In a Texas school, in an English Class, Michael Moore had his first educational premiere. Michael Moore is an example of propaganda paying off. There is a non-stop Democrat virus—no place is free of propaganda, churches, schools, theaters (including the media.) It isn’t all lies; but then, good propaganda has some truth included and then the truth is bent and twisted. Michael Moore is the pretzel of propaganda.
Europeans want to influence the votes, Terrorists want to influence the votes, everybody wants to vote in sneaky ways—absentee non-American voting called influencing. The Guardian (British newspaper) wants people to write to Ohio and paid $25 to Clark County Board of Elections for the Voter List. (Just on FOX)
Most voters do not realize how big this is and the impact it will have on our situation. This election ranks as both the biggest election and the worst election I’ve ever seen. Both sides seem to be collecting funds for a recount; both sides are accused of some type of election fraud. But, Michael Moore was the worst of the worst in this election. If a teacher wished to show Michael Moore’s film after the election and balance it with counter information that would not be as bad and could be educational.
Showing the film now is nothing more than pushing propaganda in our schools.
by Max
Thursday, October 14, 2004
A+
The best of the night is that this was the last debate. Both candidates made their points and had their mistakes.
One of the biggest mistakes was Kerry mentioning Mary Cheney. Kerry’s party is for gay rights, gay marriage, and Kerry attempted to give Bush a slap with Cheney’s daughter. It wasn’t well done and he may suffer the loss of a few points in some obscure poll.
The highest grade goes to the SPINMEISTERS. They are amazing. Love it that they call it “Spin Alley.”
My take on the debates: It was fairly even for the Presidential debates. Blunt didn’t go over well; glib doesn’t inspire trust. If you throw in the VP debates, Cheney outclassed Edwards—Edwards needs more experience, more maturity (not on-the-job training.)
The debates didn’t change the reality. We are in tough times. They are the times when you think of Kennedy, “Ask not what your country can do for you . . .”
We need the will to complete the job. We need a leader who leads, not follows.
One of the biggest mistakes was Kerry mentioning Mary Cheney. Kerry’s party is for gay rights, gay marriage, and Kerry attempted to give Bush a slap with Cheney’s daughter. It wasn’t well done and he may suffer the loss of a few points in some obscure poll.
The highest grade goes to the SPINMEISTERS. They are amazing. Love it that they call it “Spin Alley.”
My take on the debates: It was fairly even for the Presidential debates. Blunt didn’t go over well; glib doesn’t inspire trust. If you throw in the VP debates, Cheney outclassed Edwards—Edwards needs more experience, more maturity (not on-the-job training.)
The debates didn’t change the reality. We are in tough times. They are the times when you think of Kennedy, “Ask not what your country can do for you . . .”
We need the will to complete the job. We need a leader who leads, not follows.
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
EMPLOYMENT
Bandit
So Democrats want to play the blame game for job losses under Bush to somehow paint him as incompetent in matters of the economy. In doing so they are setting themselves up to take the entire rap. During the second debate Bush mentioned Clinton's bubble burst as one of culprits affecting employment.
The evidence supports President Bush.
First major signs that all was not well surfaced in May 2000. This is the month the biggest recorded decline in jobs in eight years - 116,000 jobs disappeared. What made this number even more alarming is that the cutbacks were widespread affecting all sectors: 29,000 jobs in construction, 71,000 in wholesale and retail, 17,000 in manufacturing, and 11,000 in transportation.
There was another extraordinary report that came out to confirm all was not well with Clinton's economy: Household survey recorded the largest one-month loss of jobs in its entire 52 year history, 991,000 jobs disappeared in a single month of May.
The unions were sensing not all was well under Clinton's booming economy, in August 1999 the AFL-CIO, in a report to the Clinton Administration, said the manufacturing sector ``is in crisis, having lost 491,000 jobs since March 1998. Little has been done to assist manufacturing companies in coping.''
A Seattle Times article dated November 07, 1999 was projecting 1 million job cuts in the coming year.
The White House put out a little noticed Press Release on March 5, 1999 that read: "Reflecting the weakness in the world economy, manufacturing employment fell 1.8 percent during the past year."
There were some serious forces at work to cause manufacturing employment to fall 1.8% in a single year. All we heard during the 2000 election from Democrats, Gore in particular, is how well off we all were.
The question begs, with all the clear signs the economy was in serious trouble, or in a 'crisis' as the unions warned, where was Sen. Kerry?
[Remember the word “downsizing”; and, remember “jobs going south?”]
STRETCHED THIN?
Afghanistan: 45,000 troops, not all ours. AQ left--or, was killed/captured.
AFGHANISTAN has had its first **ever** election. Afghanistan is succeeding.
IRAQ: 130,000 troops, most ours. The reason for not increasing troop levels is exposure, supplies, logistics . . . and we want to clean up and come home. A reason for retention is adaptation to climate--rotation and adjustment plus experience of some troops not easily replaced. It's rough to have the time extended (hard on troops, difficult for families); but, in the interest of success, most of the military understand how important this is.
We are not stretched as thin as the Democrats say. Republicans are not the ones promoting the draft, Democrats are; and they have been eager to do it. Kerry says he wants 40,000 more troops. Democrats say enlistment is down and put in a bill for the draft. They are either (1) playing on fears of a draft, or (2) really thinking about it.
And, when the Democrats speak of too few troops to prevent looting in Baghdad, we could have had thousands, what were the Democrats going to do? Shoot the average Iraqis who were tired of being poor, tired of being persecuted? The troops would not have shot the guy with the TV, or the people with the huge vases.
AFGHANISTAN has had its first **ever** election. Afghanistan is succeeding.
IRAQ: 130,000 troops, most ours. The reason for not increasing troop levels is exposure, supplies, logistics . . . and we want to clean up and come home. A reason for retention is adaptation to climate--rotation and adjustment plus experience of some troops not easily replaced. It's rough to have the time extended (hard on troops, difficult for families); but, in the interest of success, most of the military understand how important this is.
We are not stretched as thin as the Democrats say. Republicans are not the ones promoting the draft, Democrats are; and they have been eager to do it. Kerry says he wants 40,000 more troops. Democrats say enlistment is down and put in a bill for the draft. They are either (1) playing on fears of a draft, or (2) really thinking about it.
And, when the Democrats speak of too few troops to prevent looting in Baghdad, we could have had thousands, what were the Democrats going to do? Shoot the average Iraqis who were tired of being poor, tired of being persecuted? The troops would not have shot the guy with the TV, or the people with the huge vases.
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
DIDN'T SHOW
Andrew Sullivan
QUOTE FOR THE DAY I: "Yesterday was a huge defeat for the Taliban. The Taliban didn't show," - Lt. Gen. David Barno, commander of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Yep, democracy is to the theocrats and terrorists what light is to darkness. And it's worth repeating again and again: without the United States, Afghans would still be laboring under an unspeakable terrorist-controlled tyranny. Whatever happens in America's own election, no one can ever take this legacy away from this president.
QUOTE FOR THE DAY I: "Yesterday was a huge defeat for the Taliban. The Taliban didn't show," - Lt. Gen. David Barno, commander of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Yep, democracy is to the theocrats and terrorists what light is to darkness. And it's worth repeating again and again: without the United States, Afghans would still be laboring under an unspeakable terrorist-controlled tyranny. Whatever happens in America's own election, no one can ever take this legacy away from this president.
QUOTES
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Bill Clinton, February 4, 1998
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), January 23. 2003
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), January 23. 2003
Monday, October 11, 2004
WOT HUB
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA): "Iraq may not be the war on terror itself, but it is critical to the outcome of the war on terror, and therefore any advance in Iraq is an advance forward in that and I disagree with the Governor [Howard Dean]." (Fox News Channel's "Special Report," 12/15/03)
Quote found by AC at Bandit’s Hideout
If Iraq “is critical to the outcome of the war on terror,” then it is PART OF THE WAR ON TERROR. Another way to look at it: There are severe problems in the Middle East; Iraq was a serious enemy and part of the Middle East problem and Iraq is in the Middle of the Middle East. Freedom in the Middle of the Middle East is essential to the PLAN FOR THE PEACE. Liberty, a growing economy, a prosperous Iraqi people working toward a brighter future, means that Iraq can demonstrate to the rest of the Middle East that it is possible for the regular people in the Middle East to have a better life.
Iraq is the HUB of the Middle East—not a spoke, not part of the rim. Iraq is not only the center of the War on Terror it is the focus of the Peace Plan. If it works well, we may see vast improvements which spread, gradually, throughout the region. (The Saudis will attempt to hold elections next year. Women are trying to run for office in Saudi Arabia. Will they succeed this time . . . possibly; or, they may succeed next time. Nevertheless, there seem to be some beneficial changes in thinking throughout the Middle East.
SHUT DOWN 20
Guardian (UK)
(Emphasis was mine.) It seemed like the Al Jazeera of the West.
American authorities have shut down 20 independent media centres by seizing their British-based webservers.
On Thursday a court order was issued to Rackspace, an American-owned web hosting company in Uxbridge, Middlesex, forcing it to hand over two servers used by Indymedia, an international media network which covers of social justice issues and provides a "news-wire", to which its users contribute.
(…)It is unclear why, or to where, the servers have been taken. The FBI, speaking to the French AFP, acknowledged that a subpoena had been issued but said this was at the request of Italian and Swiss authorities.
(Emphasis was mine.) It seemed like the Al Jazeera of the West.
Sunday, October 10, 2004
AFGHANISTAN
(UK)
WAY TO GO ****AFGHANIS***!!!!!
Afghans ignore Taliban and dust storms to vote in millions
By Hamida Ghafour in Kabul
(Filed: 11/10/2004)
Millions of Afghans queued in mosques, hospitals and schools at the weekend to vote for a president to end the vicious cycle of war that Afghanistan has endured over the past two decades.
In Kabul, Bamiyan, and Kandahar voters from the 10.5 million who registered ignored warnings by the ousted but still active Taliban not to vote and queued waited for hours in snow, rain and dust storms to cast their votes.
They were determined to have their first say in the future of their country since the ousting of the Islamist regime almost three years ago.
Karimullah, 50, a civil servant in Kabul, said Saturday was one of the most important days in his life.
"Men, women, voted and it was a free choice," he said. "I voted in the mosque and everyone was joyful.
"Even if the other candidates boycott the election 10 times I still gave my vote. I will not change my mind."
WAY TO GO ****AFGHANIS***!!!!!
BIO WEAPONS (BW)
Interpol
BW are insidious and extremely dangerous. I consider BW #1, in WMD--worse than nuclear.
(…)An easy option?
An effective biological weapon is potentially devastating and much easier to make and transport than a nuclear weapon. Bio-weapons are, however, relatively safe for the terrorist. Pathogens (biological agents or germs) are virtually undetectable and can be brought reasonably easily into a country by an individual and can then be propagated in large quantities.
Recognising the imminent dangers represented by this lethal form of crime is the first step in countering the threat. Thereafter it is vital to put in place the tools which will enable society to take appropriate measures.
Isn't there a law against it?
In many countries, criminal justice systems are constrained by inadequate legal frameworks governing the detection and repression of bio-weapons. Frequently, no law is violated until the disease or biological agent is actually deployed. Law enforcement officers are therefore unable to begin preliminary investigations into the development of such weapons. Without laws which criminalise activity relating to bio-weapons, there is no basis for legal assistance or co-operation to prevent their production and transport.
BW are insidious and extremely dangerous. I consider BW #1, in WMD--worse than nuclear.
Saturday, October 09, 2004
Oil for Food--Duelfer Report
ROSETT:
Claudia Rosett has been investigating the Oil For Food Programs for quite a while (see the link at the right.) Now she is commenting on the Duelfer Report, which lets us know the volumes to tackle first--for those who are going to try reading it.
Thank you: Antimedia
Also, see Antimedia’s comments on the equipment for the troops. He’s irritated that this is coming up . . . again; and, takes the time to explain his views.
There is information on Saddam's illicit oil-funded contracts to buy from assorted Russian companies such stuff as barrels for antiaircraft guns, missile components, and missile-guidance electronics. There is an illuminating section that explains, "Most of Iraq's military imports transited Syria by several trading companies, including some headed by high-ranking Syrian government officials" — including the head of Syrian presidential security, Dhu al-Himma Shalish. There are details on Saddam's missile-procurement negotiations with North Korea. And there is background on Saddam's deals with Chinese companies that helped Iraq improve its indigenous-missile capabilities, despite the history, as the report notes, that "China stated publicly on multiple occasions its position that Iraq should fully comply with all UN Security Council resolutions."
Claudia Rosett has been investigating the Oil For Food Programs for quite a while (see the link at the right.) Now she is commenting on the Duelfer Report, which lets us know the volumes to tackle first--for those who are going to try reading it.
Thank you: Antimedia
Also, see Antimedia’s comments on the equipment for the troops. He’s irritated that this is coming up . . . again; and, takes the time to explain his views.
ABC MEMO ***RUMOR***
Drudge has the supposed ABC memo at this link:
Halperin Memo (Drudge)
Consider it **RUMOR**. It may go the way of the "pen." (into nothingness)
Halperin Memo (Drudge)
Consider it **RUMOR**. It may go the way of the "pen." (into nothingness)
Friday, October 08, 2004
Foolish Again, Mr. Kerry.
REDHUNTER is discussing Mr. Pretty's latest buffoonery (which prompted my commentary below:)
Kerry had planned to provide Iran with NUCLEAR fuel rods? Guess he wants to help Iran become technologically adept. Another dumb idea from KERRY KORP.
The Iranians are smarter than Kerry:
"Irrational", now there is a fine word. Kerry believes the problems of the world can be solved with a handshake . . . unless Kerry is doing the handshake.
Another Failure for the un-elected candidate. It was a foolish mistake. Were you "foolish again, Mr. Kerry? Oh Yes!
REDHUNTER has more information and discussion on the Iran/Nuclear.
Kerry had planned to provide Iran with NUCLEAR fuel rods? Guess he wants to help Iran become technologically adept. Another dumb idea from KERRY KORP.
The Iranians are smarter than Kerry:
Foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said it would be "irrational" for Iran to put its nuclear program in jeopardy by relying on supplies from abroad.
"Irrational", now there is a fine word. Kerry believes the problems of the world can be solved with a handshake . . . unless Kerry is doing the handshake.
Another Failure for the un-elected candidate. It was a foolish mistake. Were you "foolish again, Mr. Kerry? Oh Yes!
REDHUNTER has more information and discussion on the Iran/Nuclear.
PEACENIK WARRIOR
Kerry was an anti-war activist. Not only was he against the Vietnam War, he was busy working against the interest of the US, meeting with representatives of the enemy, voicing the sentiments of the enemy. He was a “peacenik” voice, during a war.
Kerry was a “peacenik” voter. Apparently, Kerry must believe his time in the Senate was not worthy of note, as he promotes his Vietnam service—not his Senate service. Throughout his career in the Senate, he voted against weapons and voted for defense cuts. (With emphasis on his vote for a nuclear freeze before the collapse of the overspending, defense conscious Soviet Union—near the end of the “Cold War.” He was a “peacenik” voter, in the Senate.
Kerry voted against Gulf War I, after Saddam invaded Kuwait—according to the right. If so, I could believe that. Maybe he agreed with Saddam that Kuwait belonged to Iraq. He was content to leave the Kuwaitis in the care of Saddam and Thugs. He could have believe good old honest Tariq Aziz that the US gave a wink to Saddam. (Aziz later confessed that was Iraqi Propaganda.) Some Warrior!
On which side of the Iraq War is John F. Kerry? Do you know? No? Well, Kerry doesn’t know either. We can only conclude that he is for and against; maybe and maybe not; supporting the troops but not supporting the troops; voting for the war, but only as another threat in a very long line of threat; for the war, against the troops; “wrong war, wrong place; unilateral is bad in Iraq (with 30 other countries) but good in North Korea; and, he can do better. He can do better only if he spins out of control and knocks the enemy into oblivion.
Kerry is a “peacenik” who claims he will fight; and a “warrior” who doesn’t know where the war is. Even if he finally finds the right war in the right place, he'd better have a fast military--he'll only be there 4 months and 12 days.
Kerry was a “peacenik” voter. Apparently, Kerry must believe his time in the Senate was not worthy of note, as he promotes his Vietnam service—not his Senate service. Throughout his career in the Senate, he voted against weapons and voted for defense cuts. (With emphasis on his vote for a nuclear freeze before the collapse of the overspending, defense conscious Soviet Union—near the end of the “Cold War.” He was a “peacenik” voter, in the Senate.
Kerry voted against Gulf War I, after Saddam invaded Kuwait—according to the right. If so, I could believe that. Maybe he agreed with Saddam that Kuwait belonged to Iraq. He was content to leave the Kuwaitis in the care of Saddam and Thugs. He could have believe good old honest Tariq Aziz that the US gave a wink to Saddam. (Aziz later confessed that was Iraqi Propaganda.) Some Warrior!
On which side of the Iraq War is John F. Kerry? Do you know? No? Well, Kerry doesn’t know either. We can only conclude that he is for and against; maybe and maybe not; supporting the troops but not supporting the troops; voting for the war, but only as another threat in a very long line of threat; for the war, against the troops; “wrong war, wrong place; unilateral is bad in Iraq (with 30 other countries) but good in North Korea; and, he can do better. He can do better only if he spins out of control and knocks the enemy into oblivion.
Kerry is a “peacenik” who claims he will fight; and a “warrior” who doesn’t know where the war is. Even if he finally finds the right war in the right place, he'd better have a fast military--he'll only be there 4 months and 12 days.
Who is CAREFULLY POLISHED?
Kerry said, “. . .not carefully polished arguments” in an attack on Bush.
You mean the “carefully polished arguments” during the debates; or, the “carefully polished arguments during some of the Bush speeches?”
Bush seems to speak plainly, directly, doesn’t waffle, and doesn’t seem to dance frequently. If the American people do not need “carefully polished arguments, as Kerry said, why does he give us “carefully polished arguments” on both sides of the issue to the point of becoming a whirling dervish as we watch him spin?
Kerry is trying to sell us a 30-year old USED CAR. It looks all shiny and new; but it is an old van with no motor. Inside the van is an old toy. Kerry (used car salesman) tells us you can go so fast the speed will make you sick.
If you inspect the inside of the vehicle, you will see the truth. It’s a polished empty vehicle except for the shiny TOY:
Anyone remember the SIT AND SPIN?
You mean the “carefully polished arguments” during the debates; or, the “carefully polished arguments during some of the Bush speeches?”
Bush seems to speak plainly, directly, doesn’t waffle, and doesn’t seem to dance frequently. If the American people do not need “carefully polished arguments, as Kerry said, why does he give us “carefully polished arguments” on both sides of the issue to the point of becoming a whirling dervish as we watch him spin?
Kerry is trying to sell us a 30-year old USED CAR. It looks all shiny and new; but it is an old van with no motor. Inside the van is an old toy. Kerry (used car salesman) tells us you can go so fast the speed will make you sick.
If you inspect the inside of the vehicle, you will see the truth. It’s a polished empty vehicle except for the shiny TOY:
Anyone remember the SIT AND SPIN?
LOWELL, MA--NO KERRY
According to Mary Ann Parker:
”Kerry's Home Town Newspaper Endorses Bush
Below is an endorsement of President Bush by the Lowell Sun in Lowell, Massachusetts.
This is the same congressional district where John Kerry first ran
for Congress in 1972.
Endorsement: George W. Bush for president
Sunday, October 03, 2004 - It's about national security.
That's the key issue on the minds of Americans planning
to vote in the Nov. 2 presidential election.
They must decide whether Republican President George W. Bush
or Sen. John F. Kerry, a Democrat, can provide the leadership to safeguard America from foreign terrorism. “
[Blank lines for ease of reading.]
”Kerry's Home Town Newspaper Endorses Bush
Below is an endorsement of President Bush by the Lowell Sun in Lowell, Massachusetts.
This is the same congressional district where John Kerry first ran
for Congress in 1972.
Endorsement: George W. Bush for president
Sunday, October 03, 2004 - It's about national security.
That's the key issue on the minds of Americans planning
to vote in the Nov. 2 presidential election.
They must decide whether Republican President George W. Bush
or Sen. John F. Kerry, a Democrat, can provide the leadership to safeguard America from foreign terrorism. “
(…)We in Massachusetts know John Kerry. He got his first taste of
politics 32 years ago in the cities and towns of Greater Lowell.
In his 20 years in the U.S. Senate, Kerry, a Navy war hero,
hasn't risen above the rank of seaman for his uninspiring legislative record. He's been inconsistent on major issues.
First he's for the 1991 Persian Gulf War, then he
opposes it. First he's for the war in Iraq, then he's against it.
First he's for a strong U.S. defense, then he votes against military weapons programs.
First he's for the U.S. Patriot Act, then he opposes it.
Kerry's solution to stop terrorism? He'd go to the U.N. and build a
consensus. How naive. France's Jacques Chirac, Germany's Gerhard Schroeder,
U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and other Iraq oil-for-food scam artists don't want America to succeed.
They want us brought down to their level.
And more and more, Kerry sounds just like them. In a recent campaign speech, Kerry said
America was in the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
No doubt John Kerry sincerely wants to serve his country,
but we believe he's the wrong man, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
Americans should think back three years ago to the
smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center.
There among the mist lay the images and memories of
fallen firefighters, police, a Catholic chaplain and ordinary working citizens moms, dads, sons, daughters.
President Bush, through heartfelt tears, told us never to forget the twisted carnage and the massacre of the innocents.
Yet some of us are forgetting.
President Bush told us the attacks must never happen again.
Yet some of us are wavering because of the brave
sacrifice of soldiers that our nation's security demands.
Well, President Bush hasn't forgotten.
Nor has he lost the courage and
conviction to do what is right for America.
We know if there is one thing the enemy fears above all else,
it is that George Bush's iron will is stronger than his iron won't.
[Blank lines for ease of reading.]
Thursday, October 07, 2004
Perpetual Motion--spin
Rebuttable Preseumption
How many qualifiers can we fit onto the head of a pin?
Charles Duefler, the new US weapons inspector says that Saddam "may have been" developing a capacity to develop WMD on short notice.
Whether or not we should have gone to war with Iraq is not something I want to discuss right now (especially since I'm ostensibly in Torts class). But "may have been developing a capacity to develop"??
I might think about ways to possibly comment on this probable overuse of qualifications in this tentative utterance. Maybe.
Daily Kos
Quotes Powerline:
"Iraqi intelligence documents, confiscated by U.S. forces and obtained by CNSNews.com, show numerous efforts by Saddam Hussein's regime to work with some of the world's most notorious terror organizations, including al Qaeda, to target Americans. They demonstrate that Saddam's government possessed mustard gas and anthrax, both considered weapons of mass destruction, in the summer of 2000, during the period in which United Nations weapons inspectors were not present in Iraq. And the papers show that Iraq trained dozens of terrorists inside its borders."
Daily Kos comments:
“We also need to find out the background of Scott Wheeler the author who is on Malzberg now and who was on the Hannity radio show earlier.”
Since no one seems to know exactly what happened, I’m waiting for the text of the Duefler Report. Dr. David Kay said no stockpiles; we’ve known that since January. Kay said that Iraq was more dangerous. Duefler is saying there were no stockpiles; what else was he saying that is unreported.
Yes, it’s difficult to give up the WMD theory. If you can’t believe some of the information, what can you believe? He had them before and during Gulf War I. Didn’t have them by Gulf War II. Everyone thought he had them. Saddam (apparently) wanted everyone to believe he had them. The WMD are not in Iraq, in vast quantities, not under every rock and behind every tree. What happened?
The media covered the Report with Duefler sound bites. Possibly the text will be covered by someone, somewhere. (Until then, I will continue to feel spun—in several directions . . . And, they say there is no perpetual motion machine.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)