Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2    3    4  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Gov. Ralph Northam admits he was in 1984 yearbook photo showing figures in blackface, KKK hood

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 19502
(19562 all sites)
Registered: 2/9/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/7/2019 at 09:18 PM
quote:
Nice rainbow by Capitol Butte there btw


Thanks!...Timing, just got lucky

 

____________________
Try hard not to offend; Try harder not to be offended

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9456
(9481 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Online

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 08:15 AM
As has been stated, Democrats were early and out front on this. Now that it has spiraled into a full-blown cluster-f, I think everyone is confused on how they proceed, so it seems the vigor has died down. I'll say this, when it comes to protests, sit ins, calls for change, outrage...the left is way better at that then the right. So, it does get even more attention and traction when the left is targeting something or someone on the right just because they are better at it and more people on that side seem to care more. For me, this is a Virginia thing and whatever they decide to do with their leadership and accusations is their business.
 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 19502
(19562 all sites)
Registered: 2/9/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 10:45 AM
quote:
I'll say this, when it comes to protests, sit ins, calls for change, outrage...the left is way better at that then the right.


They certainly lead the way when it comes to being offended.

 

____________________
Try hard not to offend; Try harder not to be offended

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3924
(3930 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 11:46 AM
quote:
quote:
I'll say this, when it comes to protests, sit ins, calls for change, outrage...the left is way better at that then the right.


They certainly lead the way when it comes to being offended.


Fact or opinion? Basis?

This also begs a bigger picture of which side is more diverse & inclusive as opposed to which side attempts to restrict (examples - woman's right to choose, voter suppression, equal pay, etc.). So offensive actions many times have reactions, and actions can consequences.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 19502
(19562 all sites)
Registered: 2/9/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 11:54 AM
quote:
quote:
quote:
I'll say this, when it comes to protests, sit ins, calls for change, outrage...the left is way better at that then the right.


They certainly lead the way when it comes to being offended.


Fact or opinion? Basis?

This also begs a bigger picture of which side is more diverse & inclusive as opposed to which side attempts to restrict (examples - woman's right to choose, voter suppression, equal pay, etc.). So offensive actions many times have reactions, and actions can consequences.


I am Pro-Choice and believe you must be a Citizen and present a Valid I.D. to vote.

That being said it is definitely my opinion and nothing more when I write "I believe the left is more easily offended".

 

____________________
Try hard not to offend; Try harder not to be offended

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4853
(4848 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 12:08 PM
quote:
That being said it is definitely my opinion and nothing more when I write "I believe the left is more easily offended".


Pot meet kettle.

 

Peach Master



Karma:
Posts: 710
(710 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 12:17 PM
quote:
I am Pro-Choice


I think, given the narrow rules of left/right, that makes you a leftie.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 19502
(19562 all sites)
Registered: 2/9/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 01:13 PM
quote:
quote:
I am Pro-Choice


I think, given the narrow rules of left/right, that makes you a leftie.


And my "Build the wall stance"?...

 

____________________
Try hard not to offend; Try harder not to be offended

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4853
(4848 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 03:43 PM
quote:
And my "Build the wall stance"?...


Foolish. Cracking down on visa overstays would have a much greater affect.



[Edited on 2/8/2019 by BoytonBrother]

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4112
(4110 all sites)
Registered: 8/26/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 05:45 PM
quote:
quote:
And my "Build the wall stance"?...


Foolish. Cracking down on visa overstays would have a much greater affect.



Build a roof!

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 19502
(19562 all sites)
Registered: 2/9/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 09:35 PM
https://youtu.be/5aPbefau2Zc

Should Jimmy Kimmel resign?

 

____________________
Try hard not to offend; Try harder not to be offended

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3064
(3063 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 09:40 PM
quote:
https://youtu.be/5aPbefau2Zc

Should Jimmy Kimmel resign?


No, since he hates President Trump he gets a pass from the tolerant left.

 

____________________

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4853
(4848 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 09:57 PM
If ABC determines there is a financial or reputational risk, he will be fired. The victim card wonít work.
 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 19502
(19562 all sites)
Registered: 2/9/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/8/2019 at 10:00 PM
https://youtu.be/OEp5P_Aq3v4

Should Jimmy Fallon resign?

 

____________________
Try hard not to offend; Try harder not to be offended

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4853
(4848 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/9/2019 at 07:37 AM
If there is financial risk for the company, then yes. What donít you understand about this?
 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9456
(9481 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Online

  posted on 2/9/2019 at 11:09 AM
quote:
quote:
And my "Build the wall stance"?...


Foolish. Cracking down on visa overstays would have a much greater affect.



[Edited on 2/8/2019 by BoytonBrother]


Great, let's do both! Personally, I have always wanted more action in all areas to address the illegal immigration problem I have long said, let's throw employers in jail who knowingly hire illegals. Let's come down on every aspect of this problem as hard as we can.

quote:
If ABC determines there is a financial or reputational risk, he will be fired. The victim card wonít work.

quote:
If there is financial risk for the company, then yes. What donít you understand about this?


Stepping in here on my own behalf, not trying to speak for BigV or anyone. But I wonder, are you condoning putting monetary reasons ahead of moral justification? I mean, is wrong wrong, or is it only wrong in the scope of a financial impact? I actually agree, it is totally up to the networks and the sponsors and how they want to be viewed related to whom they choose to employ. That is how these things usually go, if the offense or action is so bad that there is negative PR coming from it, the network, business, agency, whatever will cut and run - it doesn't necessarily matter if the accusations are true or if issue in question is especially offensive, all that matters is distancing themselves from the individual in an act of self preservation and to avoid controversy. What I'm asking you BoytonBrother, as someone who I think tries to take the righteous stance and cries out against bigotry or racism...if Democrats or Republicans, or voters, or networks, choose to keep their relationship and endorsements for the accused individual because they do not think it will "cost" them anything, are you ok with that? It seems as if you are, when I would think you would be more in line with getting on the side of right vs wrong no matter other aspects or fallout could be in play.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3924
(3930 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/9/2019 at 01:02 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
And my "Build the wall stance"?...


Foolish. Cracking down on visa overstays would have a much greater affect.



[Edited on 2/8/2019 by BoytonBrother]


Great, let's do both! Personally, I have always wanted more action in all areas to address the illegal immigration problem I have long said, let's throw employers in jail who knowingly hire illegals. Let's come down on every aspect of this problem as hard as we can.

quote:
If ABC determines there is a financial or reputational risk, he will be fired. The victim card wonít work.

quote:
If there is financial risk for the company, then yes. What donít you understand about this?


Stepping in here on my own behalf, not trying to speak for BigV or anyone. But I wonder, are you condoning putting monetary reasons ahead of moral justification? I mean, is wrong wrong, or is it only wrong in the scope of a financial impact? I actually agree, it is totally up to the networks and the sponsors and how they want to be viewed related to whom they choose to employ. That is how these things usually go, if the offense or action is so bad that there is negative PR coming from it, the network, business, agency, whatever will cut and run - it doesn't necessarily matter if the accusations are true or if issue in question is especially offensive, all that matters is distancing themselves from the individual in an act of self preservation and to avoid controversy. What I'm asking you BoytonBrother, as someone who I think tries to take the righteous stance and cries out against bigotry or racism...if Democrats or Republicans, or voters, or networks, choose to keep their relationship and endorsements for the accused individual because they do not think it will "cost" them anything, are you ok with that? It seems as if you are, when I would think you would be more in line with getting on the side of right vs wrong no matter other aspects or fallout could be in play.


There can be no wall.

The guy who railed in his campaign & still does against illegal immigration depends upon illegal immigrants for his resorts. What applies to the rest of us & USA companies does not apply to the Build The Wall Prez. I guess this doesn't make him a hypocrite? Not only did they work during the construction phases, but illegal immigrants have continued to work in multiple capacities at most of Trump Resorts. So much for the e-verify Trump boasted about. I believe I read they had e-verify at 3 of 12 resorts. Goose / gander?

"More than 100 undocumented immigrants worked at Trump's Bedminster resort during construction"

https://thehill.com/latino/429136-more-than-100-undocumented-immigrants-wor ked-at-trumps-bedminster-resort-during

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6829
(6829 all sites)
Registered: 7/18/2010
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/9/2019 at 01:13 PM
BUILD A CLUE
 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4853
(4848 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/9/2019 at 03:04 PM
quote:
What I'm asking you BoytonBrother, as someone who I think tries to take the righteous stance and cries out against bigotry or racism...if Democrats or Republicans, or voters, or networks, choose to keep their relationship and endorsements for the accused individual because they do not think it will "cost" them anything, are you ok with that? It seems as if you are, when I would think you would be more in line with getting on the side of right vs wrong no matter other aspects or fallout could be in play.


Great question. I understand most of us have our biases and axes to grind, but not everyone does have them. Our politicians and judges should be among the latter so as to always put logic and reason first, and not let biases get in the way. The choice to paint your face black understably creates doubt and questions.......there shouldn't be doubt and questions when it comes to fair law-making. Mistakes like that can't be made when governing a municipality and its constituents. So yes, whether Democrat or Republican, I'd want them to step down to avoid any possibility of prejudiced law-making.

In BIGV's example, however, it's a comedy talk show. Capitalism should ultimatley determine what happens because it's entertainment, and it should never be censored. If a network hired Ted Nugent to do a talk show, and it garnered enough viewers to be profitable, then more power to them all. BIGV's posts suggest he thinks it's unfair and a double-standard for Roseanne to be fired, but Kimmel and Fallon get a pass, playing the victim card as usual. But lets keep it real....one is clearly a hostile racist bigot, and the other isn't. To suggest that they are the same is just silly and childish. So, to answer your question, if Fallon and Kimmel did something that was clearly hostile, racist, and bigoted, then yes, I'd be against it and stop watching, and if they got fired because of the financial harm they caused ABC, then they made their own bed.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4853
(4848 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/9/2019 at 03:04 PM


[Edited on 2/9/2019 by BoytonBrother]

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9456
(9481 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Online

  posted on 2/9/2019 at 03:50 PM
quote:
quote:
What I'm asking you BoytonBrother, as someone who I think tries to take the righteous stance and cries out against bigotry or racism...if Democrats or Republicans, or voters, or networks, choose to keep their relationship and endorsements for the accused individual because they do not think it will "cost" them anything, are you ok with that? It seems as if you are, when I would think you would be more in line with getting on the side of right vs wrong no matter other aspects or fallout could be in play.


Great question. I understand most of us have our biases and axes to grind, but not everyone does have them. Our politicians and judges should be among the latter so as to always put logic and reason first, and not let biases get in the way. The choice to paint your face black understably creates doubt and questions.......there shouldn't be doubt and questions when it comes to fair law-making. Mistakes like that can't be made when governing a municipality and its constituents. So yes, whether Democrat or Republican, I'd want them to step down to avoid any possibility of prejudiced law-making.

In BIGV's example, however, it's a comedy talk show. Capitalism should ultimatley determine what happens because it's entertainment, and it should never be censored. If a network hired Ted Nugent to do a talk show, and it garnered enough viewers to be profitable, then more power to them all. BIGV's posts suggest he thinks it's unfair and a double-standard for Roseanne to be fired, but Kimmel and Fallon get a pass, playing the victim card as usual. But lets keep it real....one is clearly a hostile racist bigot, and the other isn't. To suggest that they are the same is just silly and childish. So, to answer your question, if Fallon and Kimmel did something that was clearly hostile, racist, and bigoted, then yes, I'd be against it and stop watching, and if they got fired because of the financial harm they caused ABC, then they made their own bed.


Thank you for that.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9456
(9481 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Online

  posted on 2/9/2019 at 04:11 PM
quote:

There can be no wall.

The guy who railed in his campaign & still does against illegal immigration depends upon illegal immigrants for his resorts. What applies to the rest of us & USA companies does not apply to the Build The Wall Prez. I guess this doesn't make him a hypocrite? Not only did they work during the construction phases, but illegal immigrants have continued to work in multiple capacities at most of Trump Resorts. So much for the e-verify Trump boasted about. I believe I read they had e-verify at 3 of 12 resorts. Goose / gander?

"More than 100 undocumented immigrants worked at Trump's Bedminster resort during construction"

https://thehill.com/latino/429136-more-than-100-undocumented-immigrants-wor ked-at-trumps-bedminster-resort-during


Martin, I say this to you as one of the contributors here I look forward to hearing from, I believe you have the ability to see the bigger picture.

You are you, I am me, Trump is Trump. Just because Trump says or does something contradictory regarding an issue (which is quite often), that should not discredit the issue at large.

Trump has never walked the walk. I would say "we should have more things made in the USA" and somebody might say "yeah well Trump doesn't make his stuff here". While that is true and I agree that ignores and in some ways, eliminates meaningful discussion that could be had on that issue.

Why would you say that there "can be no wall" just because there were illegal aliens working at Trump properties and Trump projects? I get that you want to further make Trump's hypocritical or even criminal actions known, but regardless of who or who didn't work for Trump's businesses, that should have nothing to do with the need of a wall to keep more illegals from entering.

We should have mandatory e-verify. I understand that Trump's businesses did not all use e-verify....but that doesn't mean anything for the overall issue. It might mean something specific to him and his credibility, but the fact of the matter is we need to have our employers check the status of prospective employees with a system that can give them a green or red light for hiring them. If the system clears them and the employee has presented fraudulent documentation to get hired, that isn't the employer's fault at that point, that is the system's fault. So in that case the employer should have no liability for illegally hiring them. The people we need to crack down on are the ones that look the other way or purposefully seek illegal aliens to hire. But first and foremost, everyone must be using the same system to check against creating a standard to judge everyone by. Why is there resistance to mandating a nationwide e-verify system for employers? We need that because that is part of what can decrease demand for illegal labor and if we can push that demand down then it has a positive effect on the flow coming in (or overstaying). That needs to be a big part of the overall enforcement to fight the problem - whether Trump uses it or not, the country should.

I know this forum has spiraled down and there isn't much in the way of good exchanges any more, but we make it what it is with our posts. I'm not trying to get you or anyone to stop criticizing Trump, bash away, there are certainly plenty of cause to do so. But when everything boils down to that we lose the ability to speak to each other and I like to think we can still have some of that here.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9855
(9854 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/9/2019 at 04:12 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
And my "Build the wall stance"?...


Foolish. Cracking down on visa overstays would have a much greater affect.



[Edited on 2/8/2019 by BoytonBrother]


Great, let's do both! Personally, I have always wanted more action in all areas to address the illegal immigration problem I have long said, let's throw employers in jail who knowingly hire illegals. Let's come down on every aspect of this problem as hard as we can.

quote:
If ABC determines there is a financial or reputational risk, he will be fired. The victim card wonít work.

quote:
If there is financial risk for the company, then yes. What donít you understand about this?


Stepping in here on my own behalf, not trying to speak for BigV or anyone. But I wonder, are you condoning putting monetary reasons ahead of moral justification? I mean, is wrong wrong, or is it only wrong in the scope of a financial impact? I actually agree, it is totally up to the networks and the sponsors and how they want to be viewed related to whom they choose to employ. That is how these things usually go, if the offense or action is so bad that there is negative PR coming from it, the network, business, agency, whatever will cut and run - it doesn't necessarily matter if the accusations are true or if issue in question is especially offensive, all that matters is distancing themselves from the individual in an act of self preservation and to avoid controversy. What I'm asking you BoytonBrother, as someone who I think tries to take the righteous stance and cries out against bigotry or racism...if Democrats or Republicans, or voters, or networks, choose to keep their relationship and endorsements for the accused individual because they do not think it will "cost" them anything, are you ok with that? It seems as if you are, when I would think you would be more in line with getting on the side of right vs wrong no matter other aspects or fallout could be in play.


There can be no wall.

The guy who railed in his campaign & still does against illegal immigration depends upon illegal immigrants for his resorts. What applies to the rest of us & USA companies does not apply to the Build The Wall Prez. I guess this doesn't make him a hypocrite? Not only did they work during the construction phases, but illegal immigrants have continued to work in multiple capacities at most of Trump Resorts. So much for the e-verify Trump boasted about. I believe I read they had e-verify at 3 of 12 resorts. Goose / gander?

"More than 100 undocumented immigrants worked at Trump's Bedminster resort during construction"

https://thehill.com/latino/429136-more-than-100-undocumented-immigrants-wor ked-at-trumps-bedminster-resort-during
This!

 

Peach Master



Karma:
Posts: 710
(710 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/9/2019 at 04:33 PM
quote:

I know this forum has spiraled down and there isn't much in the way of good exchanges any more, but we make it what it is with our posts. I'm not trying to get you or anyone to stop criticizing Trump, bash away, there are certainly plenty of cause to do so. But when everything boils down to that we lose the ability to speak to each other and I like to think we can still have some of that here.


I'm not jumping in to respond for Martin, but I also wish there were more exchanges than those who go off the rails when something gets interesting. There are people here who have expertise as well as a different perspective that is helpful when thinking about a topic.

IMO, RICO charges are coming for Trump within the next 5 years. So, we have the equivalent of Don Corleone in the WH & are trying to find the ways to discuss around that big glaring fact. I don't think it can be done. I do think we can be civil to each other.

Apologies to Martin.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3924
(3930 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/9/2019 at 04:52 PM
quote:
quote:

There can be no wall.

The guy who railed in his campaign & still does against illegal immigration depends upon illegal immigrants for his resorts. What applies to the rest of us & USA companies does not apply to the Build The Wall Prez. I guess this doesn't make him a hypocrite? Not only did they work during the construction phases, but illegal immigrants have continued to work in multiple capacities at most of Trump Resorts. So much for the e-verify Trump boasted about. I believe I read they had e-verify at 3 of 12 resorts. Goose / gander?

"More than 100 undocumented immigrants worked at Trump's Bedminster resort during construction"

https://thehill.com/latino/429136-more-than-100-undocumented-immigrants-wor ked-at-trumps-bedminster-resort-during


Martin, I say this to you as one of the contributors here I look forward to hearing from, I believe you have the ability to see the bigger picture.

You are you, I am me, Trump is Trump. Just because Trump says or does something contradictory regarding an issue (which is quite often), that should not discredit the issue at large.

Trump has never walked the walk. I would say "we should have more things made in the USA" and somebody might say "yeah well Trump doesn't make his stuff here". While that is true and I agree that ignores and in some ways, eliminates meaningful discussion that could be had on that issue.

Why would you say that there "can be no wall" just because there were illegal aliens working at Trump properties and Trump projects? I get that you want to further make Trump's hypocritical or even criminal actions known, but regardless of who or who didn't work for Trump's businesses, that should have nothing to do with the need of a wall to keep more illegals from entering.

We should have mandatory e-verify. I understand that Trump's businesses did not all use e-verify....but that doesn't mean anything for the overall issue. It might mean something specific to him and his credibility, but the fact of the matter is we need to have our employers check the status of prospective employees with a system that can give them a green or red light for hiring them. If the system clears them and the employee has presented fraudulent documentation to get hired, that isn't the employer's fault at that point, that is the system's fault. So in that case the employer should have no liability for illegally hiring them. The people we need to crack down on are the ones that look the other way or purposefully seek illegal aliens to hire. But first and foremost, everyone must be using the same system to check against creating a standard to judge everyone by. Why is there resistance to mandating a nationwide e-verify system for employers? We need that because that is part of what can decrease demand for illegal labor and if we can push that demand down then it has a positive effect on the flow coming in (or overstaying). That needs to be a big part of the overall enforcement to fight the problem - whether Trump uses it or not, the country should.

I know this forum has spiraled down and there isn't much in the way of good exchanges any more, but we make it what it is with our posts. I'm not trying to get you or anyone to stop criticizing Trump, bash away, there are certainly plenty of cause to do so. But when everything boils down to that we lose the ability to speak to each other and I like to think we can still have some of that here.


Ok Neb - will address a few of your points.

I said "there can be no wall" tongue in cheek as a result of the gross and factual hypocrisy of Trump's words vs actions. I have mixed emotions on a wall. He is a major abuser of his own campaign rhetoric. This should give pause to even his most ardent supporters, but I'm not sure they really care, because we've been told too many times that "Trump is different" or "that's just Donald". Sorry, that is unacceptable. He's an abuser on this issue and so many other issues. The others are for a different discussion.

I'm skeptical of the wall cost benefit to start off with. I'm also suspect of the dollar estimates which have been all over the board for the bottom line costs. Then there is the entire eminent domain issue. How many of the dedicated Trump voters who have land along the border would actually would be willing to be paid off for portions of their land? When the rubber hits the road, I'll bet you'd see a lot of these dedicated Trumpsters become less than enthusiastic over the taking of their property. Also, there are portions of the path that run through bodies of water, and that adds to the complexities / practicality of construction.

Right or wrong, a portion of our economy is dependent upon immigrants - some legal & some illegal. That's an issue that needs to be dealt with one way or another. A crack down on the illegals has its impact to many businesses. Again, I'm not making a case pro or con here. Instead I'm pointing out that there's an issue that we either turn our heads or deal with the fallout.

Then there is the biggest issue of all. Trump campaigned religiously that Mexico would pay for the wall. Many of his followers were suckered into the grand lie. It's absolutely pathetic on his part and his sycophants to pivot from that and now expect the American taxpayers to pay for wall that was nothing more than a catch phrase that contributed to his winning the election. Is was a con then and is a con now. But recently he has shifted on Mexico paying for the wall directly to now Mexico indirectly paying for it via new trade agreements and enhanced revenue. What a load he offers.

Border security comes in various flavors. A continuous wall seems impractical. Maybe sections are more realistic in conjunction with enhanced border security. We need to think in terms of today's world - tools, methods, and technology; not necessarily in old age ideas like a Great Wall Of China.

Hope that helps out. It's a start...maybe more I could post but enough for food for thought.

 
<<  1    2    3    4  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software

Privacy | Terms of Service | Report Infringement | Personal Data Management | Contact Us
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com