I got this forward in my email box today:
FW: Cash for Clunker Math
Our government at work.
A clunker that travels 12,000 miles a year at 15 mpg uses 800 gallons of gas a year.
A vehicle that travels 12,000 miles a year at 25 mpg uses 480 gallons a year.
So, the average Cash for Clunkers transaction will reduce an individual’s gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year.
They claim the program turned 700,000 vehicles so that's 224 million gallons saved per year.
That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil.
5 million barrels is about 5 hours worth of US consumption.
More importantly, 5 million barrels of oil at $70 per barrel costs about $350 million dollars.
So, the government paid $3 billion of our tax dollars to save $350 million.
Which means they spent $8.57 for every dollar saved.
I'm pretty sure they’ll do a great job with health care though...
Progressive Logic: Don't question us. The government knows best.
April 12, 2010
April 09, 2010
Work Ethic
Last night Keith Olbermann was ranting the usual rant about Glenn Beck being dangerous and fake. The usual Beck-doesn't-believe-anything-he-says-he-just-cares-about-making-more-money tirade. Olbermann then said that if Glenn Beck was such a capitalist and really thought Obama was such a socialist, then why would Beck continue to do what he's doing and make all that money if the government is going to take such a high percentage of what he earns?
Progressive Logic: Personal integrity means nothing. There is no point in working hard if you don't have to. The rich should be taxed, and if they don't like it, then they shouldn't work so hard.
Progressive Logic: Personal integrity means nothing. There is no point in working hard if you don't have to. The rich should be taxed, and if they don't like it, then they shouldn't work so hard.
April 07, 2010
Love Thy Neighbor.
Progressive: "Don't you describe yourself as Christian?"
Me: "Yes"
Progressive: "Didn't Jesus say 'Love thy neighbor'? How can you be against taxing the rich to give to the people that need it, if you are supposed to 'love thy neighbor'?
Me: "'Love thy neighbor' does not mean force one neighbor to give up their money to a government, so a government can decide where to put that money. Love thy neighbor means helping your neighbor, be it with love, support, food, money, charity, prayer, strength, a shoulder to lean on, etc. Taxing me does not equal my love."
Progressive: "Well, I'd pay more taxes for you. Wouldn't you pay more taxes for me?"
Me: "I'd help you if you needed it, but I would not give money to the government to give to you, no. If you want to pay more taxes for people you think need it, send more money to the government voluntarily every year on April 15th. No one is stopping you from sending more money."
Progressive: "How can you be so harsh? How did you get like this at such a young age?"
Me: "I'm not harsh, I'm realistic. Loving thy neighbor does not mean force me to pay more money so a third party can figure out if and how much my neighbor needs."
Progressive logic: Paying taxes is the good and humane thing to do. You do not care about others if you don't want to pay taxes. Giving help and/or money directly to your neighbor isn't as good as giving it to the government to give to your neighbor.
Me: "Yes"
Progressive: "Didn't Jesus say 'Love thy neighbor'? How can you be against taxing the rich to give to the people that need it, if you are supposed to 'love thy neighbor'?
Me: "'Love thy neighbor' does not mean force one neighbor to give up their money to a government, so a government can decide where to put that money. Love thy neighbor means helping your neighbor, be it with love, support, food, money, charity, prayer, strength, a shoulder to lean on, etc. Taxing me does not equal my love."
Progressive: "Well, I'd pay more taxes for you. Wouldn't you pay more taxes for me?"
Me: "I'd help you if you needed it, but I would not give money to the government to give to you, no. If you want to pay more taxes for people you think need it, send more money to the government voluntarily every year on April 15th. No one is stopping you from sending more money."
Progressive: "How can you be so harsh? How did you get like this at such a young age?"
Me: "I'm not harsh, I'm realistic. Loving thy neighbor does not mean force me to pay more money so a third party can figure out if and how much my neighbor needs."
Progressive logic: Paying taxes is the good and humane thing to do. You do not care about others if you don't want to pay taxes. Giving help and/or money directly to your neighbor isn't as good as giving it to the government to give to your neighbor.
April 02, 2010
Force vs. Freedom
From a Progressive Logic reader in California:
Have you ever noticed how certain words seem to circulate when a liberal speaks? The same thing happens when a conservative speaks, but the words are different. When a liberal speaks, pretty soon you will hear the words "force" and "allow". When a conservative speaks, pretty soon you will hear the words "freedom" and "responsibility". And, have you ever noticed that pretty soon after you hear the words "force" and "allow", you will hear words involving money and "sacrifice"?
Progressive Logic: Freedom and Liberty only apply to the minorities, poor, sick, mentally ill, handicapped and undocumented portions of the population. Those who are not minorities, poor, sick, mentally ill, handicapped or undocumented should be forced to sacrifice and give their money to the people progressives think should have it. It's about weakening the strong, not about strengthening the weak.
Have you ever noticed how certain words seem to circulate when a liberal speaks? The same thing happens when a conservative speaks, but the words are different. When a liberal speaks, pretty soon you will hear the words "force" and "allow". When a conservative speaks, pretty soon you will hear the words "freedom" and "responsibility". And, have you ever noticed that pretty soon after you hear the words "force" and "allow", you will hear words involving money and "sacrifice"?
Progressive Logic: Freedom and Liberty only apply to the minorities, poor, sick, mentally ill, handicapped and undocumented portions of the population. Those who are not minorities, poor, sick, mentally ill, handicapped or undocumented should be forced to sacrifice and give their money to the people progressives think should have it. It's about weakening the strong, not about strengthening the weak.
April 01, 2010
It's about winning and losing.
The night Obama got elected an old friend of mine was going on and on about how America was now saved. All the jobs are going to magically come back, because Obama was going to repeal the evil Bush tax cuts for businesses going overseas, and instead was going to raise their taxes so those awful businesses will be forced to bring jobs back here. I said that the reason jobs are going overseas is because of the cost of labor, and Obama said that he wanted to raise the minimum wage. My progressive friend said "Well, this is a time to come together and be one country and support each other. Some people are such sore losers, its unbelievable."
Progressive Logic: Elections in America are about winning and losing, not about the Constitution or freedom or liberty or what is good for the country. When you realize you are wrong, quickly change the subject to how insensitive and heartless the other person is. If that doesn't work, make sure they know that they lost and you won in the last election.
Progressive Logic: Elections in America are about winning and losing, not about the Constitution or freedom or liberty or what is good for the country. When you realize you are wrong, quickly change the subject to how insensitive and heartless the other person is. If that doesn't work, make sure they know that they lost and you won in the last election.
March 31, 2010
The Government is Health Care Houdini
From Anonymous, California:
About a year ago, friend of mine got something stuck in her eye that kept getting worse so she went to the emergency room. After complaining that she was late for work, she said "It took six hours to get my eye looked at in the ER. We need some serious health care reform in this country people!"
Progressive Logic: Government intrusion in the heath care system means no more waiting to see a doctor.
About a year ago, friend of mine got something stuck in her eye that kept getting worse so she went to the emergency room. After complaining that she was late for work, she said "It took six hours to get my eye looked at in the ER. We need some serious health care reform in this country people!"
Progressive Logic: Government intrusion in the heath care system means no more waiting to see a doctor.
March 30, 2010
Gender Equality
From Anonymous, California:
I was talking to a woman who claims to be an Independent. As we talked, I told her all the reasons why I was against a certain female Senator being re-elected in our state. She agreed with all of my reasons. Then she voted for the woman because, "I voted for a man in another office so I had to vote for her to balance things a little."
Progressive Logic: Gender equality trumps policy.
I was talking to a woman who claims to be an Independent. As we talked, I told her all the reasons why I was against a certain female Senator being re-elected in our state. She agreed with all of my reasons. Then she voted for the woman because, "I voted for a man in another office so I had to vote for her to balance things a little."
Progressive Logic: Gender equality trumps policy.
March 29, 2010
Fiscally Conservative
I was talking to a friend the other day about how fatigued we both are with political parties. Neither one of us fit completely into one party or another and I said I am very conservative and much of the time identify with Libertarians. She said "I'm fiscally conservative, and socially liberal." In the interest of keeping her as a friend, I just smiled as a flashing red WARNING sign started flashing in my head.
Progressive Logic: Money grows on trees.
Progressive Logic: Money grows on trees.
March 25, 2010
Power to the People
It started on Facebook. My friend posted a comment saying she was so happy about health care passing and how great it was that everyone was going to be covered. It set off a whirlwind of comments and debate between people who agreed and those who didn't. I jumped in, trying not to be too harsh, but still feeling like I needed to get my two cents in. I'm picking it up in the middle of the debate, and only showing what is important to the main issue, which was the debate between me and 'progressive'. Here's how the rest of it went:
My friend:
...It is pathetic that as the country gets more and more obese, I am going to be paying for people exercising their god-given right to live on Cheetos and Pepsi, BUT I will do it. I think that there should be a nice fat tax applied to all this crap like cigarettes that goes into a fund for people who get sick with completely preventable diseases , but highly doubt that will happen.
...I suppose people will be forced, if laws "force" you to do something. Everyone excludes themselves from these blanket statements, but you must know people don't always do what is in their own best interest. Seat belts are a good example. The government passed a law requirement safety belts, and highway accident deaths decreased. Without the law, there would still be kids flying through windshields and people's brains bashed all over the sidewalk every time there was an accident. People do not wear them on their own, they wear them because there is a law. My parents could have afforded private health insurance, but they gambled and said they would rather spend $1200 a month elsewhere, and then they lost. And my mom got sick with cancer. Shitty decision. So I am so happy that they are going to be required to have this, because they wouldn't have done it otherwise, and my parents are high-income intelligent people. But if they didn't do what is best for them, how are less informed, less economically stable people going to do it.
Me:
Hi 'My Friend' - I think what is at the core of the difference here is that people (including me) have a huge huge problem being told (and mandated) by the government what is good for me and what I should do. If I want to not wear my seatbelt and get in a bad accident and get thrown from my car, that is my decision, its not the governments fault or anyone elses fault. If I want to ride my bike without my helmet and I fall and have a brain injury, that is my decision. If I want to have incandescant lightbulbs in my house and leave them on all day long and pay an enormous electric bill, that is my decision. The government can not(though they try) regulate personal decisions(as long as those decisions dont hurt others). That is regulating freedom. Even though its law, people still dont wear their seatbelts or helmets, or worse, the try to throw on their seatbelt while driving and passing a cop because they dont want to get a ticket. And, before it was law, I dont think people were blaming the government for people not using common sense. Where is personal responsibility? I do not want to pay for someone who eats cheetos and drinks pepsi. That is their fault just like me not wearing a seatbelt and being thrown from my car would be my fault. I do not want a country of sheep following everything the government says. The government says GMO food is safe, high fructose corn syrup is safe, vioxx was safe, the pinto was safe, hundreds of recalled products were safe...the list goes on. With every rule they suggest or law they pass, personal responsibility and liberty gets less and less. Your parents made a choice not to have medical insurance for all those years, they knew the gamble, as do lots of people. The government forcing people to have medical insurance does not force them to go to the doctor. Is that next? Everyone is required to have a yearly physical to detect any disease? It never ends. I choose personal responsibilty and freedom.
Progressive:
@Celeste...right on! Let's leave the sick, the elderly, the mentally ill to fend for themselves! And for God's sake please keep those disgusting, icky overweight, ignorant people, who are dying from diabetes, high blood pressure or have a heart condition away from me! And while we're at it, I'm ok with the government dictating what to do with my... See More ovaries, my children's school textbooks, prayers in the schools and gun laws....
In the words of Ronald Reagan,"government isn’t the solution, government is the problem "... that's ok until someone in your family doesn't have health care coverage or enough money for the co-payment. In the words of Marie Antoinette: "Let them eat cake." ooops. No. Not cake, eat carrots.
Me:
Hi 'progressive', so because I dont want to pay for people who are irresponsible with their own health, which by the way is their freedom to do so, you think I leave the "sick, elderly and mentally ill to fend for themselves"? I dont think I said that people who eat cheetos are "disgusting, icky overweight, ignorant people, who are dying from diabetes, high blood pressure or have a heart condition" and to "keep them away from me". I said people who eat cheetos and drink pepsi are not taking care of themselves and its not my responsibility to pay for them if something happens to them. If you would like to pay for people like that, then you should send some money to government programs that deal with those sorts of issues, not attack me for exercising my right not to.
I am not ok with government dictating what to do with "my ovaries, my children's school textbooks, prayers in the schools and gun laws...."
I completely agree that government is the problem, not the solution, and when something unfair happens in my life or in my family, my reaction is not to look to the government to save me. Life is unfair. Get used to it. The government can't change that. The government's job is not to take care of me or my family, and that opinion doesn't change when something unfair or bad happens in my life.
Progressive:
@Celeste. I'm assuming you and noone in your family drinks alcohol because more people die from alcohol related problems than those who drink Pepsi and Cheetos...unless, of course, there exists an 'AA' for Pepsi and Cheetos.
Taking that thought to the next level, let's send in letters to our Congressman against all people who eat cheetos and drink Pepsi. Now that's an issue worth fighting for.
I'm also assuming that noone in your family collects Social Security or Medicare, because if so, that makes you a hypocrite re: it's not the government's job to take care of you. Fair enough. If you're going to walk the walk, then you are surely not just talking the talk.
(or is this another one of your 'pick and choose' government programs.)...
And if something bad or unfair happens, well, fetch my smelling salts, I'm fainting from relief that I live in a perfect world and don't have to worry about anything or anybody else!
Progressive:
Who are 'these people?" You mean normal, everyday people like me who have worked for the past 50 years? In fact, worked 2 jobs for 20 of those years? I AM paying for 'those people' and I consider it my responsibility to humanity.
Me:
First, I never said people are dying from cheetos and pepsi. "cheetos and pepsi" came from what 'my friend' said and I was continuing my point with her example. You are the one making "cheetos and pepsi the issue.
Second, do you acctually have a study that says more people die of drinking? That would be a funny study!
Third, I am not against people who eat cheetos and drink pepsi, so why would I write my congressman? Here again, I'm talking personal responsibilty and freedom - for those people eating cheetos and pepsi and also for myself - and you are talking governmental action. Power to people who want to eat cheetos and pepsi, but I dont want to pay for it, and that doesn't make me a bad person.
Fourth, Does your entire family think exactly like you do? I'm guessing not. I can only speak for myself, and acctually yes, my immediate family does think like me and none of us collect social security or medicare, so thanks for calling me a hypocrite, but its unfounded because I do walk the walk. For example, I weatherized and had new windows put on my house and I turned down the government handout for weatherizing my home and for new windows. Again, I dont need to prove to you that I walk the walk, but I just did.
Fifth, Just because I dont want the government taxing me or mandating that I spend money, does not mean I do not or do not have to worry about others. I find it interesting that you equate worrying/caring for others with the government forcing everyone to pay for social programs.
Sixth, I'm happy that you consider paying more and more taxes your 'responsibility to humanity', I dont. I consider caring and volunteering my time and what money I can my responsibility to humanity, but the difference is you put government in the middle, and I leave it to freedom and the individual.
I also find it interesting that you are upset with my point of view. Clearly we are on complete opposite sides of the fence, but I'm not putting down your belief system. You can do and think what you want, and thats great. Thats my point! I'm not going to change how you think of something, and nothing can make me desire a big government with lots of social programs. Its too bad you think that makes me not care for others in my community and country. Its too bad you equate government intrusion and charity.
Progressive:
What would you know about power to the people? What have you ever done FOR the people? By the time I was thirty, I'd worked for and changed civil rights programs, increased women's rights and stopped a war...sorry, but weatherizing one's screens doesn't impress me.
Me:
Too bad your not understanding my points. You are too blinded by your idealism to understand what I'm saying. Its your kind of bitter partisanship thats tearing this country apart. Kind of ironic that you worked for equality isn't it? Have a nice night!
Progressive:
The reason I can't understand you is because you can't write the King's English: "It's your idealism
your kind of bitter
partisanship that's tearing country apart."
That's the real trouble with this country: it's been run by a bunch of idiots!
Me:
You are right, there is a typo in my last post. Got me on the "your" vs. "you're". I can go back and reread all that you wrote and point out all of your grammatical errors and typos too. You do have a few. I guess that's what happens when having a debate over facebook. If my grammatical typo is what you are going to focus on after all the points that were made and above all that was debated, it further proves how blinded by your ideology and close minded you really are. You refuse to accept someone else's opinion with an open heart and respect that we all do not share the same ideas on what is best for our great country. How unfortunate.
Progressive logic: People don't know what's good for them, but progressives do, so people need to be forced to do what progressives want. If you are unhappy about something, write your congressman. People will not die from eating cheetos and drinking pepsi if there is an AA for people who drink too much Pepsi and eat too many cheetos. You can't say 'power to the people' unless you have stopped a war. When in doubt, call the other person an idiot.
My friend:
...It is pathetic that as the country gets more and more obese, I am going to be paying for people exercising their god-given right to live on Cheetos and Pepsi, BUT I will do it. I think that there should be a nice fat tax applied to all this crap like cigarettes that goes into a fund for people who get sick with completely preventable diseases , but highly doubt that will happen.
...I suppose people will be forced, if laws "force" you to do something. Everyone excludes themselves from these blanket statements, but you must know people don't always do what is in their own best interest. Seat belts are a good example. The government passed a law requirement safety belts, and highway accident deaths decreased. Without the law, there would still be kids flying through windshields and people's brains bashed all over the sidewalk every time there was an accident. People do not wear them on their own, they wear them because there is a law. My parents could have afforded private health insurance, but they gambled and said they would rather spend $1200 a month elsewhere, and then they lost. And my mom got sick with cancer. Shitty decision. So I am so happy that they are going to be required to have this, because they wouldn't have done it otherwise, and my parents are high-income intelligent people. But if they didn't do what is best for them, how are less informed, less economically stable people going to do it.
Me:
Hi 'My Friend' - I think what is at the core of the difference here is that people (including me) have a huge huge problem being told (and mandated) by the government what is good for me and what I should do. If I want to not wear my seatbelt and get in a bad accident and get thrown from my car, that is my decision, its not the governments fault or anyone elses fault. If I want to ride my bike without my helmet and I fall and have a brain injury, that is my decision. If I want to have incandescant lightbulbs in my house and leave them on all day long and pay an enormous electric bill, that is my decision. The government can not(though they try) regulate personal decisions(as long as those decisions dont hurt others). That is regulating freedom. Even though its law, people still dont wear their seatbelts or helmets, or worse, the try to throw on their seatbelt while driving and passing a cop because they dont want to get a ticket. And, before it was law, I dont think people were blaming the government for people not using common sense. Where is personal responsibility? I do not want to pay for someone who eats cheetos and drinks pepsi. That is their fault just like me not wearing a seatbelt and being thrown from my car would be my fault. I do not want a country of sheep following everything the government says. The government says GMO food is safe, high fructose corn syrup is safe, vioxx was safe, the pinto was safe, hundreds of recalled products were safe...the list goes on. With every rule they suggest or law they pass, personal responsibility and liberty gets less and less. Your parents made a choice not to have medical insurance for all those years, they knew the gamble, as do lots of people. The government forcing people to have medical insurance does not force them to go to the doctor. Is that next? Everyone is required to have a yearly physical to detect any disease? It never ends. I choose personal responsibilty and freedom.
Progressive:
@Celeste...right on! Let's leave the sick, the elderly, the mentally ill to fend for themselves! And for God's sake please keep those disgusting, icky overweight, ignorant people, who are dying from diabetes, high blood pressure or have a heart condition away from me! And while we're at it, I'm ok with the government dictating what to do with my... See More ovaries, my children's school textbooks, prayers in the schools and gun laws....
In the words of Ronald Reagan,"government isn’t the solution, government is the problem "... that's ok until someone in your family doesn't have health care coverage or enough money for the co-payment. In the words of Marie Antoinette: "Let them eat cake." ooops. No. Not cake, eat carrots.
Me:
Hi 'progressive', so because I dont want to pay for people who are irresponsible with their own health, which by the way is their freedom to do so, you think I leave the "sick, elderly and mentally ill to fend for themselves"? I dont think I said that people who eat cheetos are "disgusting, icky overweight, ignorant people, who are dying from diabetes, high blood pressure or have a heart condition" and to "keep them away from me". I said people who eat cheetos and drink pepsi are not taking care of themselves and its not my responsibility to pay for them if something happens to them. If you would like to pay for people like that, then you should send some money to government programs that deal with those sorts of issues, not attack me for exercising my right not to.
I am not ok with government dictating what to do with "my ovaries, my children's school textbooks, prayers in the schools and gun laws...."
I completely agree that government is the problem, not the solution, and when something unfair happens in my life or in my family, my reaction is not to look to the government to save me. Life is unfair. Get used to it. The government can't change that. The government's job is not to take care of me or my family, and that opinion doesn't change when something unfair or bad happens in my life.
Progressive:
@Celeste. I'm assuming you and noone in your family drinks alcohol because more people die from alcohol related problems than those who drink Pepsi and Cheetos...unless, of course, there exists an 'AA' for Pepsi and Cheetos.
Taking that thought to the next level, let's send in letters to our Congressman against all people who eat cheetos and drink Pepsi. Now that's an issue worth fighting for.
I'm also assuming that noone in your family collects Social Security or Medicare, because if so, that makes you a hypocrite re: it's not the government's job to take care of you. Fair enough. If you're going to walk the walk, then you are surely not just talking the talk.
(or is this another one of your 'pick and choose' government programs.)...
And if something bad or unfair happens, well, fetch my smelling salts, I'm fainting from relief that I live in a perfect world and don't have to worry about anything or anybody else!
Progressive:
Who are 'these people?" You mean normal, everyday people like me who have worked for the past 50 years? In fact, worked 2 jobs for 20 of those years? I AM paying for 'those people' and I consider it my responsibility to humanity.
Me:
First, I never said people are dying from cheetos and pepsi. "cheetos and pepsi" came from what 'my friend' said and I was continuing my point with her example. You are the one making "cheetos and pepsi the issue.
Second, do you acctually have a study that says more people die of drinking? That would be a funny study!
Third, I am not against people who eat cheetos and drink pepsi, so why would I write my congressman? Here again, I'm talking personal responsibilty and freedom - for those people eating cheetos and pepsi and also for myself - and you are talking governmental action. Power to people who want to eat cheetos and pepsi, but I dont want to pay for it, and that doesn't make me a bad person.
Fourth, Does your entire family think exactly like you do? I'm guessing not. I can only speak for myself, and acctually yes, my immediate family does think like me and none of us collect social security or medicare, so thanks for calling me a hypocrite, but its unfounded because I do walk the walk. For example, I weatherized and had new windows put on my house and I turned down the government handout for weatherizing my home and for new windows. Again, I dont need to prove to you that I walk the walk, but I just did.
Fifth, Just because I dont want the government taxing me or mandating that I spend money, does not mean I do not or do not have to worry about others. I find it interesting that you equate worrying/caring for others with the government forcing everyone to pay for social programs.
Sixth, I'm happy that you consider paying more and more taxes your 'responsibility to humanity', I dont. I consider caring and volunteering my time and what money I can my responsibility to humanity, but the difference is you put government in the middle, and I leave it to freedom and the individual.
I also find it interesting that you are upset with my point of view. Clearly we are on complete opposite sides of the fence, but I'm not putting down your belief system. You can do and think what you want, and thats great. Thats my point! I'm not going to change how you think of something, and nothing can make me desire a big government with lots of social programs. Its too bad you think that makes me not care for others in my community and country. Its too bad you equate government intrusion and charity.
Progressive:
What would you know about power to the people? What have you ever done FOR the people? By the time I was thirty, I'd worked for and changed civil rights programs, increased women's rights and stopped a war...sorry, but weatherizing one's screens doesn't impress me.
Me:
Too bad your not understanding my points. You are too blinded by your idealism to understand what I'm saying. Its your kind of bitter partisanship thats tearing this country apart. Kind of ironic that you worked for equality isn't it? Have a nice night!
Progressive:
The reason I can't understand you is because you can't write the King's English: "It's your idealism
your kind of bitter
partisanship that's tearing country apart."
That's the real trouble with this country: it's been run by a bunch of idiots!
Me:
You are right, there is a typo in my last post. Got me on the "your" vs. "you're". I can go back and reread all that you wrote and point out all of your grammatical errors and typos too. You do have a few. I guess that's what happens when having a debate over facebook. If my grammatical typo is what you are going to focus on after all the points that were made and above all that was debated, it further proves how blinded by your ideology and close minded you really are. You refuse to accept someone else's opinion with an open heart and respect that we all do not share the same ideas on what is best for our great country. How unfortunate.
Progressive logic: People don't know what's good for them, but progressives do, so people need to be forced to do what progressives want. If you are unhappy about something, write your congressman. People will not die from eating cheetos and drinking pepsi if there is an AA for people who drink too much Pepsi and eat too many cheetos. You can't say 'power to the people' unless you have stopped a war. When in doubt, call the other person an idiot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
