Warning: Missing argument 2 for wpdb::prepare(), called in /home/content/62/6454762/html/wp-content/plugins/category-icons/category_icons.php on line 1047 and defined in /home/content/62/6454762/html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 992
Know Newt? No Newt! | davelovell.net
Jan 242012

Newt Gin­grich is smarter than you. Don’t feel bad; he’s smarter than every­body else, too. Just ask him.  But don’t ask him about his per­sonal life – how dare you!

Trust Me…

Repeated adul­tery with younger women, while each suc­ces­sive wife was seri­ously ill — and all along Newt was pro­claim­ing him­self a cham­pion of fam­ily val­ues. Attack­ing mort­gage lender Fred­die Mac, while secretly get­ting paid $1.6 mil­lion as a lob­by­ist for them – and claim­ing he was a “his­to­rian,” not a lob­by­ist. Attack­ing Con­gress for grid­lock, when per­son­ally led the destruc­tion of Con­gress’ civil­ity and tra­di­tions in the 1980s as a “bomb-thrower” and evil genius tac­ti­cian. (Seri­ously, look it up.) A half-million charge account at Tiffany’s Jew­el­ers for his lat­est, youngest woman (that we know of).

All this for 30 years run­ning, and he’s still a lead­ing con­tender for Pres­i­dent as a reli­gious, morally cru­sad­ing Repub­li­can? Yeah, he’s smarter all right. As a his­to­rian, he knows Amer­i­cans for­get any­thing over 5 years old, and the press will ignore your long-term char­ac­ter traits if you give them a shiny new story to report.

It’s not that Newt lacks charm. My per­sonal favorite thing is that he loves, loves, LOVES dinosaurs! Not in any creepy way, for once, but with the deep enthu­si­asm of a five-year-old boy. For that mat­ter, notice how many of his “vision­ary” sci­en­tific ideas involve lasers and outer space and huge explo­sions. That’s adorable. The prob­lem is, most five year olds have a sin­cere nar­cis­sism that would lead them to hap­pily order far-off cities destroyed if they got some candy in return. That’s why we don’t put them in charge of the world.

Ulti­mately, Gin­grich is amaz­ingly sim­i­lar to Bill Clin­ton — both are pot smok­ing, draft-dodging adul­ter­ers from poor South­ern fam­i­lies, who rose to great heights with brains and hard work. Clin­ton appears to have han­dled the change a bit bet­ter though.


We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, ‘I never slept with her.’” — Anne Man­ning (who was also mar­ried at the time.)

We would have won in 1974 if we could have kept him out of the office, screw­ing her [a young vol­un­teer] on the desk.” — Dot Crews, his cam­paign sched­uler at the time

[In the book] “Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them”, [I] “found fright­en­ing pieces that related to my own life.” — Newt.

I think you can write a psy­cho­log­i­cal pro­file of me that says I found a way to immerse my inse­cu­ri­ties in a cause large enough to jus­tify what­ever I wanted it to.” — Newt, speak­ing to Gail Sheehy.

She isn’t young enough or pretty enough to be the President’s wife. And besides, she has can­cer.” — Newt, on his first wife.

He treats me really nicely, buys me all these ices. Dolce & Gab­bana, Fendi and that Donna, Karan, he be sharin’ All that money got me wearin’” — Cal­lista? No wait, that’s Fer­gie, “My Humps”

I don’t want him to be pres­i­dent and I don’t think he should be.” — Newt’s sec­ond wife Marianne.

She [Cal­lista] is the sin­gle most self-centered per­son I’ve run into in politics—it’s all about her. They do these movies together, and she does a word count: she has to have the same num­ber of words on cam­era as he does or they have to reshoot. …And Cal­lista did not want him to run for Pres­i­dent. That’s why he had to buy her so much damn jew­elry.” — an unnamed “for­mer strate­gist.” Will Rogers, Newt’s ex-Iowa strate­gist has denied it was him.

If the coun­try today were to move to the left, Newt would sense it before it started hap­pen­ing and lead the way.” — Dot Crews, his cam­paign sched­uler through­out the 1970s.

It doesn’t mat­ter what I do. Peo­ple need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t mat­ter what I live.” — Newt.


Sex on the Desk — Oral Sex is More Eas­ily Denied

Sev­eral news­pa­pers are now report­ing that Newt Gin­grich is dat­ing and basi­cally liv­ing with Cal­lista Bisek, a “wil­lowy blond Con­gres­sional aide 23 years his junior.” Biske, 33, has been spend­ing nights at Gingrich’s apart­ment near the Capi­tol and has her own key. In an amaz­ing act of hypocrisy, Gin­grich was appar­ently dat­ing Bisek all dur­ing the Clinton-Lewinsky adul­tery scan­dal, even as he pro­claimed fam­ily val­ues and bit­terly crit­i­cized the Pres­i­dent for his adultery.

Reporters and other Wash­ing­ton insid­ers have known about this rela­tion­ship since 1994, even before Gin­grich became Speaker of the House, but did not have any solid proof to report. In 1995, Van­ity Fair mag­a­zine described Bisek as Gingrich’s “fre­quent break­fast com­pan­ion.” Gin­grich was mar­ried to Mar­i­anne Gin­grich dur­ing all of that time, and just filed for divorce in August 1999.

Newt is appar­ently try­ing to cre­ate a new hybrid form, Chris­t­ian adul­tery. Accord­ing to MSNBC, Bisek sings in the National Shrine Choir, and Newt would often wait for her at the Shrine of the Immac­u­late Con­cep­tion, lis­ten­ing to her sing while he read the Bible.

This is hardly the first time Newt has cheated, either. “It was com­mon knowl­edge that Newt was involved with other women dur­ing his [first] mar­riage to Jackie. Maybe not on the level of John Kennedy. But he had girl­friends — some seri­ous, some triv­ial.” — Dot Crews, his cam­paign sched­uler through­out the 70s. One woman, Anne Man­ning, has come for­ward and con­firmed a rela­tion­ship with him dur­ing the 1976 cam­paign. “We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, ‘I never slept with her.’”

Kip Carter, his for­mer cam­paign trea­surer, was walk­ing Newt’s daugh­ters back from a foot­ball game one day and cut across a dri­ve­way where he saw a car. “As I got to the car, I saw Newt in the pas­sen­ger seat and one of the guys’ wives with her head in his lap going up and down. Newt kind of turned and gave me this little-boy smile. For­tu­nately, Jackie Sue and Kathy were a lot younger and shorter then.”

Fam­ily Val­ues? Press­ing Wife for Divorce in the Hospital:

He walked out in the spring of 1980.… By Sep­tem­ber, I went into the hos­pi­tal for my third surgery. The two girls came to see me, and said, “Daddy is down­stairs. Could he come up?” When he got there, he wanted to dis­cuss the terms of the divorce while I was recov­er­ing from my surgery.” — Jackie, his first wife. One of Newt’s daugh­ters from that first mar­riage, who is also a con­ser­v­a­tive colum­nist, recently dis­puted that story (after Newt co-authored a book with her), say­ing among other things that her mother Jackie had ini­ti­ated the divorce and that “the tumor [removed in a surgery the day before] was benign.” Of course no one knew the tumor was benign at the time, so I don’t know why that is sup­posed to mat­ter. And CNN recently found court doc­u­ments that show that Newt did in fact ini­ti­ate that divorce — which makes him a bla­tant liar, too. In any case, I’m inclined to believe the wife this hap­pened to over the account of her daugh­ter who was a child at that time (and earns easy money from her dad today.)

Spend­ing Spree at Tiffany’s

Newt brazenly attacks Mitt Rom­ney as rich and out of touch — after it came out that he owed the lux­ury jew­eler Tiffany’s between a quar­ter mil­lion and a half mil­lion dol­lars for pretty things he bought his wife. We think he bought them for his wife, any­way. If not Cal­lista, maybe the next one.

Lying Cor­po­rate Lobbyist

There are few things any cur­rent can­di­date has done more hyp­o­crit­i­cal than Newt’s cor­po­rate lob­by­ing work for the mort­gage giant Fred­die Mac. You see, Newt has pub­licly attacked Fred­die Mac for years, blam­ing it for the 2008 hous­ing crash. Then we found out that they paid him $1.6 mil­lion, as he went around and tried to con­vince Repub­li­cans to vote for Fred­die Mac’s favorite bills (and against reg­u­la­tions). Newt denies he was lob­by­ing — because his work didn’t meet some tech­ni­cal def­i­n­i­tions of lob­by­ing — and claimed, ridicu­lously that they paid him to be a “his­to­rian.” No his­to­rian in his­tory has earned $1.6 million.

Newt didn’t report to Fred­die Mac’s direc­tor of his­tory. (Spoiler alert; no com­pany has one.) He reported to Craig Thomas, who was a reg­is­tered lob­by­ist for Fred­die Mac, and paid Newt $25,000 a month. On Jan­u­ary 24, 2012, Newt finally released his con­tract. Guess what is not described in his ser­vices? His­tory. In fact, Newt admits that he only talked to Fred­die Mac staff for about one hour per month. At $25,000/ hour, that’s a lot of his­tory for a mort­gage lender.

Dead-Beat Dad:

The hos­pi­tal visit wasn’t the end of it, either. Shortly after the can­cer ward visit, Newt stopped pay­ing alimony and child sup­port. Jackie had to take Newt to court to get money out of him, and her Bap­tist church needed to take up a col­lec­tion to get his kids food and pre­vent the util­i­ties from being cut off. He has never apol­o­gized for this or admit­ted it was a mistake.

Draft Dodger:

Though he relent­lessly pushes mil­i­tary spend­ing and talks like a big­time hawk, Gin­grich avoided the Viet­nam War through a com­bi­na­tion of stu­dent and fam­ily defer­ments. (He mar­ried one of his teach­ers at age 19.)

Prob­lems With Women?

When Newt’s first wife Jackie was still in the hos­pi­tal recov­er­ing from her third can­cer surgery, Newt came to her bed and — by his own admis­sion — “argued” with her over the terms of the divorce that he wanted (and she didn’t). Newt also gra­ciously told one of his aides that “She isn’t young enough or pretty enough to be the President’s wife. And besides, she has can­cer.” Later it emerged that he had been hav­ing an affair with a younger woman, Mar­i­anne. But his sec­ond mar­riage — to Mar­i­anne — wasn’t much smoother either. In fact it was very sim­i­lar. After Mar­i­anne was diag­nosed with mul­ti­ple scle­ro­sis, Newt told her about an affair with a younger woman, Cal­lista, that he had been hav­ing for six years. She says that Newt didn’t ask for divorce this time — he asked her to have an “open mar­riage” where he could also sleep with Cal­lista. Mar­i­anne refused, and they divorced.

Does Newt have some kind of prob­lem with women? He has said that he read a book called “Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them”, and “found fright­en­ing pieces that related to my own life.”

House Bank­ing Scan­dal: Newt Bounced 22 Checks

Remem­ber the House Bank­ing scan­dal, where so many con­gress­men wrote rub­ber checks on gov­ern­ment money? Newt hopes you don’t, because he bounced 22 him­self, which almost cost him reelec­tion in 1992. His vote for the secret House pay raise, and the chauf­feur who drove him around Wash­ing­ton in a Lin­coln Town Car, didn’t help.

Lucra­tive and Ques­tion­able Book Deals: Murdoch’s $4.5 Mil­lion wasn’t the first

The 1995 Mur­doch Deal

BAck in 1995, Newt’s book scan­dal was pretty big news. He was offered first $2.5 mil­lion, then $4.5 mil­lion by Harper Collins, a pub­lish­ing com­pany owned by Rupert Mur­doch, who also owns the Fox TV net­work and news­pa­pers and TV sta­tions around the world. Mur­doch has been hav­ing prob­lems with a com­plaint by NBC that Fox is a for­eign owned TV net­work, which is against US law.

In the past, Harper Collins has offered mil­lion dol­lar book con­tracts to sev­eral con­ser­v­a­tive politi­cians in coun­tries where Mur­doch was hav­ing reg­u­la­tory trou­ble, includ­ing Eng­land (Mar­garet Thatcher, Jef­frey Archer) and China (Deng Xiaoping’s daugh­ter). A week after the ini­tial offer, Newt met with Rupert Mur­doch — and Murdoch’s leg­isla­tive lob­by­ist — to dis­cuss pol­i­tics, includ­ing the NBC com­plaint. As facts about the deal were made pub­lic, and even Repub­li­cans crit­i­cized him, Gin­grich decided to give up the $4.5 mil­lion advance for a still-lucrative deal based on royalties.

Gingrich’s story kept chang­ing through the con­tro­versy. First, Newt’s spokesman said that Mur­doch knew noth­ing about Gin­grich and the book deal. On Fri­day Jan­u­ary 13, Newt’s spokesman admit­ted that Mur­doch actu­ally met Newt on a park bench the week before the deal was made, but didn’t talk about it. He also said he knew noth­ing about Murdoch’s lob­by­ist being at their meet­ing. The next day, he admit­ted the lob­by­ist was there, but claimed he didn’t say so because no one asked.

Newt also said repeat­edly that the book wasn’t his idea; that a lit­er­ary agent named Lynn Chu had sought him out and pro­posed it. After Ms. Chu said that Gingrich’s asso­ciate Jeff Eise­nach called her first on Newt’s behalf, Eise­nach and Newt’s spokesman admit­ted that was true.

The 1984 Book Deal Murdoch’s book deal wasn’t the first lucra­tive and con­tro­ver­sial book deal Newt engi­neered. In 1983 he estab­lished a lim­ited part­ner­ship in Atlanta called COS Lim­ited, which pulled together about two dozen of his biggest cam­paign con­trib­u­tors to finance his book.

The for­mer admin­is­tra­tor of his con­gres­sional offices in Geor­gia, Dolores Adam­son, resigned over the deal. “The man­u­script was put together in the dis­trict office using office equip­ment,” she said. “He would just come in and say ‘This is what I want to do.’ I would say, ‘This is not eth­i­cal,” but after a while he didn’t lis­ten.” That office equip­ment, of course, was paid for by US tax­pay­ers includ­ing you.

GOPAC sleaze: Tax­payer sub­si­dies for his par­ti­san cam­paign course.

Newt in his polti­cal career was the king of using tax-payer sub­si­dized dona­tions for his per­sonal and polit­i­cal pur­poses. He stooped so low as to hijack not one but two char­i­ties for poor inner city kids and use their dona­tions for his per­sonal goals.

GOPAC, Newt’s long­time polit­i­cal action com­mit­tee, was the cen­ter­piece of a com­plex net­work of non-profit, and mostly tax exempt orga­ni­za­tions that Newt has used to sup­port him­self and other con­ser­v­a­tive can­di­dates. In an act of incred­i­ble hypocrisy, this cru­sader against taxes obtained tax­payer sub­si­dies for his per­sonal and polit­i­cal goals, by mis­usu­ing these tax-exempt groups.

For exam­ple, one GOPAC doc­u­ment said that its goal for the 1990s was “to both cre­ate and dis­sem­i­nate the doc­trine of a major­ity Repub­li­can party.” In another GOPAC doc­u­ment, titled “Key Fac­tors in a House GOP Major­ity,” Gin­grich wrote “It is more pow­er­ful and more effec­tive to develop a reform move­ment par­al­lel to the offi­cial Repub­li­can party”, instead of using the party struc­ture, because it would get more atten­tion and be more cred­i­ble. Shortly there­after, GOPAC paid for a tele­vi­sion pro­gram pro­mot­ing a “grass­roots” move­ment to reform gov­ern­ment; pub­licly they claimed it was non­par­ti­san, but pri­vate inter­nal doc­u­ments made its par­ti­san goals clear.

After it got expen­sive, Gin­grich trans­ferred the pro­gram to the “Abra­ham Lin­coln Oppor­tu­nity Foun­da­tion,” a tax-exempt group con­trolled by a GOPAC offi­cial named Bo Call­away. It had been set up years ear­lier to help inner city kids, which is why it was tax exempt. The group spent $260,000 on the tele­vi­sion pro­gram in 1990. That same year, Newt started another tax-exempt group that paid poor stu­dents for read­ing books. He bragged of this in many a polit­i­cal speech. But after the first two years, most of this foundation’s money went to Mel Steely, a for­mer Gin­grich aide who is now Newt’s offi­cial biographer.

The best known effort was a col­lege course (titled “Renew­ing Amer­i­can Civ­i­liza­tion”) at a small col­lege that Gin­grich nakedly used to recruit and orga­nize con­ser­v­a­tive can­di­dates, and to feed them his care­fully con­structed ide­ol­ogy and polit­i­cal slogans.

Of course, using tax-exempt edu­ca­tional or char­i­ta­ble dona­tions for par­ti­san pur­poses is ille­gal, and sev­eral ethics com­plaints were filed against Gin­grich. He agreed to pay a $300,000 fine for mis­lead­ing the com­mit­tee dur­ing the inves­ti­ga­tion, and in the process dodged con­vic­tion on the actual charges through a com­bi­na­tion of finess­ing some legal def­i­n­i­tions, sheer self-confidence and raw polit­i­cal power (as Speaker of the House at the time of the com­plaints, he appointed the ethics com­mit­tee. Fur­ther­more, GOPAC had one ethics com­mit­tee mem­ber on its ros­ter last ses­sion, and gave money to another.)

The Ethics Com­mit­tee dropped its final charges against Gin­grich not long before he resigned as speaker, despite find­ing that Gin­grich had in fact vio­lated one rule by repeat­edly using a polit­i­cal con­sul­tant paid by GOPAC to develop the Repub­li­can polit­i­cal agenda, because there was no evi­dence he was con­tin­u­ing to do so.

The IRS also started an inves­ti­ga­tion of one group, the Progress and Free­dom Foun­da­tion, for vio­lat­ing its tax-exempt sta­tus by donat­ing to Gingrich’s col­lege course. In the inves­ti­ga­tion, the spe­cial coun­sel found that these activ­i­ties were “sub­stan­tially moti­vated by par­ti­san polit­i­cal goals.” The IRS even­tu­ally over­ruled him, and found that the course “was edu­ca­tional and never favored or opposed a can­di­date for pub­lic office.” It said the foun­da­tion “did not inter­vene on behalf of can­di­dates of the Repub­li­can Party merely by pro­mot­ing” themes in the course. This extremely nar­row read­ing of the law basi­cally said “so what if he used the course to recruit, orga­nize and groom can­di­dates; as long as they didn’t say ‘Vote for Jones’, it wasn’t par­ti­san.” Despite what Gin­grich fans argue, this hardly proves his inno­cence. The IRS has chick­ened out before in polit­i­cal cases, notably let­ting the Church of Sci­en­tol­ogy com­pletely off the hook in its inves­ti­ga­tion of that group.

Cor­po­rate reward: $2,500/month to Newt’s wife

Accord­ing to the Wall Street Jour­nal, a com­pany hired Mar­i­anne Gin­grich (Newt’s wife) for $2,500 a month plus com­mis­sions in Sep­tem­ber 1994 after he announced sup­port for a free trade zone in Israel that they are try­ing to build. Her “job” for Israel Export Devel­op­ment Co. is to find ten­ants for the trade zone. Gingrich’s spokesman said that since her job did not involve work­ing with the US gov­ern­ment, there was no con­flict of interest.

Who Owns Him?

- Sher­man Adel­son, a Las Vegas casino owner, and his wife have EACH given $5 mil­lion to Newt’s Super­PAC just this spring. 2 checks, $10 mil­lion. By amaz­ing coin­ci­dence, Newt’s resur­gence in the pres­i­den­tial cam­paign began about 10 min­utes after Adel­son wrote the first check. Here you have a per­fect illus­tra­tion of what the Cit­i­zens United cam­paign has meant for pres­i­den­tial politics.

- Rupert Mur­doch (see book deal above)

- Georgia’s Richards fam­ily, own­ers of South­wire Cor­po­rate ($1.3 billion/year)

The Richard­ses lent and donated money and office space to Gin­grich from his ear­li­est days in pol­i­tics. They have given over $100,000, and Gin­grich was the first recip­i­ent of dona­tions from Southwire’s PAC. By coin­ci­dence, Gin­grich has changed from an envi­ron­men­tal­ist critic of South­wire to a staunch anti-environmentalist dur­ing that time. Peo­ple with ties to South­wire were instru­men­tal in two ear­lier lucra­tive book deals of Gingrich’s in 1977 and 1984; the lat­ter was inves­ti­gated for eth­i­cal violations.



Newly recov­ered court files cast doubt on Gin­grich ver­sion of first divorce,” By Alan Duke, CNN, Decem­ber 27, 2011

Cal­lista quote: The Good Wife: Can Cal­lista Gin­grich save her hus­band?, by Ariel Lev, The New Yorker, Jan­u­ary 23, 2012

Doesn’t mat­ter what I do” quote: John H. Richard­son, “Newt Gin­grich: The Indis­pens­able Repub­li­can,” Esquire Mag­a­zine, August 10, 2010

“Newt’s Glass House,” by Stephen Tal­bot, Salon.com, August 28, 1998

“Newt Plays House With New Squeeze,” by Tim­o­thy Burger and Owen Moritz, NY Daily News, August 12, 1999

“Newt’s Fool­ing Around With His Girl On the Hill,” by Andy Soltis, New York Post, August 12, 1999

“The Big One That Got Away,” by David Corn, Salon Web­site, August 12, 1998

adul­ter­ous choir prac­tice: “Per­son­als”, by Leah Garchik, San Fran­cisco Chron­i­cle, August 17, 1999 pE12

Gin­grich Won’t Answer Woman’s Adul­tery Story,” Mis­soula (Mon­tana) Mis­sou­lian, August 16, 1995p.1

Tales About Gin­grich make field level”, Idaho Spokesman Review, August 16, 1995 pB6

Gin­grich Aided Export Firm That Employed His Wife”, NY Times News Ser­vice, San Fran­cisco Chron­i­cle, Feb­ru­ary 7, 1995 pA7

Gin­grich, Critic of ‘Busi­ness as Usual,’ Helps Out Spe­cial Inter­ests Like ‘Any Mem­ber of Con­gress’”, Phil Kuntz, Wall Street Jour­nal, April 3, 1995 pA16

Gingrich’s polit­i­cal edu­ca­tion”, Jeff Gerth and Stephen Laba­ton (NY Times News Ser­vice), San Fran­cisco Exam­iner, Feb­ru­ary 12, 1995 pA6

IRS clears Gin­grich dona­tion that led to his House cen­sure”, Capi­tol Hill Blue Web­site, Feb­ru­ary 4, 1999

Ethics Com­mit­tee Drops Last of 84 Charges Against Gin­grich, By Curt Ander­son (Asso­ci­ated Press), Wash­ing­ton Post, Octo­ber 11, 1998, Page A13

“Use of Tax-Exempt Groups Inte­gral to Polit­i­cal Strat­egy”, by Charles R. Bab­cock, Wash­ing­ton Post, Jan­u­ary 7, 1997, Page A01

A Big Check, and Gin­grich Gets a Big Lift, By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and ERIC LIPTON, New York Times, Jan­u­ary 9, 2012

Miriam Adel­son Donates $5 Mil­lion to a Pro-Gingrich ‘Super PAC’, by NICHOLAS CONFESSORE, New York Times, Jan­u­ary 23, 2012

Jump-Start: How Speaker Gin­grich Grabbed Power and Atten­tion So Quickly”, Wall Street Jour­nal, Jan­u­ary 19, 1995 pA1

Gingrich’s for­mer firm releases Fred­die Mac con­tract, by Dan Eggen, Wash­ing­ton Post, Jan­u­ary 24, 2012

The Inner Quest of Newt Gin­grich”, Gail Sheehy, Van­ity Fair, Sep­tem­ber 1995 p147 “Gin­grich, Mur­doch reveal lobbyist’s role at meet­ing”, Katharine Seelye (NY Times News Ser­vice), San Fran­cisco Exam­iner, pA1 “Mur­doch, Gin­grich Admit They Talked”, San Fran­cisco Chron­i­cle, Jan­u­ary 13, 1995

The Mys­te­ri­ous Mrs. Newt”, Mar­tin Fletcher (Lon­don Times News Ser­vice), SF Exam­iner, Jan­u­ary 15, 1995 pA4 “Newt’s Near Misses”, Ron Cur­ran, The Bay Guardian, Jan­u­ary 11, 1995 p10

Newt, Inc.”, Den­nis Bern­stein, Bay Guardian, Feb­ru­ary 1, 1995 p19


 Posted by at 8:32 am

  One Response to “Know Newt? No Newt!”

  1. I reposted, Dave. Thanks for the in-depth cov­er­age and sources.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Content Protected Using Blog Protector By: PcDrome.