Tag Archives: Obama

Time for Some Economic Truth Telling

I have something to say to the politicians and the buffoons in the media. “Enough with the lies and the spin and the mis-information! The fraud you are perpetrating on the American people is (or should be) criminal.” For years now, we’ve been told that Reagan ran massive deficits unnecessarily; that Bill Clinton created a surplus; that the Bush tax cuts of 2003 caused the current debt crisis; and my least favorite, that all we need today is tax increases to get out of our current fiscal mess. Using the chart above, and in only 800 words, I will completely disprove each of these idiotic opinions. They are progressive myths perpetrated in an attempt to justify an ever larger U.S. government. So in order:

The deficits of the Reagan years aren’t pretty, but they pale in comparison to the sheer madness of today and more importantly, they had a purpose. When Mr. Reagan took office the Country was in a quagmire financially and militarily and the policies of his administration brought us out of both and to new heights never seen before in America. During his entire Presidency, Democrats held a death grip on Congress and its purse-strings. They could have stopped all that ‘horrible spending’ any time they wanted to – they didn’t. Trust me when I say, I hate deficits, but as deficits go, these had a usefulness at least. Things were accomplished. For the debt incurred, the country gained peace with its greatest-ever threat, the Soviet Union as well as new-found economic prosperity.

Bill Clinton is the luckiest President in U.S. history. He was a philanderer in the only moment in history when one might get away with it – that is after the country gave up its morals and before blogs, twitter, facebook etc. which might have led to a very different outcome (look at Anthony Weiner – his actions were nothing compared to Mr. Clinton’s and he was ridden out of town on a rail). On the financial front, he rode an economic boom driven by the internet to government financial nirvana and he and his progressive friends continue to take credit for something they had virtually nothing to do with. Look at the chart; it’s right there in red and blue. From 1984 to 2000 Federal revenue more than doubled. Tax cuts from the 80’s and the resulting economic crescendo capped by the tech-boom drove federal tax receipts through the roof. Did he pay down the debt? Nope. Instead, Washington spent more money than ever before in the nation’s history. Though they tried very hard, Mr. Clinton’s administration couldn’t spend it all and a small surplus was left over.

Along comes President Bush. He campaigns on returning the American people’s money (remember now, despite the progressives’ slight of hand tactics to make you forget this fact, it is our money)  to them via tax cuts. Coupled with the tech bubble bursting and 9/11, this leads to a drop in Federal revenue and a return to annual deficits. But, wait; look what happens next. Revenues explode upward starting in 2004 and reach the highest in our nation’s history in 2007. How can this be? I’ve been told repeatedly that the Bush tax cuts ruined this country. I’m sure it must be true; I mean, MSNBC says so. Sorry, liberals, wrong again. Mr. Bush is not blameless however. He presided over a federal spending bonanza that out-paced all the income gains created by the tax cuts. But, Progressives don’t argue against the ‘Bush spending’ however. That wouldn’t work with their agenda of always spending more; so they say the tax cuts are to blame. Think what they are actually saying – “We wanted to spend all the money we did spend, PLUS all the money Bush gave back in tax cuts”. Incredible!

Last lie, “Tax increases will get us out of this”. What?!?! The current tax code is virtually identical to that of 2007. That means we have a tax system in place today that produced the largest single year Federal revenue in American history. That isn’t enough for them? They need more? Look at the chart again. In the imaginary years to come, Mr. Obama is counting on Federal income reaching all new highs. And even if it does, he still expects to run $500 and $600 BILLION deficits EVERY YEAR!  He wants to increase taxes in the hopes of increasing revenue (despite all the evidence that it doesn’t work that way), not to get our budget balanced and pay down some debt. No, that would be far too sensible for Washington. These morons want to increase spending even more. They want to go to all-new record levels of spending. I guess they’ve never heard of the idea of cutting back when times are tough.

There you have it; four lies of the left debunked. Where does that leave us? I’ll leave that for another time, but there are some lessons here for those willing to see. How does 2007 revenues with 1999’s spending sound? The result is a $900 billion annual surplus. $450 billion per year of that could go to debt reduction and $450 billion to replacing the money Washington has robbed from Social Security. That sounds like a good place to start.

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Government Spending, Taxation

They Are For It, After They Were Against It?

To hear Democrats, and particularly the President, tell it, we must raise the debt ceiling immediately and to do anything other than raise it $2.4 trillion no questions asked, is “dangerous”, “irresponsible”, “risky”, “playing with fire”, etc. Mr. Obama went so far as to pull out the old liberal stand-by, i.e., scare the old people,  telling them Social Security checks may not go out if this isn’t done immediately.

Whoa, hold on a minute. Did the President of the United States just threaten citizens with taking away their own money? Haven’t we been told our whole lives that Social Security is a trust fund? You mean they can just not give our money back to us if they don’t want to? Hmmm, no conservative has ever warned you about that have they? Don’t worry, seniors, this is an idle threat. Social Security wouldn’t be the first, tenth or probably fiftieth thing cut if/when the government runs out of money. But the fact that he said it ought to really give America pause. That is if we were listening.

Back to the pending doom of not raising the debt ceiling. Interestingly, in 2006, all 45 Democratic Senators, including then Senator Obama, voted against raising the debt ceiling. The increase being discussed then was a paltry $780 billion, but today when raising it more than 3 times that amount is on the table, they would have you believe it is a mere formality and conservatives are being silly to hold it up. Heck, the President has gone so far as to say not raising it would be irresponsible. Really, Mr. President? Then what the hell were you and your cronies up to in 2006?

According to Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid in 2006:

“Any objective analysis of our country’s fiscal history would have to conclude this administration and this rubber-stamping Republican Congress are the most fiscally irresponsible in the history of our country. In fact, no other president or Congress even comes close.”

Here’s more of his rhetoric from way back… ooops, just five years ago:

Oh Harry, what’s that expression about the pot calling the kettle black? So, in 2006 Republicans were being irresponsible for raising the debt ceiling $800 billion, and today they are being irresponsible for not raising it TWO point FOUR TRILLION! I guess Democrats got their John Kerry impersonation mixed up and they are for it after they were against it.

The country is fiscally doomed and this kind of “leadership” is exactly why.

1 Comment

Filed under Congress, Financial

What Do NBC News and Barack Obama Have in Common? Neither One Understands the Deficit

Last night I watched in utter disbelief as a news report on NBC Nightly News claimed the President was going to shave $4 trillion from the $14 trillion deficit over the next ten years. Why is this shocking? Because the $14 trillion isn’t a deficit (an annual shortfall in revenues compared to spending) but rather the nation’s debt (outstanding monies owed). Furthermore, the President’s campaign speech – I mean detail deficient “plan” – doesn’t cut one penny from the $14 trillion national debt. Instead it merely cuts $4 trillion from planned future spending over the next 12 years.

[Side note: this is the first time any Washington nitwit has gone out 12 years with a budget (it’s normally ten) and, of course, was done to pretty-up a very ugly picture.]

I can hear you now, “$4 trillion is nothing to sneeze at”. Well, look at it this way – that’s only $340 billion per year and when you’re going backwards $1.5 trillion per year as we are now, that’s not going to even make a dent in this crisis. Politician’s talk in these big numbers over many years because it obscures the truth and they know it. They do silly things like tell you they’ll fix this massive crisis by raising taxes on the rich as the President did yesterday.

Newsflash, Mr. Obama – According to the IRS, the entire income of all Americans earning over $100,000 in 2008 was about $1.58 trillion. Even if  we taxed them all at 100%, it wouldn’t fix the problem. And, of course, taxing them at 100%, even 50% isn’t feasible as it will kill investment, economic growth and job creation; so please, I know it makes good campaign fodder, but can we drop that charade already? I’m begging you!

So, whether you’re NBC and are going to claim to be a national news service, or you are Barack Obama and claim to be qualified to be President, it would perhaps be good if you had ANY idea what you were talking about when it comes to the fiscal matters of this country. Feel free to call me if you need some help!

Leave a comment

Filed under Financial, Taxation

Did I Wake Up in Wonderland?

Stories from the last handful of days leave me so dumbfounded that I can only come to the conclusion that I must have woken up in Wonderland, or on another planet, or in an alternate universe. Something has to explain the lunacy of these news stories; it can’t be that we’re just this dumb as a nation. Can it?

NAACP Mourns Loss of KKK Member Robert Byrd – “…[Byrd] went from being an active member of the KKK to a being a stalwart supporter of the Civil Rights Act…” Uh, no, NAACP, you better check the Congressional Record again. This racist Democrat filibustered the Civil Rights Act for 3 months in 1964 and voted against the Voting Rights Act in 1965.

70 Days Later, Obama Finally Accepts Foreign Help with Oil SpillHaving been offered assistance in the first week of the disaster by numerous countries, it took this imbecile TEN WEEKS to realize we might need some help on this one! You can’t make up that level of stupidity; you just can’t. This acceptance of assistance still doesn’t include the world’s largest oil skimmer from Taiwan. It sits in port in Louisiana because the EPA is afraid the water it puts back might still have some oil in it?!?!? Umm, oh never mind, that’s too ignorant for me to even comment on.

Venezuela Seizes U.S. Company’s Oil RigsRather than pay the $43 million they owe this American company, Hugo Chavez’s government is just taking their drilling rights and equipment, so far without compensation. The Obama administration is very upset about this abuse of American citizens and their financial interests – they’ve released a statement.

Academics Say Obama Better President Than Reagan – Forget that he’s only been on the job 18 months and has failed to accomplish anything, save ballooning the federal debt, or that he’s currently failing (heck, not even trying) to handle the largest ecological disaster this country has ever seen. Nope these nitwits are ready to declare him a top 15 President of all time. Now here’s the scary part – THESE PEOPLE TEACH!

Nancy Pelosi Says Unemployment Checks are Fastest Way to Create Jobs – “It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name.” No, Nancy, it doesn’t, and anyone who’s taken 6th grade civics can explain why not to you so please ask!

Obama Says Borders Can’t Be Sealed“Our borders are just too vast for us to be able to solve the problem only with fences and border patrols. It won’t work.” Call me crazy, Mr. President, but I think we just might have been able to swing a fence for SEVEN HUNDRED EIGHTY SEVEN BILLION DOLLARS! In fact, I bet some Americans would have appreciated the jobs building the fence and there might even have been a few bucks left over.
Unfortunately, I am on earth, and all of this ignorance happened in a single week in June, 2010. The lame stream media ignored the real stories here, and the American people continued to bury their heads in the sand while their country is yanked out from underneath them. Can you imagine what will be in next week’s news?

Pelosi: Unemployment checks fastest way to create jobs

Leave a comment

Filed under Random Senselessness

Representation Without Taxation Doesn’t Work Either

Today being tax day, it seems a good time to remind ourselves of some key figures. Most Americans give at least a cursory look at their household budget monthly as they pay their bills or perhaps weekly if they’re in the tough position of living paycheck-to-paycheck. But, few stop to review their country’s financial state even once a year. Perhaps that should become a tradition on tax day. After all, Americans would call their cell phone provider and dispute a $10 unexplained charge; so why do they continue to pay thousands each year without asking why or where it’s going?

So here it is, the federal budget for the next ten years, as laid out by President Obama. Be sure to note, it is displayed in billions of dollars.

Allow me to round some figures off in summation: This year, the federal government will take in $2.2 trillion while spending $3.7 trillion (a $1.5 trillion deficit on top of the existing $11 trillion federal debt). Notice they expect the best year in the next ten, 2014, to still be a net loss of $706 billion, even if some wild optimism on Washington’s part comes to fruition.

This is the equivalent of an American family that earns $100,000 per year spending $168,000 while carrying $600,000 in debt; writing IOUs for the $68,000, and planning to do the same thing each of the next ten years and beyond. None of us would do that, so I can’t believe there’s a person in this country dumb enough to think the government’s numbers work, but there is. In fact, there are millions of them. A few of these work in the Lame Stream Media and will go on TV tonight and deride their fellow citizens who are at rallies all over the country today protesting this very spending lunacy, even though it seems the protesters are the only ones paying attention.

But how can millions of people who think the government’s budgetary suicide is ok? Well, that’s easy – 47% of all Americans pay NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX! Put simply, these people have no skin in the game. They are too short-sighted to realize that at the very least, their kids might some day have to pay this bill; or much worse, that a financial default by this country will mean financial pain for all – especially those who currently live off the taxpayer’s largess. Still, come election day, they have the same voting power as those footing the bill, and therein lies the problem. As Ben Franklin so accurately said, “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”

Taxation without representation was cause for a Declaration and War of Independence. Turns out representation without taxation doesn’t work so well either.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

2 Comments

Filed under Government Spending, Taxation

Justice Dept. Says Democratic Voters Need Help Voting

In a stunning admission of their low opinion of their voting base’s intelligence, the Obama administration and its Justice Department admitted that their constituency is incapable of voting without the assistance of party affiliations on the ballot. With irony laced corruption so blatant it almost defies belief the Justice Department overruled the people of Kinston, North Carolina who voted overwhelmingly to do away with the party affiliation designation on the ballot. In doing so, Obama’s Justice Dept. has admitted that their constituency is too stupid to find and vote for the Democrat on the ballot without a “D” next to his or her name. Perhaps more intriguing is the thought that they appear to be suggesting that this same constituency lacked the intelligence to understand the question when they voted overwhelmingly to do away with the designations.

If you’re like me, you probably find it extremely unnerving that the federal Justice Department has the time and the inclination to involve itself in town elections law. Even more disturbing is the disgraceful justification they provide for their actions. Citing racial equality the Justice Department said partisan designations were necessary for black voters to elect their “candidates of choice”. In what possible way is it discriminatory against a particular group to remove party affiliations of all parties from the ballot? Notice the Justice Department did not suggest this action was discriminatory against Republicans, Caucasians, or any other group; further illustrating that they seem to believe the Democrats and/or the black voters of Kinston, North Carolina are lagging behind their Republican neighbors in intelligence.

It seems the Obama administration, and Democrats in general, are wise to the fact that they cannot win elections without the un-educated, uncommitted, partisan voter. A voter who will be rendered useless if party affiliations were removed from the ballot. This is disappointing as I have long contended that the ideal way to return America’s elections to genuine contests decided by informed voters would be to remove the party affiliation from all candidates at all levels on every ballot. No more walking into the voting booth and simply checking off all the names  with a “D” next to them or all the names with an “R” next to them. Instead, voters would have to know who they were voting for and presumably, why. Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear this Justice Department or this administration is interested in fair elections where they would actually have to earn their votes.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Leave a comment

Filed under Elections, Ethics & Corruption

ACORN, Who’s ACORN Say the Dems and the Media

By now, unless you’re living under a rock, you’ve heard about the outrageous scandal involving the liberal and federally funded organization ACORN. So far FIVE different offices around the country have been caught red-handed providing advice on operating a sex ring staffed by 13 and 14 year old girls (illegal immigrants to boot) and how to stiff the IRS on the income generated. If you did somehow manage to miss it, you simply must see some of these videos:

Surreal isn’t it? And yet, a government funded organization and former employer of our current President advising citizens on the management of underage hookers, tax evasion and illegal border crossings may not even be the most unbelievable aspect of the story. No, the real stunner is the ludicrous reactions of the media and Democrats in Washington to this monumental and horribly disturbing story.

First, EVERY SINGLE major media outlet except Fox News made a herculean effort to ignore the story for as long as possible. Each day new videos came out, each one showing another office behaving just as disgracefully or perhaps more so than the last. Apparently this isn’t news. Apparently these organizations aren’t in the news business. Very confusing! When it was finally avoidable no longer they did it as they do best, they spun it as only the Left Wing Media (formerly known as the Main Stream Media) can. Only CNN would report this story with the headline ACORN workers caught on tape allegedly advising on prostitution. Hello! It is on video. What could possibly be alleged about that?

A couple days later, the anchor of ABC News, Charlie Gibson, while being interviewed on radio says he “Doesn’t even know about it” a week after the story breaks!?! Is he kidding? Are we truly supposed to believe that he missed this story for almost a week?

Meanwhile the U.S. Senate votes to ban federal funding of ACORN in light of the scandal. But, seven Senators vote to keep funding this criminal organization. They are:

Burris (D) from Illinois; Casey (D) from Pennsylvania; Durbin (D) from Illinois; Gillibrand (D) from New York; Leahy (D) from Vermont; Sanders (I) from Vermont; and Whitehouse (D) from Rhode Island.

48 hours later, Nancy Pelosi tells reporters, “I don’t even know what they passed. What did they do? They defunded it?”  Really Nancy? You are the Speaker of the House of Representatives and as such are responsible for scheduling votes and coordinating with your counterparts in the Senate on pending legislation, and you expect the American people to believe that you were “Unaware” of this legislation? Are you joking or are you a JOKE?

Just one day later (even though the Speaker knew nothing about it the day before) the House of Representatives votes to eliminate all federal funding to ACORN. Seventy-five Democrats voted against the measure! While the whole list of these convicts might be too lengthy, readers will not be surprised to learn that the tax cheat Charles Rangel (D – NY), the loon, Henry Waxman, author of the climate bill and the entire Congressional Black Caucus voted against the measure. In addition, it will surprise no one to learn that Barney Frank, lead author of the housing crisis was absent for the vote even though he had been on the House floor a mere 30 minutes earlier. Typical cowardly behavior.

This morning President Obama weighs in saying, “Frankly, it’s not really something I’ve followed closely. I didn’t even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money.” This is  simply laughable. The President of the United States doesn’t know that ACORN gets federal money. He’s the President of the United States. The Senate and the House voted on it this week. This organization played a huge role in his election campaign. He’s a former employee of ACORN. Who exactly are the Americans dumb enough to be falling for this kind of disingenuous issue avoidance?

I can’t decide which story is more outrageous; the under-cover videos exposing ACORN for what it is, or the despicable and dishonest behavior of the media and Democrats in Washington in reaction?

Leave a comment

Filed under Ethics & Corruption

Why Trifle Over a Measly $2 Trillion

On February 26, 2009, the Obama Administration released it’s first budget projecting a net deficit over the next 10 years of $7.1 trillion. The Congressional Budget Office scored the budget and said, no, the deficit would be $9.1 trillion over that 10 year period. The administration didn’t like that number and insisted it was wrong. Forget that the CBO is a non-partisan organization whose entire reason for existing is to answer such questions, that number was just too high and the administration didn’t want to admit to saddling the country with that kind of debt. chart_budget3

I’m not sure why they were worried about that, their friends and non-journalists in the main stream media published this chart without so much as mentioning that not one single year was projected to be in the black. Nor did they mention that this preposterous level of spending didn’t even include the additional $1 trillion that Obama’s team projects universal health care will cost (again, the real economists say that number is more likely to be $2 trillion).

This week, in a shocking development that absolutely everyone saw coming, the administration admitted that yes, the real deficit number will be exactly what the CBO said it would be – $9.1 trillion! And this number still doesn’t include the costs of a universal health care program. Nobody seemed to care very much, certainly not Obama’s campaign publicists, aka the main stream media.

Some may ask why I would trifle over a measly $2 trillion. After all, what’s another couple trillion dollars at this point. We are drowning in these mind-boggling large numbers that are beyond comprehension for most Americans. And that’s exactly what the policy makers count on. And that is why it should matter to all Americans. It should matter that our government is spending like a group of drunken sailors on shore leave and expecting you and I to pick up the tab. Actually, that’s not true, were we able to give the politicians a truth serum, they would tell us they have absolutely no idea how to pay for this. Yet, they keep spending, and America keeps letting them.

$9.1 trillion over the next 10 years will mean a federal debt of more than TWENTY TRILLION DOLLARS by 2019 and that’s if the politicians are able to control themselves and stick to a budget – a laughably unlikely proposition if ever there were one. Maybe it is time to trifle.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

Leave a comment

Filed under Government Spending

Revisionist History by the Boston Globe and Barney Frank

This week the Boston Globe and Representative Barney Frank (D – MA), two Massachusetts products for which its citizens should be wholly ashamed, took a laughable trip down revisionist history lane with regard to the housing bubble. The jumping off point for this latest rewrite by the Globe was the President’s announcement that he

plans to pump $4.25 billion of economic stimulus money into creating tens of thousands of federally subsidized rental units in American cities.

Forgetting the question of how $4.25 billion of our tax dollars get redirected from economic stimulus to liberal pet project without so much as a discussion, does no one recall the 1970’s fiasco that was the housing projects? I know Mr. Obama didn’t arrive in Chicago until the Chicago P.D. had finished fighting its WAR with the gangs who had taken over the projects in that city, but hasn’t someone in his cabinet studied the issue or maybe at least watched the History Channel?

Unfortunately, that memory lapse is only the beginning of the distortion in the Globe’s article. Just a couple paragraphs later, the author jumps the proverbial tracks and begins to rewrite history in a way that can only be described as nonsensical.

“I’ve always said the American dream should be a home – not homeownership,’’ said Representative Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and one of the earliest critics of the Bush administration’s push to put mortgages in the hands of low- and moderate-income people.

Interestingly Barney says he’s never been for home ownership, but here he is in 2005 saying he IS for home ownership while also saying he sees no housing bubble. Good call Barney!

I’m not sure how one gets a job writing for a major metropolitan newspaper, but clearly reading, studying, remembering even the recent past, citing facts, and/or having any idea what you are talking about are not requirements. The policy of pushing home ownership was begun by Jimmy Carter under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980. It was wildly expanded by Bill Clinton in 1994, under his National Homeownership Strategy, when Clinton directed HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros to come up with a plan. The Globe knows these things, but it isn’t the story they’d like to tell so they leave those details out.

Blaming George Bush for the housing bubble is laughable “journalism”. As a matter of FACT (stubborn things the Globe is not fond of nor familiar with) the Bush Administration tried desperately starting in 2001 to get Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulations dramatically tightened and told Congress that failure to act could be catastrophic to the financial system. Barney Frank and his Democratic pals sat there that day and said the Bush Administration was exaggerating. Barney actually said he saw no reason to believe Fannie and Freddie were headed for trouble and he said EVEN IF THEY DID GET IN TROUBLE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT  WOULDN’T BAIL THEM OUT! Don’t believe me, here’s the video of him saying it:

Barney, Barney, Barney. How dare you and your shills at the Boston Globe try to revise the story now. You and your Democratic colleagues had opportunities in 2001, 2003, and 2005 complete with warnings from the Treasury and the Fed on all 3 occasions to prevent this catastrophe. You failed your constituents and the American people at large. Hopefully the voters of Massachusetts will wake up and take your throne away from you.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

1 Comment

Filed under Financial, Random Senselessness

Anything Bad, Blame Him – Anything Good, Thank Me

Today in the White House Rose Garden President Obama claimed that his administration has saved the US economy from ‘catastrophe’. Hallelujah we’re saved! Yes, I am laughing hysterically as I type that. Along with his gigantic ego problem this President seems to also have a memory problem. You see, just 7 days ago, Mr. Obama once again trotted out his pitiful “blame my predecessor” defense coupled with the almost as weak, “this is going to take a long time to fix”. Members of his administration went on the Sunday morning talk shows and told us flat out that this was still President Bush’s economy. They told us that only a tiny, tiny fraction of the Obama stimulus package had been spent (one might ask why since it passed 5 months ago, but let’s not trifle). Now, a mere 7 days later, and while 9.4% of the U.S. population is unemployed and state and federal governments are running huge unsustainable deficits, Mr. Obama has decided everything is all better now.

Ok, he didn’t go quite that far, but his position and his audacity is no less prepostorous. I wonder what he’ll say next week if the jobs report or other economic news isn’t quite so upbeat? I wonder how many more times the American people will let him get away with blaming the other guy for bad news and taking credit for all the good news?

Leave a comment

Filed under Random Senselessness