Test Of Survival Skills: Is Your Worldview Adaptable? Does It Need To Be?

emorej a Hong Kong

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday April 18, 2016 · 6:52 PM PDT

2016/04/18 · 18:52

QUESTION: How many of the following did you predict?

1. USSR splintering-- to the shock of every stripe of Communist & anti-Communist.

2. China’s billon+ population discarding the substance of Communist ideology.

3. Wall St.’s house-of-cards freefalling -- & its post-rescue rebuilding with bigger cards.

4. Climate tipping twice as fast as consensus predictions.

5. Refugees from Syria’s small population triggering unmanageable political dominoes.

6. Jeb Bush’s billion dollars buying only serial humiliation by political Lilliputians.

7. Outpolling of Hillary by Bernie, massively among Democrats Abroad and Independents & now culminating steady gains into a (for now) small lead among all Democrats.

8. Democratic establishment ditching its Holy Grail of winning Independents, for its Holier Grail of mollifying big donors, lobbyists and post-politics employers.

BIGGER QUESTION: Did any of these predictive failures change your worldview to be more accepting of future change, tipping points and other non-linearity?

IF NOT, WHY NOT? Evolution selected for survival people who ran from floods.

WHAT NEXT? Soon there will be nowhere to run from mutually-reinforcing, 'perfectly unsurvivable storms' like the following:

• 100 x Tom Joad’s Dust Bowl;

• 1,000 x Hurricanes Katrina & Sandy;

• 10,000 x cults of every stripe adopting ISIS’s most successful tactics;

• 100,000 x today’s Syrian refugees, coming from climate-vulnerable homes of Billions.

WHEN DO WE TIP? "Yesterday" was Bernie Sanders' correct answer. Nobody knows if today is too late to save ourselves. Everybody should know that it will be to late after 8 more years of incrementalism.

Reprinted from: downwithtyranny.blogspot.hk/...

Daily Substance: U shd be DeMoralized! Shd Not! Shd Too!

emorej a Hong Kong

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday April 18, 2016 · 6:30 PM PDT

2016/04/18 · 18:30

Bart_blackboard_teachder_did_not_pay_too_much_for_her_condo.jpg — Establishment did not spend much dirty money pissing upstream

Why can’t they see that dirty money costs them in turnout among voters disgusted by the obvious influence of donor money and lobbying (not to mention the well-paid lobbying employment of former officeholders)?

One reason is that vision is affected by addiction:

YouTube Video

NY-24: Biggest Buck Bang on Social Security & National Conventional Wisdom

emorej a Hong Kong

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday March 30, 2016 · 6:53 PM PDT

2016/03/30 · 18:53

What single candidate and group of candidates gives biggest bang per buck contributed at this quarter-end?

Ref: Kingson-ActBlue; My favorite Progressive List ActBlue

First-time candidate Eric Kingson in the 3-way Democratic primary in leans-blue Republican-held NY-24 Congressional District was arguably the single person most responsible for changing the national conversation about Social Security.

Remember when?

Social Security was “going broke”
“responsible” Democrats wanted to (at least as part of a grand bargain to appease Republican hostage-takers) “chain” the cost-of-living-adjustment (because ailing 80 year-old smart-phone users can always find a cheaper substitute for something in the consumer-price-index)

What got us from there to today when every Democratic candidate claims to be a “protector” of Social Security? It started with Professor Eric Kingson, of Syracuse University’ School of Social Work, also affiliated with Aging Studies Institute & Center for Retirement Research, who:

Wrote the influential book Social Security Works
Founded the influential organization Social Security Works
Founding co-chair of the Strengthen Social Security Coalition
Gave expert testimony everywhere in the face of every kind of political wind
Now is in a three-way primary contest against two better-funded favorites of two different factions of the New York Democratic establishment (one faction including everybody’s favorite populist Chuck Schumer, and the other including everybody’s favorite king of empathy Steve Israel).

Kingson’s actblue page is here.

Kingson is on the list of Blue America PAC-endorsed multi-issue Progressives here.

Kingson’s partner in heroism in many of the above roles was, and continues to be, Nancy J. Altman, a lawyer, tax expert and veteran of several governmental and legislative roles who is the type of person who should also be running for office, and whom we can recruit, along with other serious policy people, if we help Eric Kingson prove that

the electorate is ready for really knowledge and commitment in Congress.

Update: Title changed to “Conventional Wisdom” from “CW”, which I am surprised to find has 19 different meanings, of which mine is No. 4:

CW         Consistent With

CW         Clone Wars (Star Wars)

CW         Chicken Wings

CW         Conventional Wisdom

CW         Clan War (gaming)

CW         Celtic Woman (musical group from Ireland)

CW         Christopher Walken

CW         Championship White (Acura Integra Type R color)

CW         Catherine Wheel (band)

CW         Clay Walker (country music artist)

CW         Cat's Whisker

CW         Castle Wars (gaming, Runescape)

CW         Complete Warrior (Dungeons & Dragons book)

CW         Crimson Wave

CW         Contraband Watch (prisons)

CW         Corner Kicks Won (soccer)

CW         Content Warning

CW         Country & Western

CW         Crap Weasel

Dems Abroad; Globalized Youth; Global Competition

emorej a Hong Kong for Team Bernie

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Tuesday March 22, 2016 · 9:58 PM PDT

2016/03/22 · 21:58

Of course those Democrats Abroad who resoundingly voted for the ‘foreign-policy-ignorant single-issue’ candidate for President are just spoiled kids who don’t understand economic competition, globalization, or what it takes for America to “stand taller and look farther”.

But what about the local people who don’t have as many privileges?

Below are some nuggets of comparative perspective, from the ethnic Chinese city-state that was long trumpeted (via many layers of dishonesty) as proof of the ideology that ‘the free-ist markets create the best societies’.

The Mong Kok riots are a wake up call about the widening wealth gap

The rise of violent political confrontation in Hong Kong has three critical causes. First is the growing socioeconomic divide that has deepened anxiety, insecurity and conflict in day-to-day life.

Second is the government’s failure since 1997 to respond effectively to the new socioeconomic challenges and its refusal so far to reform the political system so the problems can be tackled.

Third is the rising influence of radical intellectual ideas that have led youths to … see the system as morally bankrupt and the struggle to reform if not to overthrow it as regaining their human dignity.

To really help the poor, Hong Kong needs to target the advantages enjoyed by the rich

Peg Yoc Hui Valdez says pro-poor schemes won’t narrow the wealth gap in society without efforts to also tackle the systematic exploitation of our free-wheeling free market that impoverishes people in the first place

So what kind of ‘oblivious-to-international-comparisons’ kids are writing this kind of thing?

YouTube Video

MD-Sen: Kogs' RoxSux Blues Cure is "Ma Donna" Edwards, who has it all--except self-funding

emorej a Hong Kong

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday March 21, 2016 · 8:29 PM PDT

2016/03/21 · 20:29

Before reading more about Donna Edwards’ campaign for Senate,

First put on this soundtrack of mood+message music:

YouTube Video

Second, the need for money, because Donna’s primary opponent Chris Van Hollen is a champion fundraiser -- which is precisely why he got so tight with party leadership so fast. Emily's List has done serious spending for Donna, perhaps as an olive branch to Progressives after so many Gender-over-policy endorsements they have made, but hard campaign money is indispensable. Donna's polling numbers have held up pretty well to the spending deficit, but this tends to be cumulative, and the homestretch is going to be expensive. My favorite place to donate to Donna is this combined list of Senate and House endorsees (including Joseline Pena-Melnyk, the wonderful Progressive Latina running for the MD-04 Congressional seat that Donna is giving up) of Blue America PAC, which is the publisher of the above pro-Donna video,

… and the following similarly-styled MSM-criticizing video.

YouTube Video

Third, what’s so great about Donna?

Personal history as a single Black mom facing the challenges of law school and career advancement, and local community organizing, helps explain Donna’s commitment to fighting for her policies. In contrast, although Chris Van Hollen says most of the right things in this very Democratic state (but only after flirting with Grand Bargain softness on Social Security), his political career has been a smooth glide from well-connected parents to well-connected donors, and appreciation by connection-valuing party leaders.

The forces for business as usual are not ignoring this race. Al Wynn (who was the DailyKos poster-person for the Black sub-chapter of corrupt machine politics when Donna primaried him twice) reportedly, from his position as a lobbyist, persuaded the Congressional Black Caucus not to endorse Edwards.

Donna winning would immediately make her a nationally important figure, aided by Maryland's profile as a historically "border" state that now contains the DC suburbs, the NSA HQ and the Baltimore streets of the Wire, the Freddie Gray police prosecution, BLM (and DeRay's candidacy) and Martin O'Malley's reportedly statistically corrupted Mayoral policies. Donna would not only be the best possible face of ‘Black Maryland politics', and sole member of the US Senate’s ‘Black Woman Senate Caucus’, but would have limitless upside as a political figure uniting every Kog and virtually every stripe of Progressive.

BHO can save HRC & doom Trump by acting now on TPP

emorej a Hong Kong

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Tuesday March 15, 2016 · 8:35 PM PDT

2016/03/15 · 20:35

1. If Trump is the only anti-TPP nominee, then he has a strong chance to beat Hillary. Reasons: TPP, besides featuring its own bad policy and worse (democracy-evading) politics, also has become the most visible pending issue that is not only substantively provocative of particular criticism and anger, but also symbolic of broader establishment abuse of little people, and provocative of their feeling that angry push-back should prioritize other political concerns.

2. Now is Obama’s last chance to address TPP in a way that helps Hillary and hurts Trump. Reasons: Now, an Obama pivot on TPP could be framed as a concession to Democratic primary election controversy about this issue, ideally including a hat-tip to Bernie and his supporters, and of course a less persuasive nod to Hillary’s stated “opposition”. Later, as Trump solidifies his grip on Republican nomination, especially if Bernie’s path to Democratic nomination is fully blocked, then any such pivot will be seen by everybody as a concession to, and desperate attempt to save Hillary from, Trump’s appeal.

3. What to do? (a) At least: promise not to allow TPP approval by a lame duck session of Congress. (b) What else? Commenters please have at it. (So many aspects of our politics are so distorted now that stand-alone improvements are hard to find).

4. Bonus points: (a) The next President (and the one after) would find it easier to govern after McConnell, Ryan and their ilk had been forced to choose between their voters and their donors on this issue in a less democracy-evading way. (b) Hillary and every future officeholder and candidate would see (more clearly than from a tough primary contest in isolation) that the power of special interest money in politics can occasionally ebb, instead of only flow.

Who will judge the dead (undeserving & deserving)

emorej a Hong Kong

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday March 12, 2016 · 8:11 PM PST

2016/03/12 · 20:11

Reposted with edits from a well-received series of comments:

Much broader issues are raised, by Hillary’s Nancy AIDS “Gaffe”, than any questions about Hillary herself (including the breadth of her campaigning skills or the depth of her empathy)

We all could usefully consider two deep takeaways from this controversy.

A. Background Questions

Setting aside the context of one Presidential spouse attending the funeral of another, … please consider the broader context of all those dead who have committed great crimes.

Did Scalia deserve to have post-death reports of crude and self-indulgent racism omitted from his (broadly defined) obituaries?

Will Cheney deserve the same?

Did Pinochet? Stalin? Hitler?

Wasn’t the original underlying tradition, of “speak no ill”, premised upon an assumption that God will punish and reward in the afterlife? If the only afterlife is in our memories (and soon enough, of other people’s memories of us) then where is the punishment and reward for the abusers who die before being brought to account?

B. My Takeaways

1. Cultural: Speaking kindly of the unkind dead is a cultural tic that is inappropriate for dead public figures. If they abused us in life, then we should abuse their memories after their death. If you assume that the only afterlife is the way that you are remembered, then rehabilitating dead villains is (as Hillary has just demonstrated in the worst possible way) an insult to dead heroes, dead innocents and the people who treasure their memories.

2. Political: Broader VIP clubby-ness (of which attending funerals is the least offensive of a much broader range of VIPs’ activities) … is also inappropriate, in our era of grave political dysfunction. Funeral pleasantries are not as troubling or politically destructive as, for example:

Bill Clinton bonding with H.W.Bush and his idiot son

… apparently because of their shared experience holding a stopping-buck in one hand and the nuclear launch button in the other. This is a particularly clear example reflecting our deep problem that VIPs feel more connected to opposing VIPs than to the people they were elected to represent — which is a big part of the reason so many different people are now outraged by so many differently diagnosed, but greatly overlapping, sell-outs by the political establishment.

High Ratio Comment Techniques for BRox & Other Kogs

emorej a Hong Kong for Team Bernie

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday March 05, 2016 · 5:11 PM PST

2016/03/05 · 17:11

The ways Bernie-lovers can survive and thrive under Kos’s general election footing, are mainly the exact same ways that any DK poster on a contentious issue can achieve the highest

Ratio of: Persuaded Readers
per
Invited Distractions
(PeReInDi^TM)

1. Reread & edit before publishing (not original, but a necessary gateway step)

2. Delete superlatives — & minimize other adjectives (no two people ever perceive any adjective precisely the same way, and they would not even if they were in the kind of context-free place that no human mind has ever experienced).

3. Separate and label:

(a) Your goals and recommendations: people read very differently depending what goal they impute to your writing. Extreme examples include:

(i) “in order to maximize likely turnout for downticket Progressive candidates in the largest feasible number of districts and local governments, please consider prioritizing, this week, ...”

--in comparison with this—

(ii) “in order to vent my rage at the stupidity and immorality of the commenter I am responding to, and to every one of his/her/it’s ideological or tribalist enablers...”

(b) Your interpretations of diary/comment you are replying to (but omit if unnecessary).

(c) Your premises and ideally why you make the subjective decision to prioritize them.

4. Convey roles

Implicitly invoke the role of you, interlocutors and readers as differently minded but similarly seeking useful information in a complex world.
Example: “I recommend readers consider the reported information that...” This reduces the frequency, and destroys the credibility, of further responses along the lines of

“you have distorted, lied about and attacked my values and ME!”

… which is precisely the kind of response you have just successfully avoided posting yourself.

U Run w/the Candidate Career U Have; 2020 Pres. Donna Edwards?

emorej a Hong Kong

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday February 29, 2016 · 7:48 PM PST

2016/02/29 · 19:48

Bernie stepped up to lead the response to Hillary’s then-impending glide path to the nomination, after the following people (and every other leading Progressive voice) chose not to run (each with good reason):

D Edwards: If we get her into the US Senate in 2016, she hits all BBB’s (and my) buttons to be on the ticket in 2020 — either as the Veep of a sufficiently Progressive President Hillary, or as a challenger to an insufficiently Progressive Hillary or Republican. — There is still an hour left to donate!

Scalia smarter than many Kogs: Money = Not just Speech, but also:

emorej a Hong Kong

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday February 29, 2016 · 4:05 AM PST

2016/02/29 · 04:05

Money equals
(and $15 minimum wage, & absence of college debt, increases)
ability:

… to maintain and document a residential address, and so register to vote.

… to take time away from work to wait in a voting line, or even run for office.

… to deter workplace discrimination, by showing ability to survive firing long enough to sue for compensation.

… to pay for birth control, pre-natal (and post-natal) care, and/or a trip across state lines for an abortion.

… to appear, in the eyes of a date (or anonymous) rape-inclined person, as a human being whose testimony about rape would be believed.

What part of the following don’t you understand?

If her daddy's rich, take her out for a meal
If her daddy's poor, just do what you feel

This was already understood by these mainly White-ish looking Bro’s in 1970:

YouTube Video

But what about those racist cops? They are a menace not only to poor Black teenagers, but also to Henry Louis Gates, Jr. (and Sandra Bland and countless others) — but Professor Gates is still alive, probably in part because he looked, even to trigger-happy cops, like a human being whose relatives or friends might demand explanations if he had been shot to death.

Colin Powell, who has said all the correct things since leaving "chain of command"...

emorej a Hong Kong

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday February 24, 2016 · 6:27 PM PST

2016/02/24 · 18:27

… continues his pattern now by saying sensible things on Gitmo,

along with this backhanded acknowledgement of the economics that drive our Prison-Industrial Complex:

“there are some prison facilities in the United States, and we were looking at this years ago, who are anxious to get these folks into their unused prisons or their almost vacant prisons."

Powell has stated that the Republican Party has lost its way on immigration. Powell’s most visible post-retirement position was to endorse Obama in 2008 and 2012, which Republican ‘thought’ leaders demeaned as being purely a result of racial solidarity between two African-American men. Despite this, Powell recently said:

“I'm still a Republican because I believe in a strong defense, because I believe in the entrepreneurial spirit that is so typical of the Republican Party in the past.”

All these positions suggest that Powell would be a natural endorser of Hillary, except for the following problem:

During Powell’s long career of over-respecting the US military chain of command, from the My Lai cover-up to the fabricated invasion-justifying assertion that Saddam Hussein was rushing towards acquiring weapons of mass destruction, the out-of-character event on which Powell most-visibly disrespected that chain of command was in publicly resisting newly elected President Bill Clinton’s proposal to remove the US military’s policy on expelling Gay military personnel.

Later, when then then-retired Powell announced that he was a Republican, and made personal responsibility the center-piece of his public profile. It does not take much imagination to infer that Powell’s close-up look at Bill Clinton, as the archetype new Democrat, persuaded him that the Republican Party was the only place for somebody prioritizing this value.

My takeaway: Absence of a Hillary endorsement by Powell speaks loudly, again about Bill, and now also about Hillary.

Being an influential thought leader, as Powell seems to aspire to, carries responsibility to do more than cherry-pick issues to comment on.

About Powell’s own place in history, and the “blot” on his “record” that he acknowledges, I hope that he does not wait as long, as Robert McNamara on Vietnam decision-making, to admit the depths of dysfunction at the highest levels of US foreign policy and military decision-making.

A way to do this now, and make a difference for our troubled country, would be to publicly acknowledge the legitimacy and far-reaching nature of Bernie Sanders’ critiques of US politics and foreign and domestic policy. Anything less amounts to rank hypocrisy, in view of the US military, where Powell spent his career, being the world’s most successful example of internal socialist policies, and near the top of the list of institutions that consume the most corruptly allocated money.

Eisenhower made this kind of public break with group-think and peer pressure when Powell was 23 years old. What the hell is Powell (approaching his 79th birthday) waiting for?

Hillary -- & every Progressive -- is owed Debts that can never be repaid

emorej a Hong Kong

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday February 24, 2016 · 3:15 AM PST

2016/02/24 · 03:15

This diary’s title is my takeaway from this recent article:

Some Debts Can Never Be Paid

by Daureen Mowd
[pseudonym much?]

Republished with permission from

DownWithTyranny

(Reformatted for this diary):

What is Bill Clinton so angry about? Let’s take stock:

• rising from humble origins to the world’s most-powerful position,

• continuing to have global prestige and influence,

• penetrating deeply into high income and wealth, and

• being married to an extremely smart, accomplished and widely admired woman-- Aha!

Bill is angry about the speed bumps hit by Hillary’s Presidential campaign. But Bill knows that:

• Presidential campaigns have their ups and downs-- and are often lost,
• coolness is more effective than anger in reacting to the downs,
• becoming President requires much conflation of timing, luck and persistence, and
• the life of a global political celebrity is actually nicer than being President.

David Axelrod concealed more than he revealed when he said that

counter-productive anger pours out of Bill, despite his “incomparable genius, …because he loves his wife and because he believes she is the best candidate in the race.”

Axelrod knows-- and we all know-- the following:

Bill has enormous debts to Hillary.

• Hillary saved Bill’s first campaign for the Presidency by saying whatever was necessary to push back, at the most crucial early stage of the 1992 primary season, against Bill’s first national "bimbo eruption."
• Later, Hillary standing by Bill throughout the Republican-driven prosecution of serial scandals, may have staved off Bill’s impeachment, as they morphed from "old news" into "denied but proven sex in White House with barely legal intern."

Who else has debts to Hillary?

• There is a long line of people who have wronged Hillary.
• Hillary and Bill reached out to welcome, back into the fold of reasonable opinion, the Hillary-vilifying vast right conspirators Richard Scaife and Rupert Murdoch.
• As a Senator, Hillary bonded over prayers with piety-over-humanism fanatics who had previously vilified her.

Bill’s example: Bill seems to have taught destructive lessons to many:

• To Wasserman Schultz, assholes like Emanuel, and nice guys like Van Hollen, that money is everything.
• To Weiner, that chasing young women is fine, even right after your honeymoon with a wife who is smart, accomplished and beautiful (as was First Lady Hillary-- clearly what drives these compulsive dickheads is something much darker than wanting sex with attractive women).

Bill’s broadest lessons seem to have been taught to Hillary --that no choices need to be made. One can:

 harvest money from the rich while harvesting votes from the poor;  

be a friend both of Wall Street and of the people ripped off by bankers;  

be an intimate of both Dubya and the Congressional Black Caucus; 

be a Moderate and a Progressive;  

be Annie Oakley and Gabby Giffords;  

make decisions as Secretary of State while beneficiaries of those decisions give big bucks to the family foundation.

Promises to the Public:

• When Bill vowed to Hillary that he would zip it up for eight years in return for her standing by him on the campaign trail, we were all relying on those vows.
• Their offer to us of “two-for-price-of-one” turn
ed their marriage into a menage-a-trois with the public.
• Hillary’s trust in Bill encouraged the electorate to trust him.

Betrayals and Harm:

• Bill’s betrayals of Hillary did not cause nearly as much harm as his betrayal of the public.
• He made Democrats slide down a slippery slope that started with our fearing and hating Republicans like Kenneth Starr, and led us to accepting references to "$5 bills in trailer parks," and the "narcissistic loony toon" personality of a reluctantly public 22 year-old girl.
• Our cynical-looking slide excused, enraged and empowered a generation of ostentatiously and hypocritically pious busybodies who reveled in the apparent proof of all their worst suspicions about liberal values and policies.
• Republican vilification of President Obama would not be so sexualized without Bill having proven that even the crudest sexual adventures in the White House are all-to-imaginable.
• Bill expended all his political capital on resisting impeachment, and had none left to resist Republican priorities in policies like Welfare "Reform."
• Bill’s credibility with the military was so low that Colin Powell, who spent his entire career following even the most troubling orders, broke this pattern to publicly resist gender preference reform in the military, and decided that his concern for “personal responsibility” required him to become a Republican.

Bill’s grown-up identity is obviously important to him, as a VIP ex-President, as a man of wealth, and as a man who pays his debts — at least to his wife.

Who else is owed by Bill?

• While "moderates" like Joe Lieberman (see: ostentatiously and hypocritically pious busybodies) were building national profiles by distancing themselves from Bill, it was Progressives and especially African Americans who stood up for him.
• This was ostentatiously symbolized by the spiritual counseling asked and received from Jesse Jackson, who forgave Bill for election year distancing from Rev. Jackson’s policies and constituents.
• How will Bill repay his debts to Rev. Jackson, or to millions of African American or other Progressive voters?

How can Hillary be repaid?

• Is Bill correct that nothing short of a Hillary Presidency can repay his debts to Hillary?
• … that it’s not enough to have riches, global admiration, entry into the history books as Secretary of State?
• Perhaps so.
• But this payment is not Bill’s to give.
• Only the public can give the Presidency, especially now that the political strategy perfected by Bill is running out steam in the face of public awareness and resistance.

Why isn’t Hillary’s money and resume overwhelming Bernie?

• Every political strategy has a limited shelf-life, and the Clintons’ has gotten stale.
• But Hillary cannot easily distance herself from it, because she was alongside Bill throughout his Presidency of personal and political betrayals.
• So when Bill wonders what is going wrong-- again-- with Hillary’s campaigning for the Presidency, he can see the biggest answer by looking in the mirror.
• This "incomparable genius" must have seen this answer, which adds another level to our understanding of "what Bill Clinton is so angry about."

Bottom lines:

• Only Bill can pay back his debts to Hillary.
• We don’t owe Hillary anything.
• We are the ones who are owed, for the past tolerance, support, enabling and unintended consequences of Bill’s and Hillary’s many self-serving choices.
• We are the ones who should be angry-- and we are.

Newer
Older

RSS