Tuesday 18 March 2008
|on 18 Mar : 11:17 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
From what I can see, he's nailed it.
Looked presidential and appealed to the good in all of us. Full text of his speech...
As such, Reverend Wright’s comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems – two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.
I hope he wins.
[ image disabled ]
|on 18 Mar : 08:46 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
I'm a sours grapes kind of "hold-a-grudge" kind of voter. Like the GOP-elephant, I never forget. At least once in a while, just to keep me convinced that sometimes, in politics, there can be opportunities for falling in love and truly believing in your candidate, I listen to an old mp3 that is made up of parts of Howard Dean's speech at the California State Democratic Convention a lifetime ago (politically speaking) and his Great American Restoration announcement speech from a month later. Reading the transcripts doesn't really do justice to the mp3 I listen because its set to some up-tempo music and is really all the moving parts.
One of passages follows:
Today, our nation is in crisis. At home, this crisis manifests itself in this President's destruction of the idea of community. This President pushes forward an agenda and policies which divide us. He advocates economic polices which beggar the middle class and raise property taxes so that income taxes may be cut for those who ran Enron.
That, of course, is all about "president" George W Bush and was then and still so very true. When I think on it at the age of 42, I can't remember any time prior to 2000 that I felt like I couldn't, shouldn't or just plain didn't want to talk about the problems with our country because it would lead, not to an eye-opening discussion with some sort of agreement at the end, but to a heated argument that could lead to a potential loss of a friend or escalated conflict.
Now, those same policies and tactics are being furthered by someone who, five or six years ago, I never would have believed if I heard a rumor to that effect. Bill and Hillary Clinton, in their desperation to gain power through any means necessary have stooped to dividing to conquer.
I leafed through the morning publication (as Mike Fleming refers to it) today. On the back page of the A section was a small article about Bill Clinton and his whining to ABC's Good Morning America. The story's not on the Commercial Appeal site but here's a link to an article that covers the basics.
Now, it is not in my nature to immediately jump to calling someone a racist. All too often, especially in this community, the cries of racism are used to gain advantage or to wipe away valid concerns that minorities don't want to address or even worse point out their failings that they don't want to change. By no means am I saying that racism doesn't exist or that sometimes the pointed out failings aren't false but liberals/Democrats some how have gotten their image set as such that they are beyond racists comments and that they are the only ones allegedly qualified to point out racism in any of its myriad forms.
So, in a world of Rovian tactics like "dog-whistle politics", "swift-boating" and assassination by innuendo, how can I with my distrust of the Clintons and tin-foil-hatty view of nearly all politics, look at the words in these articles and see anything but the clandestine use of buzz-word innuendo to slander their opponent?
Case in point:
Clinton said he had gotten a "bum rap"... calling the notion that he had unfairly criticized Obama in South Carolina as "a total myth and a mugging."
Now, of course, he said a lot of other stuff but with the Clintons being the out and out gods of "message" and "strategy" (after their good buddy, Rove, of course) how can I, in good faith look at those two bold-ed words and not think that they wanted to use those specific words in reference to Barack Obama who happens to be a black man?
You may ask, "what could be the point of that?" or "what does that do for them?" Easy enough to answer, it is assumed that Obama will receive the predominance of the black vote despite what the Clintons thought way back prior to South Carolina. While that assumption could be painted as somewhat racist in and of itself, information points to more African-Americans going for Obama. So, it stands to reason, that the Clintons must now get as much of the white vote as possible. This is the desperation that sets in as losers realize they are losing.
The Clintons, from every indication, will stop at nearly nothing to make sure that Hillary is the nominee from what I can tell. Like Bush saying that the sacrifice of life in Iraq would be for nothing if we didn't achieve "victory", the Clintons now are looking over their shoulders at the path of destruction paved with lies, lives and limelight are the idea of having done all that and only have gotten Bill his eight years in the top spot is spurring them on to more stupendous ugliness.
Needing to shave off some of Obama's support means evening his negative up with her's by targeting people who don't like already don't like Hillary. They must make those people so disenchanted with Obama that they would be put in the position of holding their noses for either one. And so, they must paint Obama, not as the man he is (a person who has transcended his race and standing in life) but as the negatives some associate with people whose skin happens to be black.
It is no secret that a lot of white people over a certain age see rap music as something to be avoided and a detriment to all forms of society. Fraught with "bad language" and usually about killing cops, rap has pretty much earned that negative image in the past but now is considered nearly mainstream but don't try telling my dad that.
Admittedly, it could possibly be seen as stretch to say that was Bill Clinton's intention when he said he got a bum rap, but I really feel it was his intention because he didn't just say that. In the same interview, he used the word "mugging". Come on. Who are they kidding with this crap?
This is the kind of BS Bush and his gang of cronies pull constantly. I submit that a Hillary administration will be nothing more than a continuation of the politics of division. The point of being president is to try and improve the world to betterment of all. To the Bushes and the Clintons, by appearances, the point is to further personal agendas no matter who gets in the way.
To them, it seems to me, they have changed the system to support a pseudo-form of fascism. A facism not furthered and protected by soldiers with guns but protected and furthered by the slanderous article, the threat of exposure and loss of comfort.
For once, can we say not "no" but "hell no!" to the politics of strategy and conquest by division and say "yes" to politics of potential, hope and a world where a man is judged by the content of his character?
Sunday 16 March 2008
|on 16 Mar : 18:08 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
We've had some craziness with the weather lately. Rain, hail, tornadoes, freaking SNOW...
Here's shots of some of that as an excuse to show more Benjamin pics.
A couple of nights ago a storm rolled through and as it moved in I snapped this of the front edge of the storm over the neighbor's house.
[ image disabled ]
That snow came in last Friday and it was gone by Sunday pretty much. Looked great across the backyard. I love snow. Wish we got it more here.
[ image disabled ]
[ image disabled ]
Of course, the boy really loved it. (Till he realized that being in it got you really, really cold.)
[ image disabled ]
[ image disabled ]
[ image disabled ]
And here's a silly one I forgot to post last time...
[ image disabled ]
|on 16 Mar : 16:31 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
|on 16 Mar : 16:29 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
So here we are.
For almost two years, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have been politely battling each other (and some others who are long forgotten) to be the Presidential Nominee for the Democratic Party. Jostling and hustling, underdogged and presumptive, destined and astonishingly out of nowhere. Senators Obama and Clinton have been each and every one of the "stories" that come out of campaigns as easy to spot as the legendary Seven Stories of Hollywood Films.
Over this primary season, I tried to remain dispassionate and resolute in my simmering disdain for practically all of the nominees. Edwards had had his shot already. Kucinich knew he had not a chance in hell but he probably thought if he talked loud enough he might change some minds by throwing some red meat. (Voters love to be thrown red meat but, in the end, they wind up deciding that red meat is bad for you because not everyone thinks like they do. So red meat might make said thrower *gasp* "unelectable".)
Everyone assume that it would come down to Edwards, Obama and Hillary. Some people thought Obama would be shut out and Edwards would take up the "liberal" mantel and be the "anti-Hillary". Some called it right and saw Obama as the rational, thoughtful visionary he is.
So, now we've arrived at that all-too-familiar discussion/debate/screaming match that all elections of late have come down to at one point or another.
Strategy Vs Substance
Party insider elitist strategies or what we know and feel is right backed with logic truth. John Kerry or Howard Dean? Do we pick the polished old boy backed with shadowy machinations, a scrubbed background and focus-group-tested, dry-as-toast stances who can flip flop with the best of any landlocked fish or the idealistic, untested, unvarnished who doesn't know what the "buzzwords" are and who readily admits his mistakes and who appeals to our hopes, our dreams and reminds us of our best and brightest?
I hate this discussion. I abhor the idea that there are those who run this country who will stoop to any low, any degradation, any transgression to enforce their will and even worse that there are people who vote in this country who think that is the way government and campaigns should be conducted. Worse still, there are people in our country who have no idea that is how government and campaigns are conducted.
To anyone who knows me, it is well known that I abhor the Clintons for what they have done and what they are doing in their rapacious power pursuit. Granted, when they were in the White House, they were our maniacal master of machination and I loved them then fondly but over the time they have been gone, I've grown to hate them for what they have done since leaving the White House.
The utter gall to believe that she is somehow owed the presidency because her husband had a good run and she was involved just like a cabinet member is beyond comprehension to me. She and her husband worked to undermine Howard Dean in a campaign race she wasn't even in! Their goal was to ensure that Bush won another term and then she would ride into the 2008 race as some kind of returning Queen to set the world a'right in her infinite wisdom.
For the last eight years, she has been part of the Democratic Party who would not stand up to "president" George W Bush. She allowed him to do all the things he did when it was within her power to rally the party insiders to stop him and the only reason, that I can see, for her to do that would have to be collusion with Bush.
But I digress into rant...
When I voted in the Tennessee Primary, I voted for Obama simply because I felt he had a good shot of keeping Hillary out of the White House. While I have not really checked into his policies for I fear there only shades of differences between Hillary and he, I have opted for Obama in heart now. For I will follow a penitent man a hundred times before I will follow a unrepentant megalomaniac who is willing to usurp the will of the people in order to gain power.
As it stands, Obama stands unsurprisingly victim to the Clinton slime machine and its influence with the media. For Hillary, now most certainly a loser if she relies on those fickle voters to do the right thing, must now follow the Rovian gameplan (though she and Bill used that time of plan nationally long before we had our thoughts sullied by the disgustingly brazen assaults of Mssr. Rove). Rather than competing by running in her own lane and excelling by her own skills, she must now throws weights on Obama to drag him down.
She must slime him. Take the shine off his image. Make him appear less desirable to sections of the voting populace. Working through inter nuncios of innuendo, Clinton points out sniggling points of diversion. "Hey, have you ever noticed that Obama guy is, like, black?" "What's up with that Obama guy's wife hating America?" "OMG, check out that Obama guy's mentor and preacher! He like hates America!" "Jesus, did you hear about that black guy whose running for president? He's, like, hooked up with this guy in dirty land deals and stuff." "Check out this pic of that black guy, Osama Hussein or whatever, all decked out like a terrorist. I've never seen Hillary Clinton decked out like that!"
Oh, well there was that one time, I guess...
[ image disabled ]
It is growing more certain that Hillary cannot win by merit alone. Her desperation will push her to use machination, strategy, what have you in order to tilt the win to her favor. Using her good buddies on the convention committee to just give it to her like some Supreme Court. Using threats and bribes to convince super delegates to throw it to her. Outright stealing the election in some primaries still left to happen.
We, as decent human beings and believers in democracy must insist that the candidate with the most votes from the primaries follow our will for that is the basis of our beliefs as a nation. Undermining the will of the people through technically valid and especially non-valid avenues should be, if not an actual crime, then an unethical and distasteful choice. Hillary must be informed of this forthwith.
For me, the choice is clear. Give me the candidate that proves that we need not stoop to conquer, that hope is still alive and that, still, in this country anyone can some day grow up to be the President of these United States.
Stand with Barack Obama and let's put division and strategy behind us.
|on 16 Mar : 15:10 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
At Christmas, my father-in-law sent Benjamin a swingset, a really nice one too. After it arrived, there was a day of good weather and M and I got out there in the yard and started putting it together.
We worked on it most of that one day and I don't think we barely got it halfway finished. Thinking we'd continue the next day, we left it where it lay because after all it is treated and supposed to be out in the elements.
It rained the next day and then it was any level of cold or wet or lazy or covered up in laundry. Something always made it difficult or not the priority to get the thing finished.
So, on March 3rd, the weather was clear, I had the laundry caught up and there were no pressing errands and the swingset got built and built well I might add.
[ image disabled ]
Benjamin has been happy as a clam and has been climbing all over the thing.
[ image disabled ]
He loves to slide the most.
[ image disabled ]
He's had his buddy, LaRenzo over several times. They're best buds.
[ image disabled ]
Special thanks to GrandPa for a wonderful gift.
[ image disabled ]
Wednesday 20 February 2008
|on 20 Feb : 13:15 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
Either this moron is the stupidest moron on this planet or the most egotistical, despicably twisted moron on this planet.
Here he stands in the GD Rwandan Genocide Museum and listen what this utterly retarded jackass who freaking ivaded a sovereign nation and now refuses to leave says:
Bush: ‘Outside forces tend to divide people up.’Yesterday, President Bush defended his decision not to send U.S. troops into the Darfur genocide, saying he learned lessons from the genocide in Rwanda. Ignorant of the comparison to Iraq, Bush said foreign troops would only be divisive and “unbelievably counterproductive”:
[ image disabled ]
|on 20 Feb : 10:07 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
Here we are, again about to select another president. It's come down to the wire in the Democratic Primary and our choices are historic for the nominee: A black man or a white woman. That is historic and powerful but at the same time if we are to be true to liberal, nay supposedly American ideals, then we must ignore those delineations.
While it is only Democrats who are voting for these candidates, it is still a record turnout. Americans are turning out in droves to make their choice between Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton and at this point in the race, they are turning out in some states to choose Obama. That's fine.
In the Tennessee primary, I turned out to cast my vote, mostly against Clinton but that was my reason. When you spend a goodly portion of your free time watching politics like a sport, there comes with that a certain cynicism that everyone has surely seen. My reasoning was not so much that I had fallen into the Obama campaign and was convinced that he was THE candidate for me and that he MUST be made president at all costs.
That was how I felt about Howard Dean and I must now admit that I am still a little heartbroken over that so I was still not ready to fall in love with anyone again. Even if I had not been heartbroken, I'm not sure I would have fallen for any that ran this time but I didn't feel like I was holding my nose to vote for Obama.
Now, we're coming down to the wire. We're getting this thing boiled down to demiglasse now. This morning the Today Show had a clip from CNN where they had Hillary talking about her buzz word "solutions" and beside her was Obama suddenly and he was talking about "hope". The sign on the podium he was at said "CHANGE" thus laying the double-whammy on the electorate.
If this is how they are going to pursue votes then put me down for Hope. Solutions is good. I like Solutions but I have to be really honest, I don't think that Hillary inspires Hope in me. In fact, she inspires too many remembrances of when I had Hope and saw her dash that Hope to Hell and back.
I had Hope when I heard that there was going to be a vote on whether or not to give Bush the authority to invade Iraq. Hillary dashed the Hope that the Senate wouldn't.
I had Hope when I read that candidates were realizing that their vote for the war was wrong and they were now actually apologizing and saying out loud that it was a mistake. I Hoped that Hillary would hear about this and hand out her obligatory apology. She dashed that Hope.
I had really High Hopes when I found a candidate in Howard Dean who not only inspired Hope for the future of our nation but reflected the true heartfelt anger I had and still have over the allowances the Congress had given Bush and the way Bush had conducted this nation's business and destroyed this nation's reputation as compassionate and hopeful for Humanity. Hillary dashed that Hope by working behind the scenes to kneecap Dean at every turn by pushing General Wesley Clark into the race and dividing Dean's base.
Even worse than Hillary's hope dashing is how Hillary and the Clintons have resorted to the same kind of swiftboating that the Republicans have been doing using the Karl Rovian Handbook of Politics. Of course, the Clintons are political aficionados and, of course, I know that they have no compunctions going negative if it gets them what they want but, for years, I had worshiped Former President William Jefferson Clinton.
Whatever his faults, his mistakes, his misguided policies, I had always bought into the idea that he was a decent man and a brilliant orator. Often, I have related the story of how Michelle and i had seen a program on PBS where Clinton, in a small classroom at some Arkansan university had a question and answer session with a class who had been studying his presidency.
It is the kind of spellbinding discussion with a teacher who knows what he is talking about that every human should experience in their lifetime. It wasn't a situation where he enthralled the students and they hung on his every word like fawning sycophants. It was a discussion with a learned elder statesman who wanted to help other to understand his decisions and what he had hoped to gain by those decisions whether he gained it or not.
He listened and he respected those talking and wanting to learn and by doing that he inspired in me hope for humanity.
This, of course, was a different situation than how Obama and Hillary are having to conduct themselves in order to get what they want but it leads me to imagine how the two of them would match up with Bill Clinton if put in that classroom situation in Arkansas. When I do that, I can imagine Obama being exactly like President Clinton had been: respectful, solemn, articulate. When I imagine that situation with Hillary, I really don't hear that. I imagine her listening to the question while shaking her head and waiting for her turn to talk. I imagine her trying to fake it to make it and getting through this to the next thing that maybe seems more important to her.
Now, should I base my vote on this imagined situation? No, and I didn't but it is only in seeing how the Clintons have gone so negative in the last few days that I mention it here. Worst of all is their injection into the media the idea that somehow since Clinton has been in Washington for years that she is "ready to lead on Day One".
This to me is the most despicable and utterly disrespectful of Democracy anyone has said about an opponent that I can think of. Sure, there have been lots worse personal attack like the swiftboating of Kerry (not that he was any great shakes) and the utter garbage of attacks on Max Cleland a few years ago, but Hillary's idea that since Obama hasn't been there a long time, he can't start leading on Day One.
Sow's ass to her.
The bombastic, dumbfounding beauty of American Democracy is that anyone, listen to me, ANYONE, can become president. Sure we look for indicators, metrics and characteristics for those we vote for but it starts from the tiny, diamond-hard kernel of belief and truth that anyone who is over 35 and a native-born American can become the leader of this nation (and titular lead, for now) of the free world. For Hillary to say that Obama will somehow be not ready is hogwash and indicative of her elitist attitude towards power.
So, I re-iterate my Sow's Ass to Hillary.
There's nothing that we Tennesseans can do about it now except make our beliefs clear to those who still have control over the primary. My fear is that Obama will go on to win more of the delegates via the popular votes in the states and then Hillary will strong-arm, blackmail and woo Super-Delegates into handing the thing over to her in whatever big top circus of a convention they have later this year in Denver, Colorado.
If that happens, I intend to make it this blog's and my own personal life's work to tearing down the Democratic Party. That's not a threat, that's a promise.
Tuesday 05 February 2008
|on 05 Feb : 16:47 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
As has been the case, in the last several elections, I cast my primary vote today in the Democratic race against Hillary Clinton.
I toyed with the idea of rebelling completely and voting Uncommitted but I just couldn't see myself living with letting Hillary win in Tennessee without me at least trying to stop her.
Last year, when everyone was declaring there was no one that even remotely excited me. Kucinich ran his quixotic campaign again but I knew it would go nowhere. As the months drug on, I would listen to them occassionally but they always managed to sound boring and most times just made me angry.
There was no way that I was ever going to vote for a Republican even if it was McCain. McCain, being the only one I would even consider, had pretty much shot himself in the foot in my eyes by doing what Jon Stewart called going into "crazy base land".
As it was whittled down to the last three on the Dem side, Edwards sounded great to me but I don't remember him sounding that excited during the last campaign but maybe I was just so focused on Dean that I didn't bother to listen to Edwards. Plus with Edwards, I felt like he had already had his shot.
So, then today I was left with the choice of voting for Hillary, Obama, rebelling or giving it a miss. I would never vote for Hillary. I would never give it a miss. I didn't feel like rebelling. Ipso Facto, I voted for Obama in hopes he could win Tennessee in some kind of a miracle and Hillary would be a little further away from the nomination.
Barack Obama seems nice enough but my image of him is the same as it was a year ago. He's a nice guy. Kind of funny. Seems sort of sage-like. He did confess to his drug use and youthful mistakes which is something that I have said for many years that every candidate should right off the bat.
Overall, I feel good about my vote. Wait, that's a lie. I don't feel good, I feel nothing. And I suppose that beats the anger I usually feel when I consider how there is no viable third party in the US of A and the only two parties there are work constantly and diligently to make sure there is never a viable third party.
In the end, Obama seems ok. He can't be any worse that what we've already had. Can he?
This makes me feel a little better about the vote.
(That Video was taken down and I'm too lazy to find it again. Do a Google for Obama and Yes we can)
Friday 23 November 2007
|on 23 Nov : 19:33 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
I usually take my lunch around the time that Mike Fleming comes on WREG at 4 o'clock. As it happened, I did so today.
Mike's lead topic today was on Robert Jensen's editorial at Alternet. Mr. Jensen's article, No Thanks to Thanksgiving starts off a call for changes to holiday in this way:
Instead, we should atone for the genocide that was incited -- and condoned -- by the very men we idolize as our 'heroic' founding fathers.
Mike had a monologue about it in which he pulled out all the favorite tricks of the right when they feel their traditions (or national idyllic illusions) are being threatened. He tried to poke holes in Jensen's sources by saying the Ward Churchill is a fraud. He questioned Jensen's motives by insinuating the Jensen is a "nut" on the internet trying to get attention by making "outrageous" claims. You know how they do.
I had gotten done eating pretty quick and got my dander up about Mike's insufferability and so I called in to rebut.
I only had to wait a short while because it was the Friday after Thanksgiving and everyone was either doing something better/important or waging the mall war.
During my short hold over the commercial break, I jotted down some notes. It's always best to be prepared or you wind up sounding like some disorganized goob just responding solely emotionally.
Mike's always polite and willing to listen till he really starts disagreeing with you a lot. That happened today. Don't misunderstand. He didn't lose it but he did try to interrupt me when I started making too much sense.
Opening up, I submitted that Thanksgiving is never going to go away as long as there is a turkey lobby for the turkey industry. Laughingly, I stated, "they" would have Jensen taken out before they'd let that happen.
My second point was more to the polite conciliatory tone that America should be trying to strike at all times. I just simply stated that Jensen should be welcome to offer any hopes for changes to any holiday he wants and that it was really unfair for Mike to question his motives. Mike blustered a little and then reiterated that he indeed was questioning Jensen's motives.
Making the point that there is no "Thanksgiving Council" that dictates that everyone must have turkey or cranberries on that Thursday in November, I told Mike that if Jensen wants to make his Thanksgiving tradition with his family a fast rather than a feast that is, by all American accounts, his right since Thanksgiving, though a national holiday, is, at its core, a tradition and different people have different ways of celebrating that holiday. This point I had to make over Mike's repeated attempts to interrupt which I eventually had to ask him to please allow me to finish.
But it was my third point that apparently was the camel-feared straw for Mike. The third point was more like a question. "Surely, Mike, you don't deny that we, meaning whites, Europeans, whatever, did come here and decimate the Native American population in? Perhaps we didn't wipe them out completely, but there are, even now, only a percentage of the numbers that were here originally."
Mike put his foot down and what he said sort of blew my mind. He stated flatly that he didn't have a problem with what happened. Crazy, huh? He said that the Native Americans were just outnumbered and so that's how things went back then. Even worse, he said the native americans were just brutal and, yes, savage, and so, in effect, they got what they had comin'.
Where Mike was really showed he was feeling threatened or beaten was when he hung up on me while he was "making a point" because I interrupted him during his "they were brutal and savage" point with "for a reason! Sure they weren't a nation with a single government or a flag but they were being invaded!" CLICK. "Hello?"
I turned up my radio and Mike was recovering and sounding a little saner.
It was fun.
Friday 16 November 2007
|on 16 Nov : 08:23 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
If the primary was today, I'd vote for Kucinich.
It's called impeachment and you don't wait.
Wednesday 07 November 2007
|on 07 Nov : 09:57 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
If you have been someone who comments here, you may wonder about the comments sections. We had an attack of spambots so I've disabled comments till it passes.
Nothing much to comment on lately.
I fear the beloved Al Gore will not be jumping into the race. His numbers are higher than Hillary's but jumping in now would not be "normal" and so I fear he will pass. Sad face.
Nothing going on to really fire me up, most everything I hear regarding politics, whether local or national, pretty much turns my stomach. I get so tired of not hearing of good stuff. Bush's impeachment, Cheney's impeachment, Dems not caving on anything... Where's the freaking outrage?
Here's something good.
[ image disabled ]
Saturday 27 October 2007
|on 27 Oct : 04:20 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
Falco is Great.
Forget Rock Me, Amadeus.
This is a Bob Dylan remake.
I present Falco, 1993, live doing a cover of Dylan's It's All Over Now, Baby Blue.
Thank me later.
Friday 26 October 2007
|on 26 Oct : 09:40 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
Tuesday 23 October 2007
|on 23 Oct : 12:26 Posted by Brassmask Category: Misc|
Who else is totally f'ing sick of hearing about the inevitability of Hillary and Rudy? I know I sure as hell am.