Last political blog entry for awhile

Posted By: Kathleen DavidPosted On:

Ralph Sevush, all around good guy, wrote the following short essay which he calls “The Cultural Divide.” I thought it was an interesting take on the current status of things and decided to close out political blog entries for a bit with it:

Regarding the cultural divide

This morning, I woke up thinking…

… that, as Spalding Gray observed, I live on an island off the coast
of America;

… that we should have just let the south secede when they wanted to;

… that perhaps we could consider a new form of secession, a Northern
secession;

… that if Canada could just give up a strip of land along the northern
border of North Dakota and Montana, we could build a “Freedom Trail”
with an “underground railroad” that connected the northwestern corner of
Minnesota to the northeastern corner of Washington state, thus creating
an independent, contiguous nation consisting of the Northeast, the Great
Lake region, the northern midwest, and the westcoast (plus Hawaii) with
full autonomy from the United States;

… that we could then forge a union with Canada, and become the
Federation of North American States (FONAS);

… that we would then be Fonasians, with access to Canada’s national
health care, with religious and ethnic diversity and tolerance,
relationships with the rest of the world, economic justice, individual
freedoms, and great hockey teams;

… that we would then have a nation composed of the cultural, financial
and industrial centers of the former US, and have Canada as our farmland
and ranch, and still have great vacation spots in the south pacific;

… that we could learn a lesson from Israel and build a massive wall
along our southern border that would separate us from the belligerent,
imperialistic, crypto-Fascist military theocracy that continues to grip
the US government, as it presides over a small-minded citizenry steeped
in religious zealotry who love only their god, themselves, their first
cousins and their sheep, and whose leading export to the world is death;

… that I should just roll over and go back to sleep. Perhaps I’ll
dream of Fonasia, in repose on my island off the coast of America.

But when I wake up, I’ll still be here.
Shìŧ.

Did you ever have one of those mornings?

– by Ralph Sevush, Esq.
(a card-carrying member of the ACLU and the MMMS)

811 comments on “Last political blog entry for awhile”

  1. eclark1849 wrote…
    a lot of the contradicitions this guy lists are rather trivial and could be explained away as poor editing and poor continuity by the writers of the New Testament, whom, everyone agrees, were human.

    That’s fine and dandy, except you’re completely ignoring the fact that PAD was responding to the discussion started by Kevin Walker, who wrote,

    “The truth of the matter is th Bible was written over a 1500 year period by over 40 different authors. These authors spoke on hundreds of controversial subjects with agreement and unity from the first book of Genesis to the last book of Revelations and there are no contradictions” (Emphasis added by me).

    The statement said that contradictions in the Bible do not exist, and PAD provided evidence to the contrary. He made no statement as to the relevance or triviality of the contradictions.

  2. Important note: I have received a message from God. I have been creating way too much theological debate on a site devoted to culture and the writings of a Writer of Stuff. I hereby repent and go on a 1 week Sabbatical.

    Interpretation: I am leaving for a week of vacation with family for the Thanksgiving Holiday. Enjoy yours, I will mine.

    Jim in Iowa

  4. “And God sayeth ‘GO FORTH AND EAT COPIOUS AMOUNTS OF A LARGE, UGLY FOWL, YET DOTH TASTETH GOOD, especially with that cranberry sauce stuff…”

    Yes, I’m ducking the lightning bolts as I type….

    The “Bible has no contradictions” strikes me as a fiath-based defense. It also takes the “define ‘is’ for me” line a little farther.

    We’ve seen various posts that state Christian faith is rooted in the fact that God is infallible (and who’s going to tell Him he’s wrong, in any case) and that the Bible is the Word of God, given to man via the prophets. With the idea that God is perfect, thus his word must be perfect. This belief forces the devout to explain/ignore/rationalize what would be to the non-devout as a Biblical contradiction. For to do otherwise would be to admit that A) the Bible is in fact NOT the literal word of God, and thus not the absolute guiding force of religion and morality it is held up to be, or B), it IS the Word of God, and God is fallible, not perfect. Both A and B would destroy any rational foundation of the Christian faith.

    So instead of saying “sure, the different books of the Bible were written hundreds of years apart, and in some case decades after the events described, so naturally there’s going to be some minor differences, based on point of view, changes in the language, contemporary influences finding their way into the writings,” etc., what we get instead is “the holy spirit has guided man throughout the ages to ensure that God’s word is translated faithfully and accurately, and remains as perfect today as it did then.”

    Which fails to explain why some versions of the Bible are accepted and others not, depending on your point of view. Or why older versions are phased out, for newer versions.

    I know that God isn’t really interested in making things easy for us, but you’d think that, if He were interested in keeping the Bible accurate, he’d clearly do so. The fact that there is even a controversy tells me that, despite God’s best efforts, some person, some when, some where, mucked it up.

  5. “No offense PAD, but a lot of the contradicitions this guy lists are rather trivial and could be explained away as poor editing and poor continuity by the writers of the New Testament, whom, everyone agrees, were human.”

    Nooooo, no no. No, the conservative right doesn’t get to have it both ways.

    Either the Bible is the word of God, inviolable and not to be questioned, or it’s the words of men, and anything is fair game.

    It’s the same dámņëd “pick and choose” attitude. The Bible says homosexuality is evil, and therefore it must be so, because it’s God’s word and you can’t question it. The Bible also instructs you to kill a disobedient, disrespectful child and is rife with contradictions, but hey, some things in the Bible just aren’t acceptable anymore and the contradictions are as a result of human foibles.

    When conservative religious types complain they think that so-called liberals and intellectuals get snide with them or treat them contemptuously, perhaps they might want to consider how their own flagrantly indefensible, contradictory positions might engender some of that.

    PAD

  6. Actually, a lunar cycle is about 27.5 days, so a 7 day lunar based week would be 2 days off every 4 weeks.

    And a year is about 365.25 days. The fact that the lunar and solar cycles don’t come out to a whole number of days has vexed calendar makers for millennia. So yeah, a calendar month is a little longer than a lunar cycle and we have leap years every four years to correct these imbalances. That doesn’t change the fact that these units of time were based on the solar, lunar and planetary cycles.

  7. >When conservative religious types complain they think that so-called liberals and intellectuals get snide with them or treat them contemptuously, perhaps they might want to consider how their own flagrantly indefensible, contradictory positions might engender some of that.

    >PAD

    We’ve come a long way. It wasn’t all that long ago that kings in power had complete books of the Bible that they didn’t agree with completely taken out of the book. Kind of makes you wonder what edicts were taken out.

    Fred

  8. I haven’t found much to support any calendar based on a lunar cycle. I think it’s a rough coincidence.

    Everything I’ve seens does support a seasonal calendar, as most societies that need a date-recording system have some form of agriculture, and a calendar makes a good tool for knowing about when you should be plowing, sowing, planting, etc.

    My point was, if it was a lunar cycle you wanted to track, a 5/6 day week system makes more sense. Months would be 5 weeks long, and alternate between 27 and 28 days.

    Stating that a traditional week is about 1/4 of a lunar cycle is more an observation, not a description of origin.

    And, boy, how fast did this meandering thread get bumped off the front page by what’s going on over in Northstar’s thread?

  10. Well, fine.

    But…

    While “month” may indeed be a derivation of “moon,” neither of those links suggest that the calendar is based around the lunar cycle. Rather, it’s solar.

    Which is to say that the 7 day week is no more connected to the lunar cycle than it is to the story of Genesis. The earliest reference I’ve found is Babylon, naming 7 days for the 7 visible planets/astronomical bodies. Which is not a lunar cycle.

    So, once again, where is your support that the division of weeks/months is based on a lunar cycle?

  11. Nooooo, no no. No, the conservative right doesn’t get to have it both ways.

    But the liberal left does?

    Either the Bible is the word of God, inviolable and not to be questioned, or it’s the words of men, and anything is fair game.

    Nope. Of course it can be questioned. You’re given a choice. It’s called “free will”. You can choose to follow whatever beliefs or paths that you want, but in the end you have to stand before God and HE holds you accountable for the choices you made.

    It’s the same dámņëd “pick and choose” attitude. The Bible says homosexuality is evil, and therefore it must be so, because it’s God’s word and you can’t question it. The Bible also instructs you to kill a disobedient, disrespectful child and is rife with contradictions, but hey, some things in the Bible just aren’t acceptable anymore and the contradictions are as a result of human foibles.

    Same thing. You want to follow the Bible to the letter you’re free to do so. You’re also free to ignore it. Who’s stopping you, the law? But isn’t that what you want, a government that isn’t swayed by religious beliefs?

    When conservative religious types complain they think that so-called liberals and intellectuals get snide with them or treat them contemptuously, perhaps they might want to consider how their own flagrantly indefensible, contradictory positions might engender some of that.
    PAD

    Couldn’t agree more. Perhaps more liberal and intellectual types might be more willing to practice what they preach as well.

  12. By the way, PAD, why didn’t you include the Old Testament in your search for contradictions?

  13. I didn’t include the Old Testament because I figured it was irrelevant, since the OT doesn’t consist of gospels written by different people recounting the same events. You don’t have the Books of Moses, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob each describing what went down in Eden.

    It is not, as I infer from your question, from a belief that the OT is somehow intrinsically more right or better than the NT. It’s just that since the question involved the various Apostles describing the career of Jesus and whether there were contradictions, I focused the search to address that.

    PAD

  14. “I honestly do not understand you Peter. You are married to a Christian woman and yet you go out of your way to debunk the New Testament. That boggles my mind. Consider me shocked.”

    You can just bite me, you jáçkášš.

    PAD

  15. “Same thing. You want to follow the Bible to the letter you’re free to do so. You’re also free to ignore it. Who’s stopping you, the law?”

    Yes. That’s the problem. For instance, eleven states now have specific laws that are essentially voter-sponsered bias mandates against gays, and I will wager that the vast majority of those voters cite the Bible as their reason for condemning homosexuality.

    The problem isn’t related to following or not followng the Bible and then being held accountable before God. I have absoloutely no argument with people who have faith in the Bible and their God and use it quietly guide their lives in a live-and-let-live manner. Where I take issue is when we’re talking about people using belief in the Bible to take a holier-than-thou attitude for the purpose of terrorizing others, for taking away their rights, and for making their lives miserable. It happens in big ways, such as anti-gay initiatives. And in small ways, such as out here in Long Island, where an interracial couple woke up the other morning to discover a cross burning on their front lawn. To many people, that’s a terrorist act. To the people who did it, I’d fancy they’d call it a faith-based initiative.

    As for liberals practicing what they preach, well–I’d wager that both liberals and conservatives preach tolerance. However, I would suspect that if you tally up the number of conservatives who show up and badger liberal bloggers as opposed to liberals who show up and badger conservative bloggers, it’s going to tip heavily to the former. So who’s tolerating who?

    PAD

  16. Peter said You can just bite me, you jáçkášš.

    I guess that struck a nerve. You cuss at me because I say I’m shocked that you debunk the New Testament when you’re married to a Christian woman? Hmmm. Maybe you’re upset at the wrong person here.

  18. “David Bjorlin: Which part of this justifies calling Jim a chowder-head, comparable to the Spanish Inquisition, a yahoo, snot-faced, or lame-brained?”

    First of all, I freely admit I’m on a far shorter fuse these days, since 51% of voters were suckered into voting for Bush for another four years so he can complete his destruction of the country.

    Second, I didn’t compare Jim to the Spanish inquisition. I said there’s a zealot mindset that is shared by such varied and sundry individuals as George Bush, missionaries, the Spanish Inquisition and Jim from Iowa. Considering he’s a fan of missinaries and Bush, overall he should be flattered.

    Third, David, your point of view is that you just show up on this board and post. You’re not the one speding time, energy and money to maintain a board that sometimes seems way more trouble than it’s worth. How would you like to sponsor a board so that people can show up and inform you they’re going to heaven and you’re not, or insinuate that you have contempt for your wife’s religion? You’re not the one patrolling the board and removing regular postings that are filled with nothing but heavy duty, profanity laced, racist insults from anonymous trolls. In short, you’re not the one busting ášš so that people can show up to abuse your hospitality.

    PAD

  19. Ladies and gentlemen, I’m done with Novafan. He’s shrouded.

    I will not be responding to him, acknowleding his posts or his existence. He is, as far as the host of this board is concerned, dead.

    Others may commune with the dead as they see fit.

    PAD

  20. Nova,

    Take the hint for what it’s worth and back off fast. Don’t insult a man’s marriage and expect him to like you for it. And before you say you aren’t insulting him, think about it this way:

    “How can your marriage be any good if you and your wife disagree on your faith?”

    Because that’s basically what you asked. It implies that marriages can only work with a common faith. Well, people have gotten around that for a long time.

    Mostly, though, it’s not your business. Considering my wife is a devout Catholic and I am not Christian (though I was raised one), I can certainly empathize.

    So, again, I say, back off.

  21. Peter said He’s shrouded.

    You might as well tell me to go to Hëll again, Peter, since you never appoligized for that.

    I’m sorry if I stated the truth that I’m shocked. You know it’s funny, my faith can be attacked, my beliefs can be attacked, our President can be attacked repeatedly, and when I make a statement that doesn’t make sense to me, I’m a jáçkášš. It was the truth, I honestly don’t believe it. I guess we aren’t about stating the truth in here are we.

    Good grief.

    Have a happy Thanksgiving.

  22. As I reflect on what Novafan said, I can’t help but reflect on the uproar that ensued when Kerry brought Cheney’s daughter into his speech.

    I thought it was inappropriate to make comments about someone’s family, hmm?

  23. And for anyone who wonders why I have political discussions here…look at the response rate to just about any other blog entry, as opposed to this one.

    Not trying to be snarky, but why are you measuring the success of topics based on quantity rather than quality? Personally, I think most of the political discussions online (not just here) are shallow, unintellectual, repetitive, and offer no insights. They’re just a place for people to insult each other and feel superior. The fact that they do so multiple times within a topic doesn’t make it any better.

    You’re not the one speding time, energy and money to maintain a board that sometimes seems way more trouble than it’s worth. How would you like to sponsor a board so that people can show up and inform you they’re going to heaven and you’re not, or insinuate that you have contempt for your wife’s religion? You’re not the one patrolling the board and removing regular postings that are filled with nothing but heavy duty, profanity laced, racist insults from anonymous trolls. In short, you’re not the one busting ášš so that people can show up to abuse your hospitality.

    And judging by that, you’re not enjoying them much either.

  24. Novafan wrote…
    I make a statement that doesn’t make sense to me

    Don’t worry, you’re not alone…your statments don’t make sense to a lot of us.

  25. Peter, I certainly don’t know you on a personal level, but if you are feeling very short-fused or even actively not enjoying the blog right now, just know that taking a day, a few, a week, etc and shutting it down for a break or stepping away to relax from it is not only ok…. but your perogative.

    Not saying that you should, just saying you could.

    I enjoy this place. I enjoy much of the discussions and many of the posters here. I wouldn’t be thrilled to see it go away. I’d much rather it or you take a brief break than become so frustrated or upset that you say the hëll with it for good.

    Be healthy and don’t forget to hug the kids, kiss the wife and smile. 🙂

  26. Jeff said Don’t worry, you’re not alone…your statments don’t make sense to a lot of us.

    What the hëll was this comment for? I’ve stuck up for you several times and then you throw and insult at me. Forget you.

  27. As I recall, I’ve backed up a statement or two made by you, as well. That doesn’t change the fact that a lot of what you say doesn’t make sense to me.

    If it makes you feel any better, a lot of what Bladestar says is equally repugnant to me.

  28. Peter said I will not be responding to him, acknowleding his posts or his existence. He is, as far as the host of this board is concerned, dead. Others may commune with the dead as they see fit.

    I appoligize for stating something that I should have kept to myself.

  29. This election wasn’t about reason; it was about values. According to philosophers like Chaim Perelman, appeals to reason are made to a “universal” audience, and appeals to values are made to a “particular” audience. (Never mind the fact that all audiences are particular by nature. I am referring to audiences as they are constructed in the minds of the speaker before forming his or her argument.)

    I suppose one could argue that Bush’s success in this election owes a lot to his targetting a particular audience (and therefore focusing on values), and perhaps Kerry’s failure was due to his attempt to target a universal audience, (and therefore focusing on reason). I don’t mean to say that Bush was unreasonable, nor do I mean to say that Kerry was too reasonable. Appeals to a person’s values can sway them more than appeals to reason. And, unfortunately, people are not purely reasonable. We are not a nation of Mr. Spocks. People have to be reached on a logical level and an emotional level, and Bush was very skillful at reaching people on an emotional level. Kerry was not.

    Politics is like show business. The candidates are actors that are auditioning for the role. But remember folks, just because they play a doctor on TV doesn’t mean we should let them anywhere near a hospital, let alone a patient. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what elections do. They hand the most appealing actor a scalpel, and then he starts cutting. The question isn’t “if” we will bleed, but “when” and “how much.”

  30. Jeff said As I recall, I’ve backed up a statement or two made by you, as well. That doesn’t change the fact that a lot of what you say doesn’t make sense to me.If it makes you feel any better, a lot of what Bladestar says is equally repugnant to me.

    I don’t care if you agree with me all of the time, or even some of the time, although it would be nice if you did. It’s the fact that your statement came way out of left field since you’ve never made a statement like that before. Then all of the sudden, BAM, right when I wasn’t looking.

  31. Novafan wrote…
    It’s the fact that your statement came way out of left field since you’ve never made a statement like that before.

    True. Mostly because I’ve been trying to stay out of this discussion, opting instead to watch it devolve (on both sides) to the point where little is being actually said. It’s rather frustrating.

    The next logical question is, “why keep reading?” I’m working on that one. 🙂

  32. Novafan, the fact that Jeff wasn’t willing to back you up this time around ought to open your eyes to the idea that you’re quickly becoming persona non grata around here. Maybe you should quit with the snarky, victimized indignation and go back and re-read some of what you posted… it (apparently) didn’t make a lot of sense to many people, myself included.
    -tOjb

  33. Just to elaborate a bit on why I chose your comment to sound off on…

    A) The superior, dare-I-say “motherly” tone of the post in question – “I’m very disappointed in you young man” – is not only offensive in itself, but it’s also a prime example of the attitudes found in some (but not all) Christians, which PAD himself has been arguing strongly against in this very thread.

    B) The inherent assumption that all Christians must interpret the Bible literally, which is simply not the case.

    C) As I mentioned earlier, it’s eerily similar to what John Kerry said about Ðìçk Cheney’s wife, for which he caught all kinds of hëll from conservatives (though not necessarily you, I can’t recall and don’t feel like checking).

  34. BrakYeller said it (apparently) didn’t make a lot of sense to many people, myself included.

    And just who the heck are you. Speaking of coming out of left field….

  35. “Since I believe that Jesus is the only way to Heaven, then it is not disdain to tell you that you are going the wrong way and headed towards a canyon where the bridge is out (to change the metaphor), but an act of compassion.”

    And PAD replies:
    See, whereas I see it as an act of supreme arrogance, of self-righteous, holier-than-thou, snot-faced, wrong-headed, purblind, where-the-hëll-do-you-get-off-you-Bible-thumping-yahoo, biased, prejudiced, anti-Semitic chowder-headed, lame-brained jáçkášš intolerance.

    But I only say this because I care.

    Okay, for that alone I’m going to buy two copies of all your comics from now on. 🙂 🙂

  36. What, so you saying things I don’t understand is *my* fault, because you don’t know who I am?
    I’m somebody who’s been reading the thread. I’m part of your audience, and the audience of everyone here. Does my opinion not matter because you’ve never heard of me before?
    The point is that people who have been otherwise silent are speaking up en masse, each saying essentially the same thing: that you need to check yourself, because you’re being both unintelligible and offensive.
    -tOjb

  37. Others may commune with the dead as they see fit.

    “Let’s hold a seance!”

    “But we’re not dead. Yet.”

  38. “Not trying to be snarky, but why are you measuring the success of topics based on quantity rather than quality?”

    I’m not. But when there’s continued responses to political threads, it means people are continuing t come back because that’s the stuff that’s important to them. And if they keep returning, then they’re going to be seeing the stuff that’s the main reason for the existence of this board: News and information about my upcoming projects.

    I mean, let’s face it. No one is contributing money to the upkeep of this board. The tip jar is almost never used. I mean, if I were having a major ongoing houseparty, people would not hesitate to contribute. “Can I bring soda? Beer? Dessert?” This is an ongoing houseparty where the host and co-host (Glenn) don’t get offers for so much as a 50 cent bag of chips while guests show up constantly, including some who keep getting in the hosts’s face about his beliefs and a handful who make it a point to piss on the furniture.

    So the upside is that if there ARE a lot of people coming through, there’s back-end success through support for my projects and we see money back from Amazon.com purchases when they come through here. And the political debates keep people coming through.

    Manipulative? Perhaps. But hey, I’m a writer. If I don’t find ways to keep people coming back, I’m out of business.

    PAD

  39. So, in other words, you post something politically controversial to stir things up so that people keep coming here to comment and (hopefully) buy stuff.

    Yep, I think manipulative is a good word for that 😉

  40. PAD,
    I don’t use my credit card on-line. Yes, I’m paranoid, but that’s just me. I have asked before, but if you have an address, a PO box or some such, I would love to throw a tip in the jar.I’m just more comfortable sending my money snail mail. You’ll even get to see my last name! OK, not a great draw, but I would still like to be able to contribute for the wonderful hours spent engaging in the dialogue on this site.
    (The last name is Boe. I worry about spam, so I have a fake e-mail, but do not hesitate to let you all know who I am.)

  41. I’ll second Karen above on the snail mail for the tip jar. I don’t trust my credit card in person, let alone over the Internet, but I’d like to be able to give back a little for the pleasure of participating here. Besides, you’ll get the satisfaction of being able to say that you finally got your check in the mail from John Byrne. (Not *THE* John Byrne, of course, but *A* John Byrne…)
    Another bit I wonder about (hopefully without being crass): how much is too much/too little for the tip jar? Is there a reasonable recommendation you can make as to what constitutes a decent tip?
    -tOjb

  43. Karen wrote…
    Here’s a fun site:

    “>http://beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html

    That was fun, but I’m not terribly shocked by my results:

    1. Secular Humanism (100%)
    2. Unitarian Universalism (95%)
    3. Liberal Quakers (84%)
    4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (77%)
    5. Theravada Buddhism (71%)

    I am a little surprised that Nontheist was tied for sixth with Neo-Pagan, but I’m satisfied.

  44. So the upside is that if there ARE a lot of people coming through, there’s back-end success through support for my projects and we see money back from Amazon.com purchases when they come through here. And the political debates keep people coming through.

    I would venture a guess that the people who come here for the political debates rather than discussing your work, have little or no interest in your work. I’m sure you remember that guy on the AOL board who freely admitted as much. This site does come up on search engines, so somebody plugs “Bush” or “Iraq” in, they can come to this site not really giving a dámņ about Peter David or his work. Maybe if you were the Peter David who wrote that Gulf War book, it would be different. 😉

    Basically, I just think the politics stuff attracts all the wrong sort of people. The people who are interested in your work will continue to come here to hear about it, or even just to hear your thoughts on related entertainment subjects.

  45. Some graduate student a decade or two from now is going to dig this thread up and run a content analysis on how it’s changed and…evolved….and get a thesis AND a dissertation out of it. Maybe even an academic career.

  46. The tip jar is almost never used.

    There’s a tip jar? And I didn’t know you got money back for the Amazon thing. I’ll be sure to use it in the future.

  47. “So, in other words, you post something politically controversial to stir things up so that people keep coming here to comment and (hopefully) buy stuff.”

    Well, that’s “other words” in the sense that it’s what I said, but boiled down to a sentence. But yes, that’s pretty much right. This isn’t news: I’ve repeatedly made note of the fact that the highest trafficked threads are the political stuff.

    Entertainers manipulate their audiences all the time. Movie writers and directors. Actors. Magicians. That’s just how it’s done. And as long as no one is being ripped off, there’s no harm to it.

    But every so often, audiences will go to nasty places. I really don’t think JD Salinger envisioned anyone using “Catcher in the Rye” as an impetus to kill John Lennon.

    Same thing here. There will be people who use the platform I provide here to become abusive. It happensm, and it has to be addressed and dealt with.

    PAD

  48. Matt Adler,
    I disagree. Many of us who regularly post on the political threads love PAD’s work. I originally found the site because of his writing, not his political beliefs. I stay because I like to hear his opinions things outside of his works, but still want to know what’s coming up. I think there are more like me than the occasional person who just comes to see what is written on the political blogs. And that person may be introduced to PAD’s writings after coming out of curiosity and become a fan.

  49. Jeff,
    “As I reflect on what Novafan said, I can’t help but reflect on the uproar that ensued when Kerry brought Cheney’s daughter into his speech. I thought it was inapproprate to make comments about someone’s family, hmmm?”

    It is, which is why Novafan was wrong, as i stated earlier.

Comments are closed.