I used Jim Cooper's House form last week to complain about his public comment decrying the micromanagement of the Iraq War.  Here's his response:

March 12, 2007

Nashville, Tennessee


Thanks for getting in touch with me to share your views on the war in Iraq.  The recent elections in November demonstrated Americans want a new direction.  We must change course in Iraq if we want ensure the security of our country and the safety of our citizens and soldiers.  The United States House of Representatives voted on February 16th to express our unwavering support for U.S. service members in harms way.  We also voted to express our disapproval of President Bush's plan to surge 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.  It was a difficult vote because no one wants us to succeed in Iraq more than me.  I will do everything in my power to make sure our troops have the funding and equipment they need, but, after speaking with
and hearing testimony from our top generals and military experts, it became clear that this particular strategy does not serve the needs of our troops or the national security of this country.  

We have sacrificed the lives of many brave American soldiers, and we appear to have less to show than we should after years of occupation.  As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I have been sharply critical of the Pentagon's management of this war. I am not convinced that the Administration has developed a workable strategy for winning the peace.  The plan to surge 20,000 additional troops is more of the same strategy.  The additional soldiers and marines would bring the total number of personnel to the same level it was at in December of 2005 as violence began to escalate.  More of the same is just not good enough, either for our soldiers or for the good people of the region.  At this point in time, it is not unreasonable for Congress to say enough is enough. Voters
certainly said so clearly in the last election.

The current strategy relies upon the Maliki government to provide support to our troops in Baghdad.  I have concerns about placing the safety of our troops in the hands of a government that has proven unwilling to confront some of the most violent elements in the country.  The Iraqi units our forces would depend on for re-enforcement are currently arriving at between 55% and 70% strength before the hard work has even started.  I would have been more inclined to support the President if he had asked for a much larger number of troops or for a sacrifice on the part of all Americans who do not have a loved one in our military. Such proposals would have led me to believe that the President was considering a serious change
in strategy, but the President has not recommended either. Instead, he has insisted on waging war without overwhelming military force, a clear objective, or a defined exit strategy. From the beginning of this conflict, we have skimped on the number of troops, the equipment for our soldiers, the commitment of our allies. It is simply too late to add on a few thousand more troops now.

I made similar comments on the floor of the House when I spoke in favor of House Concurrent Resolution 63.  I encourage you to read the full text of my statement at and feel free to write me if you have any further questions or comments on my beliefs about the war in Iraq.  I appreciate hearing from you.


Jim Cooper
Member of Congress

by DTB in TN 2007-03-13 05:15PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

copying and pasting form letters is as much of an exercise in futility as it was for the original letter to have been sent to you.  Meaningless.

by jgarcia 2007-03-13 06:24PM | 0 recs

   Not to be an English nerd, but when you say "color me untrustworthy," it means that you, Matt Stoller, are not worthy of trust.  Heh.

by cilerder86 2007-03-13 05:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Stoller...


by Matt Stoller 2007-03-13 05:56PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Saboteurs

Since the Blue Dog Caucus has 44 members but I only see 17 people on this list, what was the purpose of your including "Blue Dog" in the title?  Is it to attack the Blue Dog "brand" and if so, why?

by Old Yeller 2007-03-13 06:10PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Um, why isn't Allen Boyd's name on the list?  Isn't he the leader behind the whole thing?

by BruinKid 2007-03-14 04:11AM | 0 recs
Sestak's Bill - Redeploy /Defund by 12/31/07

Sestak is not a member of the Blue Dogs caucas.

He is working hard to end the war in Iraq and has introduced legislation that goes further than the current bill being proposed by the Democrats.  

Sestak's Bill calls for a date-certain to have the troops re-deploy out of Iraq by this December 31,2007 and calls for cutting off most of the funding for the war by that date.  The Legislation is called "Enhancing America's Security Through Redeployment from Iraq Act."

See these articles:

(1) "Former Admiral Says All American Troops Should Pull Out by Year's End"; /news/nation/16742343.htm

(2)'Congressman Joe Sestak's Bill Would Pull Troops From Iraq"; d=17854136&BRD=1679&PAG=461& dept_id=86218&rfi=6

by sswimtri 2007-03-14 07:03AM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

well that pisses me off.  I made dozens of election eve calls via MoveOn to get Gillibrand some voters.

by greensmile 2007-03-14 07:31AM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

My Congressman, Collin Peterson, is a Blue Dog but not on this list. I've emailed him three times and he's never answered, but I doubt I'm the only one.

by John Emerson 2007-03-14 07:36AM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

I for one am going to be watching every bill these "Blue Dogs" sponsor in the future and I will fight  every bill they sponsor.  No hostages here!

by Andre 2007-03-14 08:59AM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

Yeah, that's real productive.  They vote with us 80% of the time and are better than the progressive caucus on at least one issue - the Second Amendment.  So let's just oppose every bill they sponsor.  If you aren't for us, you're against us and all that.  How mature.

by Old Yeller 2007-03-14 03:38PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

I put in a lot of time organizing for Kirsten and managed to raise some modest money too.  I had no illusions about her stance on Iraq. Yet her stance on the war now is more than I can take.  What she and Hillary don't seem to realize is that this is a paramount moral issue.  I can't work for her again.

by dickmulliken 2007-03-14 12:37PM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs

by dickmulliken 2007-03-14 12:38PM | 0 recs
Freshman Democrats.

    Shuler and Hill should not be on this list.  Don't tell me that their districts support continuing this war.  Ellsworth doesn't surprise me.  It's easy to win in Indiana when you run to the right of the Republican.

by cilerder86 2007-03-14 12:52PM | 0 recs
Crosspost this to other blogs--important

Cross post this to all liberal blogs--this is important.  

If Congress does not vote for this--we have also us to blame.

Congressmen need us to hold their hand and remind them who they are working for.

by jasmine 2007-03-14 01:18PM | 0 recs
i'm confused

i'm confused.

what exactly does this bill say?  tmp is reporting that moveon is telling pelosi that they are not happy :

...the bill lacks tough enough enforcement language -- meaning that the bill doesn't contain strong enough provisions to compel withdrawal after the deadlines set forth in the legislation.

Such language was removed from earlier drafts, frustrating some liberal House Dems, and the current version merely declares the war illegal after the deadlines, rather than stopping funding, which could mean Congress would have to take the White House to court to stop the war.

"We've communicated to the Speaker's office that we want tougher enforceability in the bill," Matzzie tells me. "We want something that's got teeth." electioncentral/2007/mar/14/move_on

i don't see why this bill should be supported?  what am i missing?

by selise 2007-03-14 01:41PM | 0 recs
by xililo 2007-05-21 06:00AM | 0 recs
by xililo 2007-05-21 06:00AM | 0 recs
Re: List of Blue Dog Saboteurs


pinkclip video xxx
hot xxx gay
sexe photo porno
photo and sexe and gratuit
sexe vieille mature
rencontre sexe senior
photo sexe black
photo sexe homme nu
sexe porno gratuit photo free
jeu online gratuit sexe
sexe extreme dilatation
hot sexe to brazil
film porno telecharger gratui
extrait porno video amateur
histoire de sexe gratuite
film xxx forum rapidshare
photo gratuit galerie tgp sexe
video demo porno gratos
video porno gratuit gros vagin
galerie photo sexe gratuite
video porno sex gratuit usa
femme mature porno
film xxx porno media player
xxx bd
sexe gay porno
epilation sexe homme
video de sexe extreme
sexe ultra bizarre
extrait video film porno
porno jeu video
video gratuite porno amateur
photo gratuite xxx hymens vierge
video sexe demo gratuite
plus grand site porno francais
photo femme sexe gratuit
video sexe lesbienne gouine gratuit
photo sexe amateur francais
mature nylon porno
humour sexe pps
liste meilleur site porno mature
beurette sexe avec voile
porno asiatique
black xxx mas
elisa actrice porno
sexe femme poilue photo gratuit france
sex cul porno
photo beurette sexe
femme xxx rencon
teacher sex xxx
xxx mangas hentai sakura
beurette sexe amateurt
clip xxx gratuitt
sexe mature hardt
jeu porno shockwavet
sky blog sexet
video preview free xxxt
free gay pornot
video porno voir gratui san telechargement
sexe rasee gratuitt
video de sexe a telechargert
porno gay transt
xxx hard xxx videot
video porno gratuit voirt
telecharger comic xxxt
sexe filmes livet
voir extrait gratuit video porno sans abonnementt
porno gratuit photot
sexe et vieille femmet
casting porno parist
mini video pornot
photo sexe amateur gratuit sans connexiont
sexe homme hommet
extrait film porno a telechargert
extrait video sexe blogt
disney porn xxxt
gratuit amateur sexet
hot young couple xxxt
liste acteur pornot
telechargement gratuit porno sexet
webcam live xxxt
extrait film porno femme soumiset
cam live free sexet
porno homme gay gratuitt
video sexe gratuite femme muret
photo porno amatricet
gratuit sexe videot
cul sexe pornot
clip video gratuit sexe debutantt
jouer au jeu pornot
porno free videot
pute arabe pornot
vente film pornot
larges extrait video porno gratuitt
film xxx gayt
sexe gratuit analt
photo sexet
sexe porno video gratuitt
petits extrait video de sexe gratuitt
photo porno gratuite femme blackt
i love sexe skyblogt
arabe pornot
agnes photo gratuite sexe vieillet
sexe porno cult
metz sexe amatricet
disney xxx sexet
histoire porno d adot
video amatrice cul xxxt
video porno gratuite a visionnert
sexe shop toulouset
photo gratuit xxxt
annuaire forum sexet
mami salope xxxt
sexe amateur hard gratuitt
sexe hard photo gratuitet
photo salope xxxt
photo galerie cul latine porno start
webcam sex adult pornot
cam frog sexe freet
comic xxxt
live show audio sexet
free sexe moviest
humour sexe gratuitt
sexe video freet
sexe gratuit hard interracial asiant
galerie porno gratuitt
gay porno video demot
actrice film pornot
sexe gratuit et hardt
sexe hard cradet
yasmine and pornot
video francaise de sexet
film porno yasminet
baiser lesbienne xxxt
sexe xxx videot
video clip sexe xxx porno gratuitt
sexe asiatique spermet
catalogue divx pornot
pps image sexe sexyt
extrait porno videot
divx porno gratuitt
yasmine lyon pornot
film de sexe francaist
jeu en ligne pornot
sexe asiatique gros seint
les photo porno du bresilt
video porno gratist
image porno simpsonst
demo virtuelle film xxx gratuit sans connexiont
sexe amateurt
video xxx defemme mure gratuitt

demo virtuelle film xxx
actrice porno nu
pps sexe perso
perso sexe amateur
sexe tres extreme
jeu sexe en ligne gratuit
sex porno film
photo arabe porno
video amateur porno
spanking lesbienne sexe
blog sur sexe
free xxx galerie updated daily
liste acteur porno
photo sexe hard xxx
galerie sexe porno
xxx and gratuit
mangas porno photo gratuite
sexe xxx girls video
porno arabe video
luna sex porno photo video gratuit
jennifer gargner sexy xxx
photo de sex et porno
photo gratuite de sexe de femme mature
sexe anal extreme
porno and gratui
pps sexe diaporama
photo porno anal
xxx gay photo
video webcam sexe
pipe porno xxx
porno video amateur
star porno photo
photo de gay porno gratuite
professeur sexe xxx
video porno et gratuit
femme hentai xxx
video adults xxx free
hard xxx black gratuit
extrait video porno gratuit
porno black anal
video asiatique et galerie sexe
sexe amateur gratuit perso
blog video amateur sexe
clip film porno gratuit
extrait free video xxx
jeu sexe online
xxx video
amatrice sexe belge
hentai xxx
gay porno poilu gratuit
video porno etudiante gratuite
sexe asiatique gratuit video
photo et dvd porno gratuit
arabe hetero porno
film mangas porno
sexe hot mom
image porno gratuite
video porno africaine
porno gratuit ejaculation anal
photo video sexe amateur gratuit
clip porno lesbienne
sexe crade jpeg
couple video sexe
sexe hardcore gratuit extrait
sexe nu photo
sexe porno mangas
devenir actrice porno
film x gay porno
dvd sexe lesbienne
forum sexe amateur
grosse marocaine beurette sexe
porno tres mature
cam and sexe
sexe image sexe
forum de discussion sur le sexe
animation video porno gratuite
sexe hardcore film
xxx video movie
girls sucking men porno video
demo porno gratuite
clip de film porno
sexe entre femme et homme
porno gay maroc
telechargement video porno amateur gratuit
sexe gratuit porno
couple libertin sexe photo
blog porno perso
photo porno et video gratuite
blonde xxx
sexe extreme allemand
sexe ala cam
image de film porno
femme mure sexe tres poilu gratuit
video hard xxx
clip and video and de and sex
deviant clip xxx
dvd xxx gay
free live sexe
image porno d homosexuel
amatrice et sexe et free
bulle actrice porno
video ultra hard sexe gratuite
extrait amateur porno gratuit
lesbienne porno francaise
rencontre sexe
porno gay amateur gratuit
ado xxx sexe video
annuaire sexe exhibitionniste
blog film porno
histoire porno bas masque
skyblog paris hilton sexe
photo sexe amateur contribution gratuite
sexe avec amateur
film sexe hard
sexe amateur gratuis
video sexe preview hard gratuit amateur perso
sexe bien poilu
black girls xxx
clip sexe gay
free xxx porn
sexe black gay gratuit
sexe star video photo gratuit
photo and porno and gratis
mature porno
xxx totalement gratuit
sex xxx hard photo gratuit
xxx shannen doherty video free
photo sexe masculin
muscle men xxx hard
sexe amateur extrait gratuit
photo sexe homme nu
demo video sexe gratuit
sexe photo femme
video de star xxx
annuaire de sexe totalement gratuit
top sexe fr
sexe mature and boy
galerie photo et sexe
pin up toon xxx
 xxx anal sexe pictures
extrait video sexe grtuit
video jeune sexe
photo porno couple gratuit
sexe xxx trans
arabe sexe gay
sexe gay gratuit etranger
porno gratuit amateur
annuaire porno couple jeune
femme sexe video
xxx porn movies
xxx extrait transexe
sexe nipples porno
lesbienne sexe bite
pps sexy porno sexe
photo porno star
blonde xxx gratuit
sexe web cam tout gratuit
porno amateur.x gratuis
film de porno a telecharge gratuit
anal porno movies
sexe video anal
extrait video xxx son image gratuit
sexe image
gratuit xxx pic photo
download free movies porno mpeg
video sexe porno gratuit
image porno gratuit
free black porno picture
video porno des star de cinema
sexe vieille
free anal porno
chat cam sexe gratuit
photo gay sexe
rencontre sexe vendee
sexe vieille pute
jeu java sexe
lolita tgp xxx gratuit
actrice porno asiatique
xxx clip free
photo xxx gratos
sexe femme noir
sexe avec femme mure
archive sex xxx video
star photo sexe
sex lolita xxx
histoire sexe homme nu
porno actrice
femme experimentees sexe anal
sexe video extreme
video perso porno amateur
free sample video porno
web cam gratuite de sexe
photo professeur xxx
sex free porno
extrait film porno vieille femme
azzedine acteur porno
photo sexe bizarre
sexe mgp clip
jeu sexe gratuis
road sexe
photo porno de naine
photo porno de naine
anal sexe video
hard sexe photo gratuite
sexe tres crade
video sexe gratuit sans telechargement
gay porno gratuit perso
film et photo porno
video porno femme mure pauline
sexe rencontre amateur
xxx movies jenna
mangas gratuit sexe
jeu and de and sexe and gratuit
telechargement gratuit film porno
photo porno femme black banlieue
sexe film x gratuit marre faux site
histoire sexe cocu
chatte star sexe
video gay porno extrait gratuit
film porno gratuit anderson
mangas and sexe and hentai and extrait and gratuit
hard sexe porno
jeu porno sans inscription
video xxx sur vieille zt vieux bourgeois


by manulocosa 2007-05-28 10:13PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads