The Exploitation of Trayvon Martin
The Exploitation of Trayvon Martin
The absurdity of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton is that they want to make a movement out of an anomaly. Black teenagers today are afraid of other black teenagers, not whites.
By SHELBY STEELE
Two tragedies are apparent in the Trayvon Martin case. The first is obvious: A teenager—unarmed and committing no crime—was shot dead. Dressed in a "hoodie," a costume of menace, he crossed paths with a man on the hunt for precisely such clichés of menace. Added to this—and here is the rub—was the fact of his dark skin.
Maybe it was more the hood than the dark skin, but who could argue that the skin did not enhance the menace of the hood at night and in the eyes of someone watching for crime. (Fifty-five percent of all federal prisoners are black though we are only 12% of the population.) Would Trayvon be alive today had he been walking home—Skittles and ice tea in hand—wearing a polo shirt with an alligator logo? Possibly. And does this make the ugly point that dark skin late at night needs to have its menace softened by some show of Waspy Americana? Possibly.
What is fundamentally tragic here is that these two young males first encountered each other as provocations. Males are males, and threat often evokes a narcissistic anger that skips right past reason and into a will to annihilate: "I will take you out!" There was a terrible fight. Trayvon apparently got the drop on George Zimmerman, but ultimately the man with the gun prevailed. Annihilation was achieved.
If this was all there was to it, the Trayvon/Zimmerman story would be no more than a cautionary tale, yet another admonition against the hair-trigger male ego. But this story brought reaction from the White House: "If I had a son he would look like Trayvon," said the president. The Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, ubiquitous icons of black protest, virtually battled each other to stand at the bereaved family's side—Mr. Jackson, in a moment of inadvertent honesty, saying, "There is power in blood . . . we must turn a moment into a movement." And then there was the spectacle of black Democrats in Congress holding hearings on racial profiling with Trayvon's parents featured as celebrities.
In fact Trayvon's sad fate clearly sent a quiver of perverse happiness all across America's civil rights establishment, and throughout the mainstream media as well. His death was vindication of the "poetic truth" that these establishments live by. Poetic truth is like poetic license where one breaks grammatical rules for effect. Better to break the rule than lose the effect. Poetic truth lies just a little; it bends the actual truth in order to highlight what it believes is a larger and more important truth.
The civil rights community and the liberal media live by the poetic truth that America is still a reflexively racist society, and that this remains the great barrier to black equality. But this "truth" has a lot of lie in it. America has greatly evolved since the 1960s. There are no longer any respectable advocates of racial segregation. And blacks today are nine times more likely to be killed by other blacks than by whites.
f Trayvon Martin was a victim of white racism (hard to conceive since the shooter is apparently Hispanic), his murder would be an anomaly, not a commonplace. It would be a bizarre exception to the way so many young black males are murdered today. If there must be a generalization in all this—a call "to turn the moment into a movement"—it would have to be a movement against blacks who kill other blacks. The absurdity of Messrs. Jackson and Sharpton is that they want to make a movement out of an anomaly. Black teenagers today are afraid of other black teenagers, not whites.
So the idea that Trayvon Martin is today's Emmett Till, as the Rev. Jackson has said, suggests nothing less than a stubborn nostalgia for America's racist past. In that bygone era civil rights leaders and white liberals stood on the highest moral ground. They literally knew themselves—given their genuine longing to see racism overcome—as historically transformative people. If the world resisted them, as it surely did, it only made them larger than life.
It was a time when standing on the side of the good required true selflessness and so it ennobled people. And this chance to ennoble oneself through a courageous moral stand is what so many blacks and white liberals miss today—now that white racism is such a defeated idea. There is a nostalgia for that time when posture alone ennobled. So today even the hint of old-fashioned raw racism excites with its potential for ennoblement.
For the Revs. Jackson and Sharpton, for the increasingly redundant civil rights establishment, for liberal blacks and the broader American left, the poetic truth that white racism is somehow the real culprit in this tragedy is redemption itself. The reason Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have become such disreputable figures on our cultural landscape is that they are such quick purveyors of poetic truth rather than literal truth.
The great trick of poetic truth is to pass itself off as the deep and essential truth so that hard facts that refute it must be dismissed in the name of truth. O.J. Simpson was innocent by the poetic truth that the justice system is stacked against blacks. Trayvon was a victim of racist stereotyping—though the shooter never mentioned his race until asked to do so.
There is now a long litany of racial dust-ups—from Tawana Brawley to the Duke University lacrosse players to the white Cambridge police officer who arrested Harvard professor Skip Gates a summer ago—in which the poetic truth of white racism and black victimization is invoked so that the actual truth becomes dismissible as yet more racism.
When the Cambridge cop or the Duke lacrosse players or the men accused of raping Tawana Brawley tried to defend themselves, they were already so stained by poetic truth as to never be entirely redeemed. No matter the facts—whether Trayvon Martin was his victim or his assailant—George Zimmerman will also never be entirely redeemed.
And this points to the second tragedy that Trayvon's sad demise highlights. Before the 1960s the black American identity (though no one ever used the word) was based on our common humanity, on the idea that race was always an artificial and exploitive division between people. After the '60s—in a society guilty for its long abuse of us—we took our historical victimization as the central theme of our group identity. We could not have made a worse mistake.
It has given us a generation of ambulance-chasing leaders, and the illusion that our greatest power lies in the manipulation of white guilt. The tragedy surrounding Trayvon's death is not in the possibility that it might have something to do with white racism; the tragedy is in the lustfulness with which so many black leaders, in conjunction with the media, have leapt to exploit his demise for their own power.
Mr. Steele is a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. Among his books is "White Guilt" (Harper/Collins, 2007).
************************************************* ****
Create your own visitor map
()()()()()()()()(()())()()()()()()()()()
The religion of Climate Science
Romney's Pending Sellout on Global Warming
EPA Endangers Human Health and Welfare
()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()
NOT EXACTLY FRONT PAGE NEWS
***
CONSTITUTION 101
History in Pictures
###
TODAY'S QUOTE
" If, as it should, the Supreme Court declares the individual mandate unconstitutional, it will be reaffirming our traditions, and not usurping them. The president, a former constitutional law teacher, should be ashamed of himself."
Stephen B. Presser
the Raoul Berger professor of legal history at Northwestern University School of Law and professor of business law at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management.
~~~~~~~~~~
"The enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table."
-Antonin Scalia
Reader Comments
Page: 1 — Blog Index
An Uncivil Income Tax System
Jeff Jacoby
Each year in the United States, an estimated 6.1 billion hours are spent complying with the federal tax code. I'm pretty sure at least half of those hours are spent by me.
With less than two weeks remaining before this year's tax returns are due, I've barely made a dent in my stack of forms, receipts, and instructions. Each year the prospect of doing my taxes looms more daunting and dismal than the year before. Each year I wonder where I'll find the time, never mind the patience, to get it done. Each year's tax ordeal seems to require more mental energy, more double-checking of math, more scouring of check registers and credit-card statements and brokerage records. And yet when I finally hit that "Send" button, I'm less certain than ever that I haven't inadvertently screwed something up. And if that's true for someone like me, whose financial arrangements are not especially abstruse, how much more miserable tax season must be for taxpayers whose circumstances are more elaborate.
Some people claim they file their tax returns cheerfully. They approvingly quote Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.'s dictum that "taxes are what we pay for civilized society." I quote instead that eminent commentator Dave Barry: "It's income-tax time again, Americans: time to gather up those receipts, get out those tax forms, sharpen up that pencil and stab yourself in the aorta."
Not surprisingly, the Internal Revenue Service embraces Holmes's words. They are chiseled over the entrance to the IRS headquarters in Washington, DC. Yet I doubt whether Holmes, who retired from the Supreme Court in 1932, would think there was anything civilized about what the federal tax system has turned into, or the burdens, confusions, and complexity it imposes on honest taxpayers.
When Holmes first expressed that sentiment about taxes and civilization in a 1904 speech, the federal income tax didn't even exist. That had changed by 1927, when Holmes's phrase appears in one of his dissenting opinions. But even then, all of federal tax law -- not just the Sixteenth Amendment and Revenue Act of 1913, but the entire corpus of related regulations, rulings, and forms -- took up fewer than 500 pages. Today, the Standard Federal Tax Reporter runs to 73,608 pages in 25 volumes, and consumes nine feet of shelf space.
Is it any wonder, then, that the paperwork, record-keeping, calculations, form-preparation, and filing procedures required to pay federal taxes have become one of the great soul-crushing time sinks in American life? Or that the National Taxpayer Advocate (the independent ombudsman within the IRS) declared flatly last year that "the most serious problem facing taxpayers – and the IRS – is the complexity of the Internal Revenue Code"? Or that the Tax Foundation concluded in 2005 that income-tax compliance costs amounted to a stunning $265.1 billion -- in effect, "a 22-cent … surcharge for every dollar the income tax system collects"?
By now the great majority of individual tax filers has decided that putting together their tax returns without paying for help isn't feasible. According to a 2011 MarketTools study, only 12 percent of US taxpayers still complete their federal income taxes without hiring an accountant, visiting a tax-preparation firm such as H&R Block, or buying tax-preparation software. I gave up trying to prepare my returns by hand years ago; like tens of millions of other Americans, I now put my fate in the hands of TurboTax.
All of which is terrific for the tax-preparation industry, and perhaps April is anything but the cruelest month for those who make their living as a CPA or own stock in Intuit (which makes TurboTax). For the nation as a whole, however, the labyrinthine tortures of our tax system have serious social consequences.
Our tax code's lack of clarity -- and the flood of special-interest giveaways and preferences that make it so cumbersome -- has turned innumerable taxpayers into cynics. Americans conclude that the whole setup is rigged, and that only a sucker doesn't bend the rules in order to pay less or finagle a bigger refund. How many people who wouldn't think of ripping off a local charity or business don't hesitate to cheat on their taxes? In such an environment, it isn't only compliance rates that suffer. Some of the civic virtue so important to a healthy society is lost as well. Jimmy Carter was right in 1976 when he called the US income tax "a disgrace to the human race." Thirty-six years later, it's more disgraceful -- and maddening -- than ever.
This whole "science' is based on lies......
Healthy polar bear count confounds doomsayers
The study shows that “the bear population is not in crisis as people believed,” said Drikus Gissing, Nunavut’s director of wildlife management. “There is no doom and gloom.”
Link
Did you even read the article? I mean beyond its title.
"The study’s conclusions drew concern from Andrew Derocher, a professor of biological sciences at the University of Alberta who has been studying polar-bear populations for years. Prof. Derocher said the 1,013 figure is derived from a range of 717 bears to 1,430. “It’s premature to draw many conclusions,” he said, adding that there were no comparative figures and the upper end of the range, 1,430, was highly unlikely.
Prof. Derocher also said some details in the survey pointed to a bear population in trouble. For example, the survey identified 50 cubs, which are usually less than 10 months old, and 22 yearlings, roughly 22 months old. That’s nearly one-third the number required for a healthy population, he said. “This is a clear indication that this population is not sustaining itself in any way, shape, or form.”
The above is from the same article you cite. So, reading this article, how can Drikius Gissing logically claim, "There is no doom and gloom"? The article certainly does not provide enough evidence for anyone to make this claim. Also, this study is of the main population of the western Hudson Bay region only. What studies are you able to provide of the other polar bear populations?
"But many Inuit communities said the researchers were wrong. They said the bear population was increasing and they cited reports from hunters who kept seeing more bears. Mr. Gissing said that encouraged the government to conduct the recent study, which involved 8,000 kilometres of aerial surveying last August along the coast and offshore islands."
Even this statement is said without any due merit. How was it confirmed that there are more sightings due simply to the fact that there are more bears and that it was not a matter of the bears being driven, from there being less sea ice, into areas they would not normally show such numbers.
So, this whole article actually skates on some pretty thin ice. Does it not?
and went on to say he had two car payments, three kids in school, and a second mortgage to pay for his vacation home............
Special agents from the Interior Department’s inspector general's office are questioning the two government scientists about the paper they wrote on drowned polar bears, suggesting mistakes were made in the math and as to how the bears actually died, and the department is eyeing another study currently underway on bear populations.
Biologist Charles Monnett, the lead scientist on the paper, was placed on administrative leave July 18. Fellow biologist Jeffrey Gleason, who also contributed to the study, is being questioned, but has not been suspended.
Investigators are also examining Monnet’s procurement of one of those research studies on polar bears conducted by Canada's University of Alberta, as well as the “disclosure of personal relationships and preparation of the scope of work,” according to a July 29 memo from the Interior Department's inspector general’s office.
In particular, investigators are asking questions about the peer review work on Monnett’s drowned polar bear paper, which was done by his wife, Lisa Rotterman,.... as well as Andrew Derocher,..... the lead researcher on the Canadian study under review by the inspector general's office.
Link
Ah! I missed that part. Does this negate what I said?
"Andrew Derocher,..... the lead researcher on the Canadian study under review by the inspector general's office."
"A federal judge today upheld the George W. Bush administration's decision to list the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act." Link
Wow. Just, wow. The article you cite is from 7 months ago. Do you have any updates to this? Also, is this an investigation that was conceived of by Senator Inhofe? The odor is familiar. Is there any wrong doings here? We will have to "wait and see". Are these familiar words to you? I am willing to wait for what the investigation finds and accept its findings. Are you?
LOL! You request my age as a rebuttal?
Let it suffice to say that, even if I was a slow learner, I have had plenty of time to acquire quite a lot of data and to turn this into knowledge.
Hmmmm. I had taken you as being a little older. My bad. Well, should that be the case, then you still have plenty of time to learn.
I'm very happy to hear that the polar bear population is currently in good shape. I don't wish for bad things just so I can be right. Nor do I bury my head in the sand and pretend that bad things won't really happen if I just don't look up, and ignore all the evidence. The polar bear issue is about habitat destruction. The habitat is the ice...which is melting. Now, it's not all going to melt this year or next. It's a slow process. But ten, twenty, thirty years, what then? Whatever way the ice goes, so go the bears. Maybe we can't stop that, maybe we can, or at least lessen the impact. What's wrong with that?
Finally, Lat, I can assure you that I'm not 12 or 13. And regardless of Rookie's age, he's certainly not the intelecual light-weight around here.
Bringing happiness to misanthropes...one day at a time
Just words just speeches. The end justifies the tactical lies. The Left can almost never be truthful about where they want to go and how they want to get there.Then after they are elected they set about doing the very things they said they wouldn't.
The Republicans are nailed to the wall when they are truthful. And when they are elected,fail miserably at getting things done.
I think I will stick to inept truth as opposed to successful lies.
There is no good news for them....what a waste of carbon
“SMART DIPLOMACY:” Canada: After Keystone, We’d Rather Sell Oil to China. “What Harper is saying is that Canada could make more money by creating a market for its oil rather than selling all of it solely to the US. In other words, the cost of Canadian oil will go up as the US is forced to compete with China.”
UPDATE: Related: Obama Regulations Hand a Strategic Mining Monopoly to . . . China. On rare-earth minerals.
Plus: Solyndra vs. Keystone: A Tale of Two Energy-Project Reviews. “Got that? A speculative ‘green’ energy project that in retrospect, once the rest of us saw the details, was obviously going to be a business disaster, and ended up costing the taxpayers over half a billion dollars, was approved after a ‘one-day review.’ Yet the president demanded that Keystone, a project with certain and vast energy output, be delayed for many more months so that it could be ‘adequately reviewed,’ despite the fact that it had already had years of review. And as a result our energy prices will now rise in the future, with no way of returning to the status quo. Just as the president told us he wanted them to when he ran four years ago.”
Plus: “One wonders what administration defenders are thinking as they watch this ongoing trainwreck. We know what they’re saying, but what are they thinking?”
MORE: Reader Ari Mendelson writes: “They called Dan Quayle stupid because he couldn’t spell ‘potato.’ Well, the effects of Dan Quayle’s stupidity, such as it was, could be cured in two seconds with a computer spell checker. Obama’s stupidity with the Keystone Pipeline? Not quite so easy to correct, now, is it?” I’m not sure Obama’s actions can be characterized as stupid. I think he knows what he’s doing.
MORE STILL: Prof. Stephen Clark writes:
All of these moves are consistent with a desire to see the domestic price of commodities rise. This is consistent with a belief that to do so makes alternative energy sources economically competitive (I’m not saying this makes economic sense) in the belief that we are entering a time of ever scarcer resources; and is also consistent with a desire to mitigate America’s relative strategic strength. If your overarching goal is to limit the ability of the US to act independently, then this combination of acts with others is not an anomaly nor is it the product of strategic oversight or blunder. This leads to several questions: Does the administration believe we are entering an era of ever scarcer resources and that their acts will force us to adapt before the real crunch hits? (This would indicate a belief that assumes a consensus that doesn’t exist.) What does the administration and its representatives think is the proper role for the US in the international system? How much independence should the US enjoy and is the ability to act independently seen as the potential for greater good or greater harm for the international system at large? Whose vision informs the president’s choices in these matters – and among those living what have they to say in response to these questions?
I think the time has passed for looking at these policies and acts as the product of incompetence or lack of coordination, and rather to ask what policy goals do they serve? These things should be openly discussed and laid out as part of the process leading to November’s decision.
Link
Polar Bears are very adaptive.
Ice water etc they know how to use it for their advantage.
Now the Narwhal that the Polar bear feeds on?
Now thats another story.
Countless Narwhals die every year when they are trapped by ice. They can only survive the winter by hanging around a single hole in the ice.
Hanging around the entire winter!
Now the polar bears take advantage of these poor stresses whales and feed on them when they come up for air.
Lack of Ice helps these fascinating creatures survive.
Polar bears can find a different food source.
Narwhals cant move 50 miles to another hole in the ice.
Why isnt there a cheer for the Narwhals freedom from ice and a boo for what those nasty polar bears do to them?
Reality of nature flag on!
"I think the time has passed for looking at these policies and acts as the product of incompetence or lack of coordination, and rather to ask what policy goals do they serve? These things should be openly discussed and laid out as part of the process leading to November%u2019s decision."
Oh its not incompetence or lack of coordination.
The Obama Administration is quite competent and coordinated with their goals and propagandist talking points.
They are incompetent when it comes to comprehending The Capitalist /Constitutional society they Govern.
kill the bears....save the seals
They are ignorant....
...they are lying conniving scum
Either you believe they are stupid...then why do we have stupid people running our country?
..or they are not stupid
The problem is that when your ideology is dependent on narratives rather than facts....facts can hurt. Consider how large a role the destruction of the polar bear has played in the whole global warming narrative. This along with a few other key misrepresentations IE Hurricanes, the hockey stick etc were used to promote an agenda. As these have been shown to be false, "true believers" are watching the very foundation of their ideology being systematically destroyed. I have come to see that the best way to approach such people is to see the wisdom in the old adage
When an honest man discovers he is mistaken, he will either cease being mistaken, or cease being honest.
I choose C
They are Lying conniving scum that are stupid about the American system that brought about the most prosperous, charitable, innovative and FREE nation the world has seen.
I chose the adjective stupid because they are not ignorant of the reality that I just pointed out.
They are just stuck on stupid.
Stupid for a goal of utopia that cant exist.
They deny the natural state of man and his flaws.
And the beauty of our system that understands those flaws,accepts them,takes advantage of them and governs them in the best way ever devised.
The flaw I speak of is the flaw unique to man.
That flaw is SELF.
The freedom of self or selfishness is a Godsend when Governed least intrusively balanced with checks.
When a Governing body stifles self interest in an over zealous desire to eliminate all wrong doing,the result is repressed innovation and the corrupt are still corrupt.
Laws dont stop the corrupt.
Too many laws are designed with the intent of preventing corruption or wrong doing.
That is an exercise in futility.
Laws dont stop lawbreakers.
In fact the more convoluted the innumerable laws the more wiggleroom lawbreakers have to manipulate the system.
The departure from our original system of limited Governance has become the very tool that the flawed part of mankinds self interest takes advantage of.
The old adage of less is more has never been more true.
...I agree
a keeper
An elderly woman was ordered to find a new GP because the “carbon footprint” of her two-mile round trips to the surgery where she had been treated for 30 years was too large.
Avril Mulcahy, 83, was told to address the “green travelling issues” over her journeys from her home in Westcliff-on-Sea, Essex, to the West Road Surgery. The surgery wrote to Mrs Mulcahy, telling her to register with a new GP within 28 days.
The letter said: “Our greatest concern is for your health and convenience but also taking into consideration green travelling issues. Re: Carbon footprints and winter weather conditions, we feel it would be advisable for patients to register at surgeries nearer to where they live.
“We would be very grateful if you could make the necessary arrangements to re-register at another practice.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/918469 3/Surgery-bans-elderly-patient-over-her-carbon-foo tprint.html
"The problem is that when your ideology is dependent on narratives rather than facts....facts can hurt."
"Ideology" is the grand theme of this blog. "Facts" are so sparse and and so loosely strung on threads so thin that they become easily lost in the deeply entrenched ideology here.
"When an honest man discovers he is mistaken, he will either cease being mistaken, or cease being honest."
These are true and meaningful words. What I have not seen here is the capability for most to understand the true meaning of these words. These words are treated as no more than a "feel good" catch phrase to be tossed about and never really fully understood. Very few here have delved into the depths of the words and understood what is at their core.
I was born in 1951. I have seen political ideologies rise and fall. I have watched the Democratic party transform from a party for the common man into a party of their own self interests. I have watched it loose its way. I have watched the Republican party transform from the, "The Grand Old Party" into a party of hatred and mistrust of its own people. A party that is filled with a membership in the quest of the next dollar over everything else. The party of morals and family values is now completely void of both. A party that is anxious to, "talk the talk", but fails to take the first step to, "walk the walk".
I have seen a president assassinated and two attempts at assassinations on two other presidents.
I have experienced a great war hero and later a great leader of this nation, Dwight D. Eisenhower. He took this nation from a war worn nation and help lead us into the beginnings of a new nation. A nation that was loved and respected by the other nations of this world. Even the nations that fought against us in that war loved and respected after the war.
I saw another great war hero, John F. Kennedy. A man that risked his life to save his crew during that war. A leader that gave us national pride when he set in place the building blocks to be the first and only nation to send men to the Moon and walk upon its surface. I then saw this great leader assassinated and I watched his three year old son gain the hearts of the people of the world when he saluted his father's coffin as it passed by.
I saw the next president, Lyndon B. Johnson, become eaten alive with his quest for power, push this nation further into an undeclared war until it destroyed him. I have had friends to never return from that war and other friends that came back emotionally destroyed.
I have seen the last good president this nation has had, Richard Nixon, destroy himself and his presidency. All due to his own insecurities and attempts to retain power. I saw it cost his vice president his position due to his own desires to control.
I have witnessed the presidency of this nation's only unelected president, Gerald Ford, try to get the people of this nation to have some trust in the leadership of this nation again. He had limited success, but the job he faced was extremely difficult.
I saw our next president, a devoutly religious man, Jimmy Carter, try to build this nation back again through his love for our people and his trust in God. He, of course, failed to accomplish this, but the job was fairly insurmountable.
The next president of this nation, Ronald Reagan, tried to bring some sense to the tax brackets we faced. While he did do this, he also brought great debt to this nation with attempts to bring down Communism. He managed to out spend the U.S.S.R. until it fell in economic collapse. (We all know that Communism is not self sustaining) His bid to defeat Communism failed. Communism still exists and, if I were to believe any of you, Communist and Socialist make up half of our nation's population now. He was still the last president we had that won the popular vote in his re-election bid.
Our next president, George H. W. Bush, worked diligently to keep this nation on a sensible taxing system, but the debt produced by his predecessor proved too much for him. This cost him in his re-election bid.
Our next president was a brilliant man, Bill Clinton, and was completely inept in his first term, but brought us an economic powerhouse and a balanced budget during his second term.
Well, I will imagine that even the 13 1/2 year old among us is able to continue the chronological sequence of events on their own from here.
I voted for Ron Paul in 2008. I will vote for Ron Paul this election. I believe that his son, Rand, is a complete idiot and I would have more respect for Ron, if he declared that his son is the result of an adoption that went horribly wrong.
I have not only lived life, but I have experienced life. The greatest generation that this nation has ever seen is the generation of my parents. Those that are unaware of this are, well, just unaware. When you think you know me, I will quickly remind you that you do not know anything about me. Why? You are too deeply entrenched with your ideologies to even try to realize anything else about the world we live in.
Good night, gentlemen. I will show sebastianjer the respect for his blog that he deserves and leave each of you to your "Romper Room" form of entertainment. Allow this to be your next laugh. You may now commence the back slapping and enjoy the entertainment value I have just supplied you.
Viewing: 1 - 32
Page: 1 — Blog Index