NEW YORK, Oct. 23, 2007

White House May Halt Anti-Radiation Pills

The Skinny: Plan Born Of Terror Fears Scrapped To Boost Confidence In Nuclear Power

  • The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which isn't sure that taking anti-radiation pills is really the best way to prevent thyroid cancer in the event of a terrorist attack on a nuclear reactor, was put in charge of the government's pill distribution program in July. Photo

    The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which isn't sure that taking anti-radiation pills is really the best way to prevent thyroid cancer in the event of a terrorist attack on a nuclear reactor, was put in charge of the government's pill distribution program in July.  (AP / CBS)

  • Interactive Nuclear Disasters

    Review some of the worst accidents in the history of nuclear power, see how the body responds to radiation exposure and find out if there's a nuclear plant near you.

(CBS)  The Skinny is Keach Hagey's take on the top news of the day and the best of the Internet.


Is the White House admitting that global warming is scarier than terrorism?

That seems to be the message behind USA Today's report that the Bush administration may scrap a plan to give anti-radiation pills to millions of people, five years after Congress ordered that the tablets be made available to anyone living within 20 miles of a nuclear reactor.

Congress issued the order based on fears that terrorists could attack a nuclear plant. The once-a-day pills protect the thyroid against ingested radioactive iodine by saturating it with harmless potassium iodide, thus guarding against thyroid cancer following radioactive exposure.

Back when the White House was focused on conjuring images of mushroom clouds to sell the Iraq war, it called potassium iodide pills crucial to preventing thyroid cancer. But now that it's looking like we might actually need all those nuclear reactors - plus a whole lot more of them - to power the country, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is arguing against distributing the pills.

"According to the NRC, the pills may not be the most effective way to prevent cancer and could undermine confidence in the U.S. nuclear plants," the paper reports.

In a sign of where he stands now, President Bush stripped the Health and Human Services of responsibility for the program and turned it over to the NRC in July.

The American Thyroid Association is furious. "If you entrust our kids' health to nuclear engineers instead of doctors," said Peter Crame, a former lawyer with the NRC and thyroid cancer advocate, "you are inviting disaster."

Phone Companies Seeking Immunity Donated To Senator

This morning's installment of Not Illegal But Still Totally Depressing Behavior In Washington comes courtesy of the New York Times.

The paper reports that executives at the two biggest phone companies contributed more than $42,000 to Sen. John Rockefeller IV, D-W.Va., this year while seeking his support for legal immunity for business participating in the National Security Agency eavesdropping.

The contributions come from "a Who's Who of executives" at AT&T and Verizon, starting with the chief executives and including at least 50 executives and lawyers, according to campaign finance reports.

Rockefeller, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, emerged last week as the most important supporter of immunity in devising a compromise plan with Senate Republicans and the Bush administration, the paper reports.

A measure approved by the committee on Thursday would add restrictions on the eavesdropping and extent retroactive immunity to carriers that participated in it. The companies face big lawsuits from customers who say their privacy was violated when the telecoms helped the government snoop on them without warrants.

Rockefeller denies that the sudden surge in telecom contributions swayed his opinion. One of his supporters backs him up by pointing out the obvious: the guy's name is John D. Rockefeller IV.

"That these phone companies are going to focus their lobbying efforts where their business interests are is no revelation," said Matt Bennett, vice president for Third Way, a moderate Democraticy policy group that has supported immunity for phone carriers. "That's the standard Washington way of doing business. But you're not going to buy a Rockefeller."

Incoming!

The search continued yesterday for one of two pieces of luggage that vanished on Sunday after a cargo door on an airplane apparently opened in flight, the New York Times reports.

Shortly after a plane took off from Chicago's Midway Airport, its controls indicated an air pressure problem, according to a spokeswoman for Atlantic Southeast Airlines, which operated the Delta flight to Atlanta.

The plane circled back and landed. None of the 70 passengers were injured, but the ground crew found a cargo door open. The Federal Aviation Administration said it was investigating the case.

A breakthrough happened on Monday when an employee at a railroad switching yard less than a mile from the airport found one of the missing pieces, a garment bag, on the ground.

The Times, at least, couldn't find anybody who'd ever heard of luggage falling out of a flying plane before. The airline spokeswoman said the airline was thankful that "no one has been hurt during this very rare incident."

But how can she be sure? The second bag, the Times reports, remains at large.

A NOTE TO READERS: The Skinny is available via e-mail. Click here and follow the directions to register to receive it in your inbox each weekday morning.


©MMVII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Video and Galleries from CBS Evening News: The Skinny

Add a Comment See all 75 Comments
by likeitis5050 October 22, 2007 11:14 AM PDT
I find it so curious how all Hispanics/Latinos do not differentiate between legal and illegal, even when it comes to referring to what Americans do and don%u2019t do when it comes to them. I hear illegal immigrants grousing about how ungrateful Americans are toward their presence here, and I am just amazed. They really don%u2019t %u2018get it%u2019. I also find it troubling that documented and legal immigrants feel so threatened by the crack down, thinking they will, somehow, end up deported. Since we can%u2019t even prosecute businesses for intentionally hiring illegals, we certainly can%u2019t punish legally documented or naturalized immigrants. And on certain military forts, illegals are allowed to set the ''date'' for their deportation to allow them to work until they save enough money to turn around and apply legally. Isn''t this an accommodating nation? I don''t know how illegals can complain.
Reply to this comment
by jerr11 October 22, 2007 11:21 AM PDT
No, but she''ll make me run for the bathroom.

Reply to this comment
by vancouverboo October 22, 2007 11:29 AM PDT
Blacks are going to vote for him anyway. It''s the racist thing. So that leaves white women. Can she take them away from Hillary? Try guilt, Oprey.
Reply to this comment
by olebd October 22, 2007 11:30 AM PDT
If Oprah sends me 3 millions dollars....I''ll vote for him.
Reply to this comment
by pared1 October 22, 2007 11:31 AM PDT
If Oprah supports him then I would rather walk on fire than vote for him.
Reply to this comment
by missingamerica October 22, 2007 11:34 AM PDT
Oprah would have a lot more influence on me if she said who NOT to vote for - phrased as "OK, vote for whomever you will, but whoever you vote for do your country a favor and don''t vote for ''X''".

Be far more interesting to watch the reaction, too.
Reply to this comment
by nirak2-2009 October 22, 2007 11:42 AM PDT
Since I am Canadian, I can''t vote but if I did, it sure would not be because of Oprah.
Reply to this comment
by gunnerv1 October 22, 2007 12:06 PM PDT
Better yet, Can Oprah get little Hussain to put on an American Flag pin?
Reply to this comment
by l69jmont October 22, 2007 12:07 PM PDT
If you are looking to lose weight or redecorate your house, you should ask Oprah for her opinion. But come on America, YOUR vote is very important.. do some research and make up your own mind. Oprah is a smart lady, but most celebrities who endorse a candidate, can''t even manage their own lives and we should listen to them?
Reply to this comment
by l69jmont October 22, 2007 12:12 PM PDT
If you are looking to lose weight or redecorate your house, ask Oprah''s opinion. Come on Amercica, YOUR VOTE is way too important! Do some research, listen to the debates and choose wisely! Oprah is a smart lady, but mose celebrities who endorse candidates can''t even manage their own lives and we should listen to them?
Reply to this comment
by oleander8 October 22, 2007 12:25 PM PDT
"Winfrey, made the 800-page Russian classic Anna Karenina a best seller in 2004 just by telling her viewers to read it."

Please - recommending a good book is a little different than electing a president.
Reply to this comment
by blindersoff October 22, 2007 12:29 PM PDT
The statement "blacks will vote for him" is ignorant, Hillary Clinton leads among blacks. All blacks don''t vote together, as all whites don''t vote together.
Reply to this comment
by wtf1999 October 22, 2007 12:35 PM PDT
If Oprah endorses and wants to vote for Barack Obama, let her do so. That is HER choice. However, I will neither be swayed by Oprah, nor any other celebrity when it comes to MY VOTE. I am smart enough to make my own decisions.

In my view, celebrities should stick to entertainment.
Reply to this comment
by prairiefox1 October 22, 2007 12:37 PM PDT
JUST WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THAT OPRAH IS CREDIBLE ENOUGH TO ADVISE ANYONE? SHE IS ONLY A ENTERTAINER
(A PLAY ACTOR)! IF SHE HAD ABILITY TO BE IN POLITICS SHE WOULD NOT BE ON TV TALK SHOW! GRANTED SHE HAS MADE THE MONEY BUT BEFORE YOU TAKE HER POLITICAL ADVICE CONSULT FORREST GUMP!
Reply to this comment
by scoliosuxs October 22, 2007 12:42 PM PDT
I don''t care about celebrity anything. They put their pants on one leg at a time just like everyone else. They have their own hidden agendas in their own little worlds of make believe that they live on a daily basis. Couldn''t care less- they have curtains on voting booths for a reason.
Reply to this comment
by prairiefox1 October 22, 2007 12:42 PM PDT
BRAAACCCK! VERY TIME I HEAR THAT NAME I MAKE A MAD DASH TO THE LAVATORY !
Reply to this comment
by averjane October 22, 2007 12:44 PM PDT
She has a huge following. She''s a good actress, that she is, but how does she have this affect on all the people who swear by her? Book club, etc. Too many people (mostly women) with too much time on their hands. Maybe they need to get out and get a job. Same with all the soap opera fans. I used to watch soaps and gossiped about it like crazy. Then I grew up and got a real job. But some are just pampered wives and caregivers. They''re crazy about her so I think they would mindlessly do whatever she recommends. Some people just need someone to tell them what to do. Once they find someone to fill that spot, then they do not have to think for themselves.
Reply to this comment
by prairiefox1 October 22, 2007 12:54 PM PDT
BAARRRAAACCCK! EVERY TIME I HEAR THAT NAME I MAKE A MAD DASH TO THE LAVATORY !

Reply to this comment
by erasmus6 October 22, 2007 12:57 PM PDT
I love Oprah but I think that it was very irresponsible on her part to back Obama knowing how people will BLINDLY do what ever she says.

Reply to this comment
by jhamilton918 October 22, 2007 1:05 PM PDT
No, Oprah cannot influence me in who I will vote for. I love Oprah for all that she does but she is not my conscience.
Reply to this comment
by gdig60804 October 22, 2007 1:06 PM PDT
I don''t think people are going base their vote just because of Oprah. People are going to vote for someone experienced. Someone who can get us out of this mess Bush put us in. To many people are losing there jobs and foreclosures are at there ultimate high. I don''t think voting for someone because there black makes them able to handle the job of presidency. If Obama was any other race than African American than Oprah would not be backing him.
Reply to this comment
by drivelphobe October 22, 2007 1:31 PM PDT
Are you kdding? Her support looks to be race based, even if she claims it isn''t. She is just another super-rich entertainer with no more sense than anyone else. I don''t even consider the opinions of entertainers. They should just entertain and be thankful every minute that they have been so successful and keep their opinions to themselves.
Reply to this comment
by erasmus6 October 22, 2007 1:51 PM PDT
"I don''''t even consider the opinions of entertainers. They should just entertain and be thankful every minute that they have been so successful and keep their opinions to themselves." posted by drivelphobe

I agree! Because there are people who are obsessed with celebrity and can''t think for themselves, I think the celebrities should keep who they are voting for to themselves.

I wonder what would happen if ALL celebrity ceased to exist? Geez, I think the world would collapse. What would people do? Some wouldn''t be able to function, I think.

Well, in the U.S. anyways. Canada isn''t AS obsessed or addicted to celebrity. :) Vancouver is supposed to be "Hollywood North" but I don''t see the obsession or media frenzy that goes on down there.
Reply to this comment
by rohink-2009 October 22, 2007 2:34 PM PDT
No. Just like I won''t vote for Hillary because she is a woman. I take voting for President very seriously.
Reply to this comment
by aris-d October 22, 2007 2:44 PM PDT
What Oprah does behind the closed curtain on voting day is her business and hers alone, just as what you do is yours. Truthfully, what she does with her show is her business alone too. She built it from nothing on her own with hard work and built her appeal by trying to help common people with common problems. I think she sees the same conviction in Barack Obama. I for one am happy that she decided to back Senator Obama. I don''t see it as shoving her opinion down our collective throats, I see it as leveling the field a little bit. Hillary has had two decades of name recognition on her side. John Edwards had his shot on the VP ticket and everyone should know who he is too. Obama is the new guy on the scene and I think Oprah feels complelled to share his story with as many as she can reach. That''s what a movement of change is about. And she, like all of us, has the right to her own pursuit of happiness. She is not the only one that is completely impressed by Obama and it is her prerogative to give him a platform to deliver his message and give people the opportunity to make an educated decision instead of a popularity contest. This election is for the leader of the free world and should not be taken lightly. I hope you all watch and come away as impressed as many of us.
Reply to this comment
by barbjc1 October 22, 2007 2:44 PM PDT
I am very angry at OPRAH for endorsing Obama. I have a gut feeling it is because he is half black. Has she forgotten it was WHITE grandparents that raised him? The man has a background that is JUST TOO CLEAN. I did have a lot of respect for her, no longer.
Reply to this comment
by feedback3-2009 October 22, 2007 2:45 PM PDT
Black people should definitely only vote for black people thereby ensuring that racism will not be a factor in this election.

Anyone listening to what the candidates have to offer on resolving issues is ridiculous.
Reply to this comment
by mudrose-2009 October 22, 2007 2:56 PM PDT
NO! SHE CAN''T!
Reply to this comment
by ramos937 October 22, 2007 3:16 PM PDT
Oprah is a nice lady and when I want entertainment, she is tops. But when I want advice on a serious subject, I look elsewhere.
Reply to this comment
by greeneyes222 October 22, 2007 3:18 PM PDT
Can Oprah make me vote for Obama? Not even close. This is a joke, right?
Reply to this comment
by jowand October 22, 2007 4:03 PM PDT
WHO CARES
Reply to this comment
by scrapper1979 October 22, 2007 4:34 PM PDT
My husband doesn''t tell me who to vote for and I respect his opinion a lot more than Oprah''s. Nothing against her, but voting for President is a personal, private thing. No one should tell anyone else who to vote for and people should vote for who will do the best job - not just "I''m voting for Obama because he''s half black" or "I''m voting for Hillary because she''s a woman" or any other inane reason. Vote for who will work the hardest and who''s goals align the best with your own ideals.
Reply to this comment
by erasmus6 October 22, 2007 4:51 PM PDT
"I for one am happy that she decided to back Senator Obama." posted by Aris-D

Ordinarily, I wouldn''t see a problem with it but when you have millions of people who follow her BLINDLY, WITHOUT THOUGHT, I find it completely irresponsible.

You want people to vote for someone because they have watched and listened to that person, to see what they are about and if they are capable of running the country. Now hopefully, the majority of people will use COMMON SENSE but I wouldn''t hold my breath because from reading alot of the comments on this website over the past months, I haven''t seen too many that have any.

Yes, there are other celebrities that back different candidates but none have a following like Oprah, where the fans would follow her blindly into the pits of hell without question. Of course not everyone is that stupid but some most definitely are, they will do whatever she says, no questions asked. And no I am not saying that Oprah would ask that of her fans.:)

The United States has a huge problem right now and they need to be EXTRA CAREFUL about who they vote in next time and maybe Obama isn''t the greatest choice. Let me put it this way, I don''t think there is room for any mistakes, this time around. People need to be THINKING very hard about their decision.
Reply to this comment
by erasmus6 October 22, 2007 4:56 PM PDT
"God I hope not. We do not need Obams in the white house. I would rather Bush be there tham him. Please GOD don''''t let this man in the white House. Oprah needs to go back where she came from. The street, selling her self to make money." posted by lawandorder7

Okay now, you are just plain and simply an IDIOT.
Reply to this comment
by savetheus2 October 22, 2007 5:23 PM PDT
***** Stop The War & Corporate Corruption *****

Why Don''t You Know Ron Paul?

The corporate media will not give Ron Paul any Exposure. Because, NBC is owned by GE. GE is one of the world''s largest war-makers. They make things that go boom. They make $Billions on war. A Ron Paul administration would be bad for business. CNN is owned by AOL. Majority share holder is Saudi Royal Talal who is also partners with GHWBush in The Carlyle Group. Another major warmaker. And on and on. You get the picture. This is why they are doing a Media Blackout on him. Because they don''t WANT YOU TO KNOW THE TRUTH!

Who is Ron Paul?
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/about

** Ron Paul Won The GOP Debate Lastnight!

Who Owns The Media: http://www.mediaowners.com

RESTORE YOUR LIBERTY & FREEDOM
SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT RON PAUL 2008!

He Will:

** Stop Iraq War Immediately
** Eliminate IRS
** Eliminate Federal Reserve
** Eliminate Government Wasteful Spending
** Restore America''s Work Force & Values
** Restore America''s Freedom!

GET UP AND GET ACTIVE TODAY!!!
Paul Is America''s Last Hope!

Join The ReVoLuTiOn In Your City Stand Up America:
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/cities/
Reply to this comment
by mistered9 October 22, 2007 5:59 PM PDT
I WOULDdn''t vote for anyone backed by Oprah.

Reply to this comment
by jerr11 October 22, 2007 6:25 PM PDT
An endorsement from Oprah just says one thing, "This guy is a certified airhead."

I''ll vote for Dr Phil and that weirdo who loves to handle body parts, what''s his name, Mehmet OZ!!

LOL

Reply to this comment
by sftodd October 22, 2007 6:32 PM PDT
Why do white men hate Oprah so much? Because she has totally whipped them at their own game! You have to laugh at that! I know I laugh my a$$ off every time a white guy spouts off about Oprah. She got them right where it stings! LOL!
Reply to this comment
by jacksteen1 October 22, 2007 6:33 PM PDT
The silly ***** that watch Okra Winfrey''s gabfest on TV, who read the books she has suddenly ''discovered'' (yet they have been on every sophomore class reading list since 1968) and who put trust in her housemonkey "doctor" Dr. Phil are to be pitied, surely not emulated in any way.

Okra''s populist rantings and ********* diet tips keep middle-aged women glued to their TV sets...all well and good for Tubbo''s paycheck, but let''s not get too stupid about this.

She''s an entertainer - a BLACK entertainer - who doesn''t realize that SuperBlack Barry Obama jumped the gun by about 10 years and should have waited for his chance. HE BLEW IT - and she risks blowing what little hold she has on her own community by backing his failed, flawed candidacy.

But nobody really cares about her OR him.

He doesn''t have a fiddler''s chance in HELL.
Reply to this comment
by likeitis5050 October 22, 2007 7:00 PM PDT
If I was a belt, Oprah couldn''t make me buckle.
Reply to this comment
by keithle1 October 22, 2007 7:59 PM PDT
I''m sure some idiots will vote for Obama based on what Oprah says.
Reply to this comment
by frb01 October 22, 2007 8:36 PM PDT
How come so American''s are anti-American dream, where your children are supposed to do better than you. Or that any child can think about being President. People tear down Edwards because he made his money as an attorney. If we hate the legal system so much, then we need to change the system. Every one says Obama should have waited, waited for what? Mario Cuomo waited, his time passed him buy. I admire Obama''s ambition. Is his different than Hillary, and the media has already annointed her. If Oprah decides to get involved, and gets people interested and perhaps encourages them to register, I say that is a good thing. Martin Luther King marched on Washington and wished this dream. I think that Barack Obama and his family being involved in the process is a good thing for America. I think a lot of Americans'' will be disappointed if our choices end up being Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton. The only thing we are waiting for is change, I think we have waited long enough.
Reply to this comment
by mattcbsmatt October 22, 2007 8:36 PM PDT
She is JUST MONKEYING AROUND and enjoying it
Reply to this comment
by sftodd October 22, 2007 8:49 PM PDT
He doesn''''t have a fiddler''''s chance in HELL.
Posted by JackSteen1 at 06:33 PM : Oct 22, 2007

Hmm, me thinks the LADY doth protest too much. Little JackSteen1, pray tell, who does have a chance?
Reply to this comment
by sonotso October 22, 2007 11:55 PM PDT

'' ... if mortal suffering seems to evolve toward eternal ecstacsy, then eternal ecstasy prevails, except: survival of less fit hints that less fit killets must occupy 99 plus % of space time to survive, but that''s only from a mortal suffering perspective ... ''

'' ... big business is capable of employing full time staffs devoted to visiting sick beds in order to afford them market share and public awareness; however, a small specialist company would also be capable of paying entitys small and large to provide such staffs temporarily or long term ... ''

'' ... ideally, each folk would visit 33 sick beds each day, but: because that is not likely, averages might be 1.3 billion sick beds visited per day for 43 million to 1.3 billion dollars, with 40 million folk makeing such visits and 1.2 million of those answering lots of questions for 1.3 million to 40 million of the dollars ... ''

'' ... traditional corporate vanagement should be replaced by 3-d realtime journals of traveling journalists paid to keep hundreds or thousands or tens thousands of small companys informed ... ''

Reply to this comment
by sonotso October 22, 2007 11:56 PM PDT

'' ... war rapes babies, u.s. spends more on domestic war than most countrys together spend globally on war ... ''

'' ... u.s. farmers were taught to make folk pay for lunch and nearly all u.s. farms were forclosed on or sold to avoid forclosure ... ''

'' ... u.s. business refused to feed starving africans and south americans and asians for the 3rd world had no money, yet taught them to speak english and play capitalist to exploit cheap labor / goods markets .. nations gladly gave up their languages and religions and cultures so not to starve to death and thanked the u.s. for shipping each dollar and operation overseas, and for even picking up the tab to do so ... ''

'' ... most folk most time dance get well feed world songs rallied round hundreds millions sick beds drifting tens millions spore bloom weed dragon trail fickle first aid lunch farm cottage studio trail crossing yseedsberry trail groups (33 sick beds @ 33 villages of 300 for 3.3 cents to $1.00 in swapped tips per sick bed / village) ... and still find time 20 mins per night for hike naked dance dressed get sick tax world porno ... ''

'' ... of course you have options, you have the option to invest all your money and votes in baby raping warfare ... ''
Reply to this comment
by sonotso October 22, 2007 11:57 PM PDT


'' ... not a god lording over other gods, not a unwilling unwilling victim in eternal hell, not some flicket in oblivion: eternal storyboards swimming drifting infinite oceans of eternal storyboards ... ''



'' ... maybe edible algae and mushroom knick knack artwork could store and possibly even lever or multiply water molecules and microbes ... maybe since we can turn acorns into atomic stars, we can turn acorns into atomic stomachs and forego all the consumption anyways ... ''

Reply to this comment
by kaelinda October 23, 2007 3:46 AM PDT
Sneer all you want at Oprah''s influence over voters, but influence she has. Sneer if you will at Obama''s appeal to non-black voters, but appeal he has.
**********
The illegal immigration problem is that almost any form of citizenship proof can be forged. Maybe everyone should be required to put his or her fingerprint on his or her ID or drivers'' license, so that the print can be compared with the DMV records - and if there''s a match, the person is legal; if there is no match, the person is illegal. Hey, this is also a way to make every American carry a photo ID with his or her print on it!

That''s the only way I know of to make sure that the documents that are presented are true and accurate and legitimate.
Reply to this comment
by lovecbs6 October 23, 2007 7:50 AM PDT
You know what! I don''t give a *** what Oprah says. Anyone who listens to Oprah on how to vote or on politics is stupid. She just has an opinon like anyone else. And I hope just because she is Oprah that people are not swade be her.It would be rediculous. If she wants to recommend a book fine. However i hope folks have there own brains and vote the way they want to. And not the way Oprah would like them to. Oprah just stick to want you know. your little talk show and your books. and do me a favor. and JUST SHUT UP. YOU ARE NOT THAT IMPORTANT. AND YOU DONOT IMPRESS ME ONE BIT... NEXT QUESTION?????? GREG BOONE MAD IN PA...AND LIVING IN .. CLINTON COUNTRY.... WE ARE PROUD..... GO HILLARY...GO....
Reply to this comment
by lovecbs6 October 23, 2007 7:57 AM PDT
Kaelinda, GROW UP. IF OPRAH HAS INFLUENCE OVER YOU. THEN YOU NEED TO FOLLOW EVERYTHING SHE SAYS. AND YOU ARE KNOW DOUBT PETHETIC. AS A HUMAN BEING. CAN''T YOU THINK FOR YOURSELF. I LOVE CHER, HOWEVER I WILL NOT LET HER HAVE ANY INFLUENCE OVER WHO I VOTE FOR. EVEN IF SHE CAN KNOCKING ON MY FRONT DOOR. GET A LIFE.OH THAT''S RIGHT MAYBE YOU NEED OPRAH''S INFLUENCE FOR THAT TOO.. GREG BOONE ..
Reply to this comment
See all 75 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR
  • Viewed
  • Commented
Latest News
Featured Blogs