Good Lede

Paul Krugman: "There are two ways to describe the confrontation between Congress and the Bush administration over funding for the Iraq surge. You can pretend that it’s a normal political dispute. Or you can see it for what it really is: a hostage situation, in which a beleaguered President Bush, barricaded in the White House, is threatening dire consequences for innocent bystanders — the troops — if his demands aren’t met."

Indeed. Krugman seems disinclined to end his column on a defeast note, but the maddening thing of it is that all signs indicate that this tactic is likely to succeed and Bush will achieve his goal of ensuring that the war is left on the desk of the next president. Perhaps he thinks this'll mean it'll go down in the record books as something his successor "lost" rather than a catastrophic error he made.

Comments

Sigh. One can always rely upon Krugman for the most grotesque spin.

One could validly spin things in the other direction: the Dems are holding the troops hostage by tying withdrawal to funding - they know that widthdrawal is unacceptable to Bush so they put it into the same legislation, forcing Bush to veto funding whn he vetoes withdrawal.

And this is easily demonstrable: why don't the Dems prepare a separate piece of legislation for withdrawal? Because they know that it will be trivially vetoed. So they wrap it into the same legislation as the funding, thus holding the troops "hostage".

Krugman is the most partisan hack of any significance writing in America today. It is just embarrassing to see Matthew, who used to think for himself, parrotting Krugman idiocy.

Posted by: a on April 23, 2007 01:04 AM

a, check your seperation of powers notebook.

In reality "withdrawal from iraq" either means the commander in chief pulls them out or congress withdraws funding so they are forced to come home.

Bush wants to keep them there. He'll veto anything that doesn't guarantee that US troops are dying in the sands of Arabia in Feb 2009.

The republicans who are ok with that will, I hope, lose many seats in the next election. They'll deserve to.

Posted by: blatherskite on April 23, 2007 01:27 AM

Talk about a dishonest take.

Krugman is arguing FOR confrontation and you take it as confirmation of your earlier nonsensical post that Dems can't win on this?

My gawd, did you read the whole column? It is a rebuke of your type of thinking and points to the political dangers of adopting your defeatist and do nothing attitude. Krugman wrote:

"So how should Congress respond to Mr. Bush’s threats?

Everyone talks about the political risks of confrontation, recalling the backlash when Newt Gingrich shut down the federal government in 1995. But there’s a big difference between trying to force a fairly popular president to accept deep cuts in Medicare — which is what the 1995 confrontation was about — and trying to get a deeply unpopular, distrusted president to set some limits on an immensely unpopular war.

Meanwhile, there are big political risks on the other side. If Congress responds to a presidential veto by offering an even weaker bill, voters may well react with disgust, concluding that the whole debate over the war was nothing but political theater.

Anyway, never mind the political calculations. Confronting Mr. Bush on Iraq has become a patriotic duty . . ."

His column is a broadside at your type of thinking.

Did you miss that? Apparently, yet again, you did. You seem clueless on the Iraq issue and what the Congress can do. Go back to covering the NBA if this is what you are going to write on this.

Posted by: Armando on April 23, 2007 01:39 AM

Armando, I don't think I've ever seen Matt say that it would be a good thing if Bush got his way on this. He's making a descriptive claim that he thinks the Democrats are going to unforuntately fold in the face of Bush's veto. Or, if I'm wrong about what Matt's said about this, could you link?

Posted by: washerdreyer on April 23, 2007 01:44 AM

...but the maddening thing of it is that all signs indicate that this tactic is likely to succeed and Bush will achieve his goal of ensuring that the war is left on the desk of the next president.

I've been hearing all kinds of buzz, though (especially on this weekend's talking heads shows) about the surge needing to show results soon (by mid summer, or late summer) or else. Doesn't any of this emanate from GOP congressional sources? Bush may want to avoid an "L" but my guess is a growing gaggle of Republicans facing reelection in '08 would like to have the withdrawal well underway by then.

Posted by: Jasper on April 23, 2007 01:48 AM

"Perhaps he thinks this'll mean it'll go down in the record books as something his successor "lost" rather than a catastrophic error he made."

Perhaps? Surely that's the plan, isn't it?

Posted by: Renwick on April 23, 2007 01:56 AM

washerdreyer:

Of course he does not think it is a good thing. He just does not think Dems should do anything about it and now dishonestly states Krugman agrees with himn when Krugman is sayng exactly the opposite.

This is a dishonest and uninformed post to follow his most recent uninformed post on the subject.

He is 0 for 2 on the subject.

But let's face it, most every blog has been 0 for Iraq this year. Too busy writing about the all important who will remove residual forces in 2009 issue.

BTW, if the Debacle is not ended during the Bush Presidency, the answer is none of them will remove combat forces, much less residual ones. Who wants to run against "he/she lost Iraq."

Some Progressive blogosphere. Pathetic.

Posted by: Armando on April 23, 2007 02:00 AM

The fact that it was Nixon, rather than LBJ, who eventually got U.S. troops out of Vietnam has certainly led to LBJ not being remembered as the man who lost Vietnam. Oh, wait, that's not true at all.

If Bush thinks that keeping the troops there until he leaves office is a political ploy to make him look better, he is both cynical and deluded. This is quite possible, but I suspect he is merely deluded - that he actually believes that we need to achieve "victory" in Iraq.

Posted by: John on April 23, 2007 02:32 AM

I think there's a lot to be said for thinking it will be extremely difficult for a Democrat or even a Republican to start his or her term by pulling out troops.

1965 184300
1966 385300
1967 485600
1968 536100
1969 475200
1970 334600
1971 156800
1972 24200
1973 50

Where Armando is wrong, is that history shows us that we will be able to start removing troops in 2009 with all but 50 troops remaining in 2012.

Apart from that, everything seems to be going according to plan.

Posted by: jerry on April 23, 2007 02:37 AM

PK's right. I say the Dems need to bring out the hostage meme.

I'll suggest my own: we won the war in 2003, but we failed at nation-building. It has the advantage of being actually true. And there's the ironic turnaround with Bush's 2000 debate bit about being against nation building.

Posted by: chris on April 23, 2007 03:01 AM

Everybody I think is still underestimating the intermediate consequences od withdrawal from Iraq. Either a Shia ethnic cleansing of Arab Sunnis or the return of the Baathists will send the ME into flames. After that the oil wells burn;after that the Second Great Depression. I am not sure we can withdraw without losing a third or more of the Army on the Basra road to Kuwait.

We are not taking Vietnam;we are talking more like the 30s or 40s. I am not all sure the left is prepared for such circumstances; I am not sure the Democratic Elite will allow it.

President Edwards (whomever) can try to avoid the responsibility for Iraq; but the years of negative GDP with double digit interest rates and inflation will require measures that no President will...hell I have no idea. We are probably looking at 1-2 percent of GDP for a decade simply to rebuild & maintain a reasonable defense.

I do believe that the Right has engineered a catastrophe of 1860s or 1930s proportions and I don't think we are ready.

Krugman is ready:he saw it coming in 2002 and called the Bush administration "revolutionaries". He did not use the term lightly.

Armando is wrong. I don't think elections matter much or will help anymore. I'll give 30% chance that 2008 doesn't come off. If you want to confront Bush and stop the war it likely needs to be extra-political and extra-legal and I'll ask Armando to shit or get of the pot.

If not blood in American streets, then let us just try to muddle through and keep the status quo, which means no better no worse in the ME. We are not leaving Iraq.

Posted by: bob mcmanus on April 23, 2007 04:40 AM

I mean that is the point of the Krugman column, isn't it?

Hostages. Violence

Republicans are willing to bankrupt the country and kill thousands of Americans and millions overseas to achieve their political ends. Are y'all ready to rumble? I doubt it.

Posted by: bob mcmanus on April 23, 2007 04:51 AM

I still find it tough to buy the Dem position that we should withdraw from Iraq, because it's pointless/meaningless, etc., but we shouldn't even start to withdraw for 15 months. Is that they best you can do? That's lame.

If you really believe that we no strategic interest in or responsibility for what happens in Iraq from this point on (but that staying in Afghanistan is strategically important/worthwhile), and that the best thing we can do is withdraw, why wait over a year to start doing that?

General Petraeus is in D.C. this week. Dems in Congress should ask him, simply: If you received an order to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq, what's the quickest you could do so without taking on undue risk? What resources would you need to do so? If Petraeus says all U.S. troops could be pulled out relatively safely with three months (or whatever) of lead time, and it would cost billion, Dems should send Bush a budget to cover exactly that amount and explain why they are doing so.

Posted by: Fred on April 23, 2007 08:55 AM

There's a column in the Boston Globe by a guy who advised Clinton during the 1995 showdown with Gingrich. He thinks the Democrats are making a big political mistake being confrontational.

I don't think they're making a big mistake, but I DO think their actions need to be evaluated wrt the political consequences, not the immediate troop-removal consequences. Let's face it, the troops aren't coming home until we have a new president, in all likelihood.

I think Krugman is a master of biting polical rhetoric, and his phrasing, while it sounds a little extreme, could easily become conventional wisdom if enough people would just keep repeating it. This, or something like it, is what the Democrats need to do to win the political confrontation.

Posted by: Jim W on April 23, 2007 09:41 AM

He just does not think Dems should do anything about it and now dishonestly states Krugman agrees with himn when Krugman is sayng exactly the opposite.

Calling people dishonest is pretty serious. Calling someone dishonest by attributing opinions to him that everyone can see he does not hold is just stupid. I'm assuming this is not the Kos Armando, cause that guy seemed fairly bright.

Posted by: nolaboyd on April 23, 2007 09:51 AM

The writing style seems very similar to Dailykos Armando's.

He just does not think Dems should do anything about it and now dishonestly states Krugman agrees with himn when Krugman is sayng exactly the opposite.

I don't think this statement is accurate.

Posted by: JP on April 23, 2007 10:07 AM

Jim:

That guy who advised Democrats in 1995 and who thinks it would be a big mistake for the Democrats to confront the Republicans is Doug Schoen of Penn and Schoen. Penn and Schoen are pollsters who are known distorters of polling data. Stan Greenberg caught them doing this in 1995 and wrote an article exposing them.

Penn and Schoen are perfect examples of spineless establishement Democrats. Did you notice that, while Schoen mentions having polled the issue in 1995, he doesn't use a single piece of polling data to support his argument now?

As Armando argued above, there is a world of difference between 1995 and now. In 1995 the confrontation was between great comunicator and reasonably popular Bill Clinton taking on an unpopular Congress lead by the even less popular Newt Gingrich on issues where Clinton's position was very popular and the Republicans desire to slash Mediacre and Medicaid and education and the environment were not.

In 2007, those positions are completely reversed. Bush is incredibly unpopular and so is his position on Iraq. Congress is reasonably popular and leaders like Pelosi are far more popular than Newt Gingrich was.

This is a fight we could win if we got some balls and didn't just assume, as people like Obama have been doing, that we will lose.

Armando has argued that we don't need majorities because all we need to do is force a showdown by NOT funding. This argument is very attractive although I don't know enough about legislative procedure to be sure he is right, but its well worth looking into.

One thing is for sure. We should definitely not simply accept Bush's frame that 1) cutting off funds 18 months in advance is the same as cutting off soldiers' supply of bullets in the field or 2) that it is the Democrats who would be cutting off the funds, after all it is Bush who would be taking the final step in the form of a veto -- and all so he can get his way when a large majority of Americans disagree with him.

For godssakes, let's not always be a bunch of frightened pussies. Is there nothing that we will stand and fight for?

Posted by: Cause Disturbance on April 23, 2007 10:18 AM

Do we point out that Fred is lying, or do we ignore him?

Posted by: Matt Weiner on April 23, 2007 10:25 AM

Bush plan is to drag this out till January 2009 and dump it on the lap of his successor who will be forced to make the difficult choices. The shit will hit the fan under his successor. That way Bush is hoping history books will blame his successor or at least split the blame 50-50 as opposed to him getting 100% of the blame.

Posted by: DonB on April 23, 2007 11:01 AM

Weiner:

"Do we point out that Fred is lying, or do we ignore him?"

Is this just your lazy way of saying that you disagree with what I wrote but can't articulate why you think I'm wrong?

Posted by: Fred on April 23, 2007 11:05 AM

Clinton/Newt example is like apples and oranges.

1) Clinton was fighting for a popular program; medicare. The war is very unpopular.

2) Newt shut down the govt. There is not going to be a shutdown in this case.

Posted by: DonB on April 23, 2007 11:05 AM

Bush can do all sorts of sleazy dishonest things to try and avoid taking any blame for "losing" Iraq, but never forget the main fact that Bush hasn't won his war. He'll keep trying to pretend until January 20th, 2009 that "victory is at hand", but there's only so many do-overs you get before there's the inevitable Emperor-has-no-clothes moment.

Posted by: David W. on April 23, 2007 11:15 AM

Hey Matt:

You're a smart guy and an investigative journalist with knowledgable sources. Why don't you look into Armando's strategy of simply not-funding Iraq (see his posts on TalkLeft) and figure out if it is hypothetically viable or not -- particularly from the standpoint of legislative procedure -- and then enlighten the rest of us?

Posted by: Cause Disturbance on April 23, 2007 11:16 AM

Fred, you said "I still find it tough to buy the Dem position that we should withdraw from Iraq, because it's pointless/meaningless, etc., but we shouldn't even start to withdraw for 15 months." (Emphasis yours.)

Yet the bill passed by the Democratic Senate sets as a goal that we start withdrawing within 120 days of passage, and finish by March 2008. The House bill mandates starting in March 2008 and finishing by August 31, 2008; if benchmarks are not meant withdrawal starts much sooner.

So your comment was wrong from top to bottom. If you've been paying the least attention to this issue, you know this; if not, you could have found it out by thirty seconds of Googling.

This concludes my fact-checking/troll-feeding duty.

Posted by: Matt Weiner on April 23, 2007 12:08 PM

"1) cutting off funds 18 months in advance is the same as cutting off soldiers' supply of bullets in the field"

Actually cutting off the bullets, simply stopping funding and letting Petraeus and Pace figure out what to do, is the only serious way to go. Do it now.

Now I don't know if Petraeus & Pace would simply let the soldiers die, but I doubt it. But if Bush went to impoundment and told the joint chiefs "bullets. We're staying" my guess is that the JCS would say:"We take the hint from Congress. Use the money for transport."

And Bush being humiliated by the military would be a good first step in the horrific domestic battle that would ensue.

No, it will not happen. We are not leaving Iraq.

Posted by: bob mcmanus on April 23, 2007 12:20 PM

Weiner:

"the bill passed by the Democratic Senate sets as a goal that we start withdrawing within 120 days of passage, and finish by March 2008. The House bill mandates starting in March 2008 and finishing by August 31, 2008"

I made a mistake: Neither bill proposes waiting 15 months to start withdrawal, one proposes waiting 4 months to start and the other 11 months; neither envisions completing a withdrawal before March of '08. Despite my mistake (not a lie), my general question remains a valid one (and one as yet unanswered by you): Why wait so long? Why not ask the theater commander (who is in town now) what the shortest practicable time frame is and propose that? Why should American troops be risking their lives in Iraq next February or March if the war is pointless?

Posted by: Fred on April 23, 2007 01:51 PM

Given that Petraeus was hand-picked as the only person who thought the surge would work, they might not think they'd get a good answer from him.

Posted by: Matt Weiner on April 23, 2007 03:24 PM


Given that Petraeus was hand-picked as the only person who thought the surge would work . . .

I'm still waiting for one of the people who toss around remarks about whether the surge will 'work' to explain what that means. Is there a generally understood meaning that I have somehow missed, and if so where can I find it articulated?

Posted by: David Tomlin on April 23, 2007 04:00 PM

"Perhaps he thinks this'll mean it'll go down in the record books as something his successor "lost" rather than a catastrophic error he made."

Bush thinks he'll win. He needs to think that. Bush has constructed a narrative of his life that goes like this: there was a drunken loser who found Jesus and was picked by God for great things (remember "God wants me to be President" back in 1999?) and told by God to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam.

Withdrawal from Iraq would destroy that narrative. Bush will never do that.


Aramando:

The claim:

"He (Matthew) just does not think Dems should do anything about it.." is silly. He doesn't think the Dems CAN do anything about it.

And this:

Who wants to run against "he/she lost Iraq."

is irrevelant. No rational person (certain extreme Jesus types fail this test) will ever think anyone but Bush lost Iraq. The implied parallel with China (I can't recall anyone ever asking "Who lost Vietnam?", largely because by the time we left no one though it was worth "winning" in the first place) fails to hold.

Posted by: Psycho-Historian on April 23, 2007 06:28 PM

Psycho:

I'd like to see someone explain why Armando's strategy of not-funding won't work. I don't know enough about legislative procedure to say it definitely would work, but it seems like it could. Matt? Anyone? Care to make a substantive criticism of Armando's defund-by-doing-nothing proposal?

Posted by: Cause Disturbance on April 23, 2007 06:58 PM

Cause:

I haven't read Armando's proposal, and therefore have no opinion about it. Nor am I going to, not because of any animus towad Armando but just because of lack of time.

BTW. as I read him Armando is quite correct about Krugman's view. I think he thinks that Krugman is right in saying that the Democrats should confront Bush (sorry about that syntax). If that is what he does thInk we agree there as well. I'm just claiming he is wrong about what MAT thinks, and about the political impact of pulling out troops on whomever does it.

Posted by: Psycho-Historian on April 23, 2007 11:39 PM

Re: Either a Shia ethnic cleansing of Arab Sunnis or the return of the Baathists will send the ME into flames.

I don't think either is particularly likely. The fate of Iraq is more likely to be similar to that of Yugoslavia: lots of woe and misery in Iraq itself, but nothing spreading beyond its borders. (For one thing, it would not be in anyone's interest to allow that and while China, Russia, Iran etc. may be pleased to watch America fail in Iraq none of them want a mass conflagration in the Middle East). Long term we will probably end up with the three state solution: A Shi'a Iraq under Iranian tutelage, a Sunni Iraq, probably under Saudi protection, and a Kurdistan with US bases and a mightily peeved Turkey on its borders.

Posted by: JonF on April 24, 2007 12:31 PM

thank all plase very good pages

Posted by: seks hikayeleri on January 8, 2008 02:03 PM

thanks all

Posted by: hikaye on January 8, 2008 02:04 PM

a lat off very good pages

Posted by: hikayeleri on January 8, 2008 02:04 PM

thanksss good work..wwwww

Posted by: penis büyütücü on July 7, 2008 06:29 AM

thnxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Posted by: sex shop on July 7, 2008 06:29 AM

thanks very.

Posted by: erotik shop on September 6, 2008 11:59 AM

You will get access to our members only forum where I will show you how to make the most out of your video sites, how get your site listed in Google in about 24 hours, and how to use Web 2.0 techniques to build traffic to your sites.

Posted by: teoman dogan on November 28, 2008 06:11 PM

thank you

Posted by: mynet on January 10, 2009 03:26 PM

Thanks

Posted by: sohbet on January 22, 2009 07:21 PM

Thanks

Posted by: cet on February 1, 2009 04:45 AM

ThanX

Posted by: sohbet on February 18, 2009 09:13 AM

geciktirici krem

Posted by: geciktirici krem on April 2, 2009 09:05 AM

penis büyütücüler

Posted by: penis büyütücüler on April 2, 2009 09:16 AM

anal penis

Posted by: anal penis on April 2, 2009 09:17 AM

Thanks

Posted by: sohpet on April 7, 2009 06:03 AM

Thanks you ßy_SuSquN

Posted by: sohpet on April 22, 2009 06:01 PM

Good comment.Thanks admin.

Posted by: coders on April 30, 2009 03:41 PM


neon tabela
thank you

Posted by: neon on May 6, 2009 06:19 AM

neon

thank you

Posted by: neon tabela on May 6, 2009 06:20 AM

erkek ve kız öğrenci e zenci hamile hikaye yasli olgun kadin gott kendisini doktora sikt sekreter vivid erkek sex iç giyim tek gecelik şikiş erotik kucagına alma öğretmenlerle sex hika bekçi yarağı seksi sarışın vidyosu bornozlu sevişenler iz jigolo ve yaşlı karı p 2 genç yaşlı kadının e bedava yaşlı kadın göğ domalma kadınlar video güzel kız manyak seviş genç kız videos erotik şişko öğretmen öğrenci kilot erotik sıc seks sicacik amciklar bedava sütyenli kız ia yumuşak büyük memeli s kadın zorla sevişiyo evli siktirenler sıyah kulotlu hemsıre hizmetci kıza tacavüz saxsofon çeken kadınla ÇİFTLİKTE SEKS İZLE erotik alman porno vid Em güzel yarak görüntü sex popo sikiş sarhoş kadn pornosu tesettürlü sürtükler yaşlı kadın çocuk siki adult spor yapan kadın lezbiyem ögrenci şişman annesinin amcı çılgın sexsahneleri denizin altında sikişm ŞİŞMAN KADINLARIN GÖTÜ tecrübeli olgun kadın sex karılar sex yapark KALİTELİ ADULT DORUM www.zevknet.com nez videoseks yaşlı kadınlar erotikv sıcak sevişme sibel can seks izle olgun kadın gen çocuk ensest öğretmenle sex hikayel zenci kadın beyaz erke geridenkızlıkbozma lezbiyen grup sex vide memeli kızı giydir istanbul silişi sarhoş sikiş videoları şişman kadın ve erkek ŞİŞMAN KADININ GÖTÜNÜ grup evde sex seks burada net video \"sikişen kadın ve FAHİŞE İZLE 89kızlıkbozma uzun sikilş cıplaklar kamp sikiş b 1 fahişe 4 erkek sex zencı erotık fılm ızle genç pornocu ünlüler büyük göğüslü kadın ya büyük göğüslü olgun ka grup evde sex vidyolar seks si filim ler www.sevişme videoları genç kız pornosu türki masac yapan kızlar ero club sandy video karımı sikti yolda sevişenlerin vid dağdasex sıcak lezbiyan videola +16 kız japon sikiş vi üvey annesini siken ad sikişen insanlar genç ekek yaşlı teyzey yabanıcı uydudan sex f seks altmış dokuz olma japon kıza zorla sikiş 12 cm sex erotik sikişken olgun on sekizlik kızların s patron azgın hizmetçi jartiyer ayak yalama şişman mature sikiş po uzun süre porno erotik gögüs videoları sıcak meme videoları olgun kadınlar ve çocu kamyon heryeri çiplak kadın v nefis sevişme vidyo büyük penis seven kadı deneyimli sex yapan ka 18 sekiz ilkez sikiş koylu fahıse video birebir am sikiş porno kapalı yerde sex şişman kadınla otuzbir erotizm haz yüklü seks sikiş be comm. gülben ergen üzerinde OLGUN KADIN ÇOCUK VİDE teyzekızı yatakta asistan sik balon memeli kadın sex amca sex oral sex flım yarak yalatma videosu olgun erotik film izle lezbiyenler porna abisiyle sikişenler vajina asian kızı sikme şifresi ikiz tepeler sikiş bakirevidio EŞŞEK SİKEN erotik brezilyalılar türbanlı gizli çekim k genç sex videoları sarışın yarağı yedi yaşlı kadınlar sevişiy vivid film izle azgın seks izle sarışın sikiliyor porn yaşlı olgun kadın hika arabada mem yalama otobüste dayadı video sikişme topluluk izle kucağa oturanlar dal yarrağı kucağa oturanların vid ıslak sevişen lezbiyen DUL MATURELER delıce sex sahnelerı saksafon çeken kız izl iki lezbiyen tatilde s kadın güreşi erotikli büyük memelilerin siki sexslı golf ogretmek vajina içindeki yarak rus yabancı seke amında sikiş var göğsü sex film desenli porno ÖGRETMEN İLE SEVİŞEN K parayla sex yapan lezb sex hikayenet evlilik kadınlarla sex porno sex lezbi kadın içine alıyor öğretmeniyle sevişen ç iki erkek bir kadını b arkadaşının annesıyle soktum vajina video şişman yaşlı karı inli sıcak esks video sek yapan kadınlar hamam erotik zenci adamlı erotik fi amve sikis videosu POPO PONO SEX uzun penis seven kadın komşusuna tecavüz ediy geriden kızlık bozma v osuruk pornofilim,videosunu,i kadın amcuğu evli kadın erotik film polisi sikiyor 3d sex sıkıs porno bedava aletli porno vi teyzem.net sikiş izle kızyurdu sex hemşire müşterisiyle s kız arkadan kıvranıyor adult18 sikiş gelin damat pornosu adult18am sikiş yabancı karı pornası bağırtarak sevişenler azgın kadınlar sikiş v teeneger videolar beyaz sütyenli video sex fotoğraflarını gta san andreas kızı s zencilez biyenler akar sikis iniltili porno izle 3d animasyonsex porno erotik hoca www. çiftlıkte sikişen sex firikik sabahsex grup eotik sex izle aminin icini sikme por brezilya porno sex yakışıklı çocuk ile se sex yapan hamile kadın canlı seks bar zenci kilolu kadın alı yaşlıların penisini iz yeşil,.am,erotik,video sanal alem sex amcık s genc kızlar evde sikiş üvey sex video sıcak lez porno kadın erkek erotik gör karı koco ilişkileri seksi sarışın sikiliyo seksi kadında göğüs vi asyasikiş sikşen kapalı kızlar çıplağın memesini emen evde öğretmeniyle sex iki erkek bir kadinsex olgun evlı kadın sıkıs japon erotik kızlar çocukla sikişiyor www.pornofilmcanada.co aletli porno KALÇASI AM delicesine sikişme vid sokarım amına partide sevişen lezbiy 18 yaş kıza sex dersi kürt kız sex video 3d animasyon sex porno koca yarak kafalı oral grup yapan ciplak şişman kadınlar sulu am vajina yatakta sek eotik siki rus orosbu pornosu erotıkfılmler.ogr kürt kızı video tecavüz videoları kıllı yarak traşı ünlüler izle eurotik kadın amcıgı parmaklıy yaşlı kadını jigolo si öğretmeniyle seks yapa peni yalayanlar kilitoris ne seks Açık havada travesti i porno sex erotik sıcak manyak sevişme filmi 18 lik manita tecavüz siyah tül çorapli vide home erotik video yaşlı kadın jigolo vid kendini sikitiriyor sikiş yapan kadım vıdı xxl erotikvideo kardeş kendini siktiri popoyu okşuyo canada pornosu erototik wideoları türkce tül coraplı sex denizaltında porno seks yaparken ağlayan salakça sikişenler kürt kadınların sikişi ogretmenıyle sıkısmek yapay penis ile seks zenciamları 12cm yarak işeyen kadınlar videos sıkıs sen benle annesini sikiyor video önden sikşmeler çocuğa kendini siktire lezbiye show sudasex sakall www.teroristsex.com 7. sınıfta sex yaşlı olgun kadın sex şişman asyalılar eroti dul sikiş videosu kürt seksi vide vajina y sexo real pornoları SERT AM SİKME adultx.com asiangrils üvey annesini zorla lezbiyenlerin sikişmes sex kıza on sekizlik çıtırlar lez yaşlı sevişme sevişen emolar izle kadın çoçuğu penisini arabic sex cartoon kız sikişi porno 18ans kadın çocuğu yalıyor götsikme yarışı lezbiyen porno video polis sesx yapıyor istanbulda parayla sik freesevişme eteklı yaslı kadın ski AMSİKME CE kiz aglayan seks erkekler kadını siker kocasının arkadaşıyla orsbu resmi yaglıyarrak bunnyteens sex Yaşlı kadın beni sikin bilardo masasında siki karılar soyma izle kız sex sikis zle me net lezbi kadın sikişmek istiyor ERKEĞİN KIZIN GÖTÜNÜ E sıcak lez videolar şişman kadın göt sikme ilk kez götten sikiş t büyük yaraklı zeçi www.sevişme resimleri şişman kadınla sikişme yarrak hasan izle www zevkkafe müzikli pornolar düğünden sonra sikiş v zenci çocuk sikişi arap kız yol ortasında sikişme porno izle seks net vi sarışın lezbiyenler po evliler seks videoları cıbıldak kız sikişi kızların sex daha yen en büyük zenci penisle kudurdum. İŞKENCE EROTİK İZLE yapay yaraklar plastik masada zenci erotik atlar sekx hikayem bir adam işten geliyor sex kızını giydir YENGEM SEVİŞİYOR VİDEO seks yapan gaylar büyük aletli travesti şikiş firikik yarak sikiyor seks,eylence manita seksi sikış zenci gügüs seksi kadınlar sev paris hilton videoseks yenge sikişhikayeler sıcak lezbiye büyük memeleri erkek e şişman soymaca oyunu seks ene net olgun kur faişe sarışın sex kadı büyük memeyi erkek emi kız kıza sexsi vidyola kendi isteğiyle sikile manita amcigi güzel zevke gelen kadın vide kadının amını yalayan erototik oyunlar 3d seks videolar kuduran amcıklar sex isteyenler video 18 tipsiz porno oral sex film göğüs pornoları erotik atlar vidosu saksafon ceken hatunla sicakseks.gov (3) Üçlü Grup Sex Sıca erkeğin sikini yalayan sikişstar.com sabahtan akşama kadar şişman kadın göt resim dersde sikişen ögretne sevişmeye seven kızlar sıcak kadınlar VE SEX russ erotik izle ah tezem komik domalma video asyal sik lezbiyensikiş kız ögretmenle erkek ö suda ponro izle seks filmleri, sex, sı sikis elim net video i buyuk goguslerini oksu sarhoş kaın şikişi erotik ebony öğrenci öğretmeniyle s salla yarak sikiş çıplakdans sicak video 3d pornolar izle postacı sikiş şişman kadın sıkısı iz tül çoraplı porno kaca karilar sikişi zenci japon kızı sikiş +18 sevişme beleş dul karı sikişi tahrik kalkan penis vi otomobide sex erotık etek giymiş kad izle zenci sekx video dalgıç pornosu yarak seven vidyosu gelin li damat porno hoplayarak sikişme sarısın ama memeler ko asian bayan partner porno 3d 140 erotik türbanlı sıcak videolar evli büyük penis jigolo sex sevişme videolarıs sexsahneler ŞİŞMAN KADIN AMI SİKİŞ türbanlı sex-fotoğrafl kokulu kilotları erotik seks video seks porno seks sarışı kadınazgın 69 sicak lezbiyen arabada erotik toplu lezbiyen sikiş evi seksene video milf video seksene video sikiş komşu kızı olgun bacak suda şikişenler lezbiyenlerin aletli s çocoğun yanında sikşiy çocuk kadın sexi saksafo çeken kadınlar soyunarak sıcak eglenc www. kürt. seks vıdeo erkeği zevke getirme v harika zenci domalan türk kadın kaRİ AMİNA SOKMAK çıplak olgun kadın fot seks ve tesetür video zenci amcuk kaynıyorum sana videos kürt porno erotika sex fotog bayan kuaföründe kızı zenci porno KİRAZ EROTİK VİDEO dvd porno film full.co pornosu olan ünlüleri sıcaık videolar kırmızı iç çamaşırlı k sibel can seks videola seks inlemeleri komşusuna yaşlı kadın türkçe büyük memeli y tecavüze uğrayan kadın Seksi kürt kadınları asyalı sikişiyor boşalan karı videoları seks video olgun yaşlı hamileler okulda hoca sikiyor zenci kadın veriyo rus ertik filim seksin saksafon asyalıkızlar uzun bacaklı esmer sik 13 yaşında olgun kadın kocalarını boynuzlayan tesettürlü kapalı türk usta sikiş videosu düz sikiş kürt erotik izle sexicanada otobüsün içinde karı s bakirebul

Posted by: sikiş on June 5, 2009 12:53 PM

Post A Comment

advertise_liberally.gif