Saturday, September 11, 2010

PAIN, COMPASSION AND POLITICS

September 11th is particularly pognant this year. It is a difficult day for many americans anyway; a day to remember and, even nine years later, to grieve. It is a day that we, the citizens of the most powerful country on earth, are confronted by our vulnerability. Nine years and one day ago, the US was on top of the world. We were the gentle giant, leading the world with our innovation and thriving economy. It seemed inconceivable that just 24 hours later, we would be brought to our knees in shared grief, anger and disbelief. The horror of it all is still a raw, gaping wound on the psyche of the country as a whole.


This year, 9/11 will be more emotional for many because of the proposed mosque scheduled to be built two blocks away in a building that was partially destroyed on 9/11 when it was hit with the landing gear of one of the planes. This project is an affront to all who lost loved ones that horrific day. For those who say "It's not the "Ground Zero Mosque" - it's two whole blocks away!" the response is simple - it was destroyed by the same forces that destroyed the Twin Towers. It is Ground Zero. Adding insult to injury, the mosque has been fast tracked, even though a Greek Orthodox church, which was destroyed on September 11, 2001 when one of the towers fell on it, has yet to receive approval to rebuild.

This past week has been a three-ring circus of outrages, from the unyielding determination of the mosque builders to the lunatic in Florida who has threatened to burn a Qu'ran today to the burning of american flags in protest of the qu'ran burning.  The nearly 70% of americans who oppose the mosque have been called "islamophobes", racists, zionists, and a plethora of other insults in an attempt to shut them up. They have even been threatened, if you consider a warning of a potential explosion of rage in the muslim world if the mosque isn't built exactly where Imam Rauf wants it built as a threat.  His assertion that "the story will be that the radicals have taken over the discourse" is laughable, at best.  The "warning" he issued is quite indicative of exactly which radicals will take over the discourse and from where the violence will come.  Michelle Malkin has an interesting rundown of some other incidents that have caused "explosions of anger" in the muslim world. This threat is nothing new. It is endlessly fascinating that, with all the rhetoric over the years that attempts to paint "radical christians" and right wing extremist opposition as somehow worse than jihadis, there has been no talk of the potential risk of a terrorist attack on the mosque.

Quite frankly, the constant threats have become tiresome, as is the perpetual kowtowing to these extremists. No, they don't represent a majority of muslims, but they certainly seem to be the only voice we hear on the subject. There should be no support whatsoever for the burning of the qu'ran, and the pastor who threatened it dropped the level of the debate to somewhere in the septic tank range. However, his attempt to equate the atrocity of burning the qu'ran with the atrocity of building an islamic center and mosque on the site of a devastating, deadly attack made in the name of islam has some merit. Both acts are an affront to all that is civil and respectful. The fact is, both acts are legal under our constitution, and both acts are morally objectionable. In the case of the pastor, he stepped back from the edge. In the case of the imam, he is refusing to budge from his position.

If the aim of this "cultural center" was really to build bridges between the muslim world and americans, Rauf is definitely going about this the wrong way. Part of building a bridge is to meet halfway. Demanding the submission of the american people to his will is most certainly not what most people would consider compromise. That President Obama is backing Rauf and his demands is not surprising either. After all, this is the man whose idea of compromise is for his opposition to shut up and support his agenda or be demonized.

Staking out a position on the legality of the situation but refusing to comment on the morality of it speaks volumes about Obama's inability to properly unite and lead this country. He may be charismatic, but he lacks empathy and he seems to lack the understanding that he is not just the commander in chief, but our moral leader as well. That he does not understand the pain the mosque is inflicting on his people is indicative of his problems in the polls of late. Because the wound is still raw, we need a leader who understands our pain. Sometimes, a president is like a mother - required to reassure, comfort and defend her children even when she doesn't understand the full extent of their pain. The fact that they are in pain is enough for her to act on their behalf. Instead, Obama comes off as some sort of frustrated step-father, who cannot understand why the child can't move on and has no interest in building a bond by attempting to empathize. It seems that all he sees are petulant children making his life difficult with their ridiculous demands for solace, understanding and protection from that which hurts them. For all of George W. Bush's faults (and there were many) he got this concept, and his approval ratings in the aftermath of 9/11 illustrate that quite clearly.

It is ironic in the extreme that the so-called party of compassion is so very uncompassionate when it comes to this grievous wound to our country. This year, when the hallowed ground of Ground Zero has become a political football for islamic radicals and the progressives who cater to them, our national loss is all the more poignant.


Cross Posted at the Ripley Report

Read more...
Share/Save/Bookmark

Thursday, September 2, 2010

STALKING ON A NATIONAL LEVEL

The NAACP and various left-wing media groups have started up a new website, TeaPartyTracker.org.  The point of this new website?  Why, to monitor and report on any and all examples of "racism" and "extremism" in the Tea Party movement, of course.  They are calling on bloggers and assorted lefties with camera phones to document any wrongdoing on the part of the tea party.

Good luck with that, guys.  Oh, and here's a tip for you - the idiots on the fringes who carry the Obama is Hitler signs are LaRouchies - democrats.  Just a little FYI for ya, 'cause so far you don't seem to have gotten the memo.  

If the NAACP is so interested in rooting out racism on a national level, perhaps they should start here.  Or here.  And don't forget all of these.  It's really amazing that their highly tuned 'racedar' didn't go off over this one - but, then, "death to cracka's" isn't really racist, so it's understandable that they would have missed that.

Even with a $100,000 bounty for video proving claims of racism in the tea party, there has still been no video tape to prove the point, even with the hundreds of cameras present - including ones in democrat hands.  Perhaps the NAACP and their ilk should be focusiing on people like this who make their living off the back of racial prejudice, even when it is a hoax, and even when the result is violence and riots.

These constant, fruitless attempts to smear the tea parties as racist are wearing very thin.  According to a press release from Project 21, a black activist group sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research:

"Progressives have hijacked the NAACP to the extent that the group stands silent as conservative blacks suffer indignities for their beliefs. Some NAACP even egg on this appalling behavior – providing political cover and lapdog services for these elitists," said Project 21 member Kevin Martin. "As a conservative black man, I have felt more welcomed and at home within the tea party movement than among those of my own who side with the this new NAACP. If a few random signs of President Obama looking like the Joker is indeed racist, then where was the NAACP when conservative blacks are depicted as lawn jockeys, Oreos and Uncle Toms?"

Actually, members of the NAACP themselves are guilty of this.

It's time to stop the race baiting.  The damage being done is damage to themselves.  As long as the NAACP and other progressive groups indulge in these antics, there will never be progress and there will never be healing.  Resorting to baseless name-calling cheapens the NAACP and causes people to question their relevance.  Attempts to make the dissent against the current administration (and just about every other issue) about race does a disservice to their cause. 

Read more...
Share/Save/Bookmark

Monday, August 30, 2010

BECK AND THE LIBERAL NARRATIVE

Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally at the Lincoln Memorial attracted huge crowds, with estimates up to 300,000+.  The pictures are quite impressive.  The rally was to benefit the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, a great organization that helps the families of fallen special forces with scholarships and counselling, as well as financial assistance to severely wounded special operations personnel. 

The weeks running up to the event were filled with hysteria on the part of the neo-pravda media and particularly race-baiting huckster Al Sharpton, who had his own rally, "Reclaim the Dream" on the same day.  He seems to feel that Beck was attempting to usurp MLK and the "I have a Dream" speech.  This was not Beck's intent, as the actual event proves quite clearly.  They acknowledged the importance of the day, and some spoke about MLK's speech and it's importance to the country, but ultimately the day was about loving and honoring our country and the troops who fight and die for us.  According to some, Beck seemed to be stepping into Billy Graham's shoes, not Martin Luther King, Jr's. 

The day seems to have utterly flummoxed the press.  They simply don't know what to make of it.  For weeks they have been lambasting Beck for his presumptions, his nerve in stepping all over MLK's dream and, of course, highlighting Sarah Palin's participation in an attempt to illustrate how ultra political and fringe-y the whole thing is.  Apparently her mere presence made it a political event (what office is she running for, again?). 

Because they could not attack the politics of the event (mainly because there wasn't any), they had to resort to their trusty favorite fall back position and point out the "predominantly/overwhelmingly white" audience.  Interesting how none of them mention Sharpton's predominantly black audience for his rally.   But that point isn't relevant or important.  To hear the MSM report it, there wasn't a single minority face in Beck's entire rally, and besides, the few that were there were obviously confused/misled.

Today, the New York Times' Ross Douthat wrote an op-ed piece on Beck's rally titled "Mr. Beck Goes to Washington".  This article is about as close to a grudging, backhanded compliment as a thing can be: 


For a weekend, at least, Beck proved that he can conjure the thrill of a culture war without the costs of combat, and the solidarity of identity politics without any actual politics. If his influence outlasts the current election cycle, this will be the secret of his success.

The article was as fair a representation as one could hope for from the Times.  No snarky comments (even though Sarah Palin was mentioned - a minor miracle in and of itself), and no mention of the overwhelming whiteness of the crowd that others are so fixated on.  There was, however one paragraph that was a bit objectionable:


Similarly, one could call the rally a gross affront to the memory of King, who presumably wouldn’t have cared much for Beck’s right-wing politics. But one could also call the day a strange, unlooked-for fulfillment of King’s prophecies: 47 years after the “I Have a Dream” speech, here were tens of thousands of white conservatives roaring their approval of its author.

A "gross affront"?  According to his niece, Alveda King, who spoke at the rally, Dr. King was a republican.  Beyond that, as a reverend, he was a christian - a conservative christian - and as such, one would think that he might just embrace Beck's right-wing politics.  One would also think that the good reverend would be happy that a huge crowd of "predominantly/overwhelmingly white" Americans who had gathered to celebrate this great country and restore the judeo-christian ethics at her heart would hail him as a hero and great American, whose teachings should be a guiding light for all Americans.  What is so "strange" and "unlooked-for" about that? Isn't that what the dream was really about - the content of character, not the color of skin?   One might wonder, however, at his thoughts on Sharpton's rally and march.  Ms. King believes her uncle would have enjoyed Beck's rally (which is prompting critics to say she is "besmirching" his legacy), viewing it as an extension of his vision because it (via the Daily Caller):
“demonstrates the spirit of love and unity and peace.”

According to singer Lloyd Marcus:


“If Dr. King were alive today, he’d feel as if he stepped into the twilight zone,” Marcus said. “He’d feel like, ‘Oh my gosh, what happened to my dream? And, are you telling me that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and the likes of those guys now are running the civil rights movement? Oh, good Lord! What happened?’ He would be totally appalled.”


Sharpton has been at his race-baiting best.  In his speech Saturday he said:
"They may have the Mall, but we have the message.  They may have the platform, but we have the dream....
They want to disgrace this day, and we not giving them this day.  This is OUR day and we ain't giving it away."

Which is more disgraceful - Sharpton's pitting the black community against the white in a shameless attempt to relive his glory days marching arm in arm through Washington while laying claim to a man simply based on his race - a man whose whole message was about surpassing identity politics - or a peaceful rally to honor not just Dr. King, but also the country he loved?  Dr. King looked to the future - a future where race didn't matter.  Rev. Sharpton's entire purpose in life seems to be a quest to highlight racial division and keep the country believing we have not moved past 1963.  Unfortunately for him, race has nothing to do with it and his hystrionics merely illustrate how obsolete and out of touch he is.

This event was a defining moment in our history.  There were many people who felt a vague discontent under the milder progressivism of Bush and Clinton, which became more pronounced when Barack Obama took office and embarked upon his quest to "fundamentally transform" America.  It is this transformation that has people up in arms, and no matter who is driving the car, it is the inevitable transformative crash that is feared.  This is not about race.  This is a choice between wanting to restore this country to the judeo-christian ethics and values and dynamic free market system our founders put in place or fundamentally transforming it into an offshoot of the European Union, to freeze in time and slowly disintegrate into obscurity. 

Sharpton and the media do not want to have that conversation and bring that choice to the fore, because they know they will lose.  And so they bring the debate down to a level that they can get the upper hand on.  Relevancy seems optional, at this point.
One final thought - isn't it amazing how those who have been squawking about tolerance for weeks now when it comes to the ground zero mosque are suddenly showing just how intolerant they really are?  When it comes to Beck having a rally to stoke the fires of patriotism and love of God and country, suddenly the left is all about shutting him down and stifling his first amendment right to free speech.  The intolerance over Beck's event has been overwhelming, from blatantly, transparently fraudulent and yet completely expected  accusations of racism to outrage at his "usurping" MLK and his messsage of unity. 

No hypocrisy here, move along, move along. 

Cross Posted at the Ripley Report

Read more...
Share/Save/Bookmark

Monday, August 16, 2010

STAMPING OUT OBESITY

Last week, congress passed the "EduJobs" bill.  This bill is ostensibly to help save teacher's jobs in states with budget deficits.  In reality, many of the states that are to receive this "aid" don't need it, and it seems that the unions are the real beneficiaries, with $36 million going to the National Educators Association and an additional $14 million going to the American Federation of Teachers.  Let's not forget that unions are some of the biggest contributors for democrat campaigns, with teachers unions at the top of the list.

The bigger question is how this $26 billion piece of legislation is going to be paid for?  Why, by appropriating from other programs, of course.  Let's remember before we discuss where funding is coming from, that this bill was sold as helping teachers and children.  The teachers unions love to invoke the children, and yet most of their demands help no one but themselves and their members.  The unions wanted the $26 billion to be counted as "emergency spending", but the democrats were afraid to give republicans more ammunition with yet another unfunded spending bill.  Instead they decided to abide by their oft ignored PayGo legislation and raid a few piggy banks - at some point in the future.  So where is the funding coming from (via Education Report):

Education Week reported that the bill takes $50 million from the Striving Readers adolescent literacy program, $10 million from the Ready to Teach program that pays for teacher telecommunications programs and $82 million from student financial aid administration. The bill would not take money from the "Race to the Top" fund, as earlier proposed, according to Education Week.

Some of the funding will also be coming from the charter school system - a system the teachers unions oppose - because most charter schools, like private schools, are not unionized.  This is also why unions (and democrats) oppose school choice - most parents would chose a private or charter school over a public one, and most of them are union free.  How very convenient for the unions that they are getting increased funding by stealing appropriating funding from the charter schools.  No doubt that was a happy coincidence.

The remainder of the funding will be coming out of the food stamp program, to the tune of about $12 billion...but not until 2014.  Why take the blame this year when you can pile it on another congress a few years later?  Kicking the can down the road - congress' favorite sport.

Congress seems to think the food stamp program is the newest cash cow, because they are now proposing to dip into the kitty yet again to fund Michelle Obama's anti-obesity campaign.  Perhaps it's because there was little outcry from the public over the funding of the edujobs bill, perhaps because there's just no where else to get it from (hey, how about what's left of the non-stimulating stimulus?), but either way, the food stamp program seems to be the congressional pot of gold du jour.

Taking money from the food stamp program to fund Mrs. O's "Let's Move!" program makes sense, though - the easiest way to crack down on obesity, particularly in the poorer neighborhoods where it seems to be reaching epidemic proportions, is by taking away the means to buy food in the first place.  There is a great deal of irony in taking food out of kids mouths in the name of education - aren't we told that good nutrition is essential to good education?  Let's not forget, too, the war on cheap convenience food (led by Michelle Obama) - so they are taking away cheaper alternatives, thus forcing poor parents to pay more for food, while at the same time reducing the amount of assistance they receive to buy food. 

Progressive humanitarianism - it's a frightening thing.

What is most galling about these programs and the way they are being funded is the moral superiority their backers are displaying.  The teacher's unions and supporters of Let's Move! are crying that these programs are necessary for the good of the kids.  No, they are for the good of the unions and progressive social engineering.  It is appalling that these groups are using children as human shields to further their agendas - agendas that seem to be more harmful than beneficial in the long run.  Unless, of course, your idea of beneficial doesn't include a decent education and food on the table. 

As for the fruits of the liberal tree of knowledge, things are looking pretty grim.  Better not be too vocal about questioning their success, though.

Read more...
Share/Save/Bookmark

Thursday, August 12, 2010

FUN IN PHILLY

Our trip to Philadelphia was a fun one.  We went to the Franklin Institute (a favorite of mine from when I was a child) and the National Constitution Center.  We also saw Independence Hall and the Liberty Bell, as well as the Reading Market and Pat's (King of Steaks!)  for a cheesesteak. 

The Constitution Center was great:



The kids were sure they were going to be bored, but they had a good time in spite of themselves!  There are lots of interactive displays, and it goes through the Constitution from it's founding to the current day.  And by current day, I mean they had new displays up questioning the constitutionality of a) the goverment directing cleanup of the Gulf oil spill, b) same-sex marriage and c) the Arizona Immigration law.  There are post-it notes at nearby stations, and visitors are encouraged to vote yes or no and stick their post-it on the issue:


Founder's Hall was fun.  The hall is filled with life-sized statues of the Founders, and many are in the poses of the iconic painting "Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States".  Visitors are encouraged to join the signers by signing a large visitors book and pose for pictures with the various Founders:



The whole experience starts with a live-action multi-media presentation on the period just after the Revolutionary War, when the individual states were governing themselves and the union was close to splintering apart. The presentation discusses the founding; the men who started us off on the greatest political experiment in man's history, and the document they created.  The exhibit hall is round, and after the presentation, visitors are directed to begin their tour through the center at the beginning and work their way around to the present day.  The exhibit startes in 1787 with a display of books that influenced our founders and winds through the 234 years of our history.  There are artifacts from each of our presidents, and information on how their policies affected both the Constitution and We, the People.  

Patriotic geek that I am, I highly recommend the Center if you find yourself in Philly.  They have created a mall-like complex, with the Constitution Center at one end and Independence Hall at the other, with the Liberty Bell and the excavation of the President's House in the middle. 

Make sure to check out the Franklin Institute, too, especially if you have kids.  Even my teenager had fun.  Check out the planetarium shows, be sure to stop by the rooftop observatory to take a peek at the sun and don't forget to tackle the walk-through heart!





"Tell me and I forget.  Teach me and I remember.  Involve me and I learn."  - Ben Franklin

Read more...
Share/Save/Bookmark

Monday, August 2, 2010

UNEXPECTED PLACES

   I am currently on vacation in the beautiful Pocono mountains of Pennsylvania. It had been a very stressful late spring/early summer, as my sister has been dealing with a fairly major health crisis over the past couple of months. We decided to come up to visit as soon as she was up for vistors. It's gorgeous up here, and my kids have been overwhelmed by the mountains, which they have never seen before, and their cousins (whom they have also never seen before), of which there are seven. It has been a wonderful week, full of much-needed laughter, and we will be heading down to Philadelphia in the next few days to take in the sights and visit with other family. I'm looking forward to visiting the Constitution Center, as well as the old city and possibly even a day trip to New York if we have time.


My sister lives in a lovely little town nestled in the gently rolling, ancient Poconos, in a house that was built in the late 1800's. The people here are what our president would call gun-toting bible-clingers. Real salt of the earth people, many of whom are farmers. As we were driving along one of the curving, undulating main roads one day, I saw a sign by the side of the road that led me to believe that Mr. Obama's policies aren't well liked here:





It was most unexpected. The sign belongs to a local farmer, who is obviously unhappy with the way Obama and Co. are handling things. Needless to say, I feel quite at home up here!


Cross Posted at The Ripley Report

Read more...
Share/Save/Bookmark

Friday, July 23, 2010

IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON Updated

Last week, Shirley Sherrod was merely another regional director for the USDA.  She performed her job admirably well, and has spent much of her life helping the poor.  But all of that was thrown out like last week's garbage when Andrew Breitbart posted video of Ms. Sherrod on his BigGovernment website. 

The video showed Sherrod speaking before the NAACP last year, telling a story about a white farmer who, twenty-four years ago when she worked for a different agency, came to her for aid to keep his farm.  At first, Sherrod was reluctant to help him, feeling her duty lay with the black farmers in the region.  She helped him a bit, but not to the full scope of her capabilities, as she warred with herself over what to do with him.  She finally referred him to a white lawyer, preferring to allow "his own kind" to help him. 

Out of context, her remarks seem to promote discriminating against whites.  But taken in context, her story wasn't about some sort of 'justifiable' racism, it was about racism never being justifiable.  It was about the needs of the poor being universal, and the help from people such as her being colorblind.  It was something she struggled with over the years, and continues to struggle with, but, at least in the case of the farmer in question, she saw the wrong she was doing and set it right.    She was not perfect, but she recognized her imperfection and strove to change it.  She overcame her bias and wanted to use her story to inspire others to see things as she did.

But this story isn't really about Shirley Sherrod.   As compelling as her story may be, she is just the most recent in a long string of innocent victims to the racial narrative that has exploded in this country since Barack Obama took office. 

Was this a setup by Andew Breitbart - an effort to draw out a racial accusation by the NAACP on an erronious spot judgement to prove a larger point?  There have been several unfounded accusations from the left over the past 18 months, culminating in the NAACP's denouncement of the tea parties last week over implied but unproved slurs and slights.  The NAACP demanded that the tea parties take ownership of and denounce any and all persons who make racial remarks at a tea party function, whether they are affiliated with the group or not.  Because of this ridiculous, impossible stance, they were forced to live up to their own standards and so went after Sherrod as an example to prove their own, well, intolerance of intolerance. 

Sherrod is more of an example than they know in that, much like the tea parties that are the left's favorite punching bags, she was innocent of their charges of racism.  Much like the tea parties, the NAACP made judgements on Sherrod based on incomplete and incorrect information.  Instead of checking their own archives, they just assumed she was in the wrong, much as they assume the allegations of racism in the tea party are correct, with no evidence to corroborate.

Which brings up another question - why were they so quick to think she really was making racist statements at an NAACP forum?  Considering how quick they were to come out on this story, without even researching their own archives first, that raises an important question -  does it happen that often?  Ben Jealous claims the NAACP was "snookered", but it seems more like they set themselves up. 

Granted, it is one of Alinsky's Rules (Tactic #4) to hold the opposition to a higher standard (#4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.").  The problem is, sometimes the hypocrisy is just too much and the blowback is worse than the initial assault.  After the rantings of the New Black Panthers, Rev. Wright, and even members of the NAACP itself, there just isn't as much weight behind the accusation anymore.  The race card has been played too much, with too little to back it up.  In short, the country is suffering from race fatigue.  This is an excellent example of why tactic #7 - "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag" - is a caution that should be heeded.

The NAACP doesn't seem to want the country to move on, though.  They cannot afford to acknowledge the giant strides this country has made in race relations, because it would illustrate their eventual obsolescence.  For every step forward, people like Jealous, Al Sharpton, Rev. Wright and Jesse Jackson try to drag us back to 1967, when they were relevant and necessary.  Not to say there is no discrimination, it is just that it is becoming more rare, as opposed to the systemic corruption of bigotry from the Jim Crow era.  With their broad brush accusations, they are trying to argue that the entire tea party 'system', as well as everyone sympathetic to it, are racists.  Even with a surge of black conservatives denouncing the racial accusations, the NAACP has their narrative and they're sticking to it. 

They are attempting to lay blame on, of all things, Fox News.  This is interesting, since Fox did not air the video until hours after she had been booted to the curb resigned.  The USDA blamed the White House, saying if she didn't resign, she would be on Glenn Beck.  The White House is now blaming Vilsack, the head of the USDA, saying he "jumped the gun".  It would be very interesting to know if the White House did demand her head out of fear of giving Beck fodder for another show.  The threat of Beck coverage seems to be a pretty strong incentive for this administration.  Odd, considering how stupid and crazy they keep saying he is.

The problem we have in this country is that we are unwilling or not allowed to see the strides made, only the original sins that propelled the change.  It is nothing short of amazing to me that in this day and age, with the country being led by a man of african descent, that racial bias and the old stereotypes of decades past are still being trotted out as relevant today. Opposition to a political agenda is NOT racism.

The constant race baiting by left-wing groups has become nothing more than a distraction from the real issues.  This is far too serious a charge to be bandied about in that way.  If the Journolist scandal has taught us anything, it is that a surprising number on the left are perfectly happy to use the race card to change the subject, no facts required.

Many of those the NAACP would label racists for opposing the Obama agenda were the self-same people who helped vote Obama into office in the first place. The NAACP seems to be incapable of seeing the great strides towards equality that this country has taken since the civil rights era. They are unable to let go of the hate, and it has poisoned them nearly to the point of irrationality. Much like infection keeps a wound from healing, so too does the continued trumping up of racial charges keep the country from moving on in the quest for an equal society of free people.

UPDATE: Allen West weighs in.

Read more...
Share/Save/Bookmark

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP