Sunday, February 15, 2026

Obama's Latest Interview Is an Unbelievable Rewriting of History

 

Former President Barack Obama continues to make the podcast rounds as he joined Brian Cohen in what could only be labeled as one of the most insufferable interviews available on the internet. Obama managed to do what he does best: pretend to take the moral high-ground while having ruthlessly targeted anyone politically opposed to him.

Obama jumped onto the leftist talking point of the Democrat Party being the party of unity, while the Republican party has a monopoly on divisiveness, anger, “us/them” style of politics, and almost laughably equating the Left to Bad Bunny’s recent profane halftime performance that nearly no one in the United States could actually understand.

“That’s their home court,” Obama said. “Our court is coming together. A great example, it wasn’t political, Bad Bunny’s halftime show.”

Of course, by “unity” he means when his running-mate labeled his opponents as racists who would work to reinstitute slavery. Or how about the “basket of deplorables" line from his would-be successor, Hillary Clinton? It seems almost daily that we hear of a leftist politician calling ICE officers Nazis.

The lunacy doesn’t end there. Obama also took shots at President Trump, alleging that Trump has harassed and intimidated states who didn’t vote for him, and claiming that he would have never done the same.

It’s hard to break down just how absurd this statement is. Trump has only had to conduct these large-scale operations in sanctuary cities who are openly and flagrantly defying federal law, and because the Democrat-run states Trump desires to withhold funds from are engaged in billions of dollars of fraud.

Obama also seems to think that he never used his government power to target political opponents after making a claim that is a complete rewriting of the work of his administration. It seems rather hard to forget that the IRS targeted Tea Party aligned groups for increased scrutiny, with James Comey running cover for their political activity, among the countless other activities his administration got up to. Does the Steele Dossier even need to be mentioned? The number of cases are simply too vast to write about.

The good news for conservatives is, that if they have resorted to trotting out Obama to try to clean up their mess, you know that we are winning. If it weren't for him and his ego, Donald Trump would have never come down that escalator and ushered in a new age of conservative governance.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

How Do They Come Up With So Many Stupid Goosestepping leninist Democrats?

 

You have to hand it to Democrats, no matter how many times you are certain they can’t do something – be more corrupt, act sleazier, hate the country more, be idiots – they find a way to exceed what anyone thought was possible. In a sick way, it’s an accomplishment – a perverse one, but an accomplishment nonetheless. It’s enough to make you wonder if there is some sort of performance enhancing drug that lowers the bar to the point that you’d need a shove not to clear it. 

The idea of a human being running a 3-minute mile was, for decades, laughable…until Roger Bannister did it in 1954 – finishing in an astonishing (for the time) 3 minutes 59.4 seconds on May 6th. Until then, no one had done it, as the speculation was a human being simply could not run fast enough for that long. In about 100 years of timing running races, no one had ever done what was considered impossible. On June 21 of the same year, the “impossible” record was broken by John Landy. Since then, the record has been broken 17 more times, with countless more runners besting 4 minutes regularly now. 

No one could do it…until someone did it, then everyone started doing it and have been doing it ever since, proving that nothing is beyond the reach of human beings if we really apply ourselves. 

Unfortunately, while that is true for the good things in life, it is also true for the bad, and the bad gets really bad when it comes to intelligence and members of the Democratic Party.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez flew to Munich, German Democratic Republic, this week to participate a security conference where she and her fellow Democrats whine about their claim that the President is a fascist in the home of fascism, “genocide” in Gaza in the places where real genocidal plans were hatches, and climate change in person when they could have simply done a Zoom call and saved the “carbon footprint” of the flight.

What’s the fun in that? You don’t get a “free” trip to a conference in Europe for you and your fiancé if you just video chat in your appearance. I’m not saying she brought her finance with her to Germany, but I do think it weird she’s been “engaged” for years, whatever the reason, when a secondary effect of that is her fiancé’s finances do not need to be included in her financial disclosure forms. With her fellow leftists having their net worth skyrocket to the multi-millions due to the “earnings” of their spouses and all the justified scrutiny that comes with that, I’m just saying that putting off a wedding for as long as possible, in my opinion, makes political sense.

You gotta make hay while the Sun is shining, I guess, and certainly before the sunlight creeps into where all the money comes from…if that’s what is happening. (Just a guess…or one of them doesn’t really want to get married and that’s why they’ve been engaged since 2022.)

In Munich, this intellectual leader of the left was asked a simple question about whether or not the United States would come to the aid of Taiwan if China invaded, as they are desperate to do. This not-ready-for-prime-time-person responded with what could easily be described as an attempt to make Joe Biden look like a genius and Kamala Harris come off like a great orator. 

AOC answered, “Um...you know...I think that uh...this is...such a, ya know, I think that...this is a um...This is, of course, a, uh, a very longstanding, um, policy of the United States, uh, and, I think, what we are hoping for is that we want to make sure that we never get to that point, and we want to make sure that we are moving in all our economic research and our global positions to avoid any such confrontation and for that question to even arise.”


Can you believe Jeopardy hasn’t called yet?

How does a political party produce someone so, um…articulate and special? How does a political party, that same political party, produce a series of “victims” of a child sex predator – who was a proud member of that same political party – who became entangled with that predator not when they were children, but when they were adults? Can’t they even stage a photo-op properly? 

They can’t, because they don’t mean any of it. Do you really think AOC likes this country or cares about Taiwan or anyone who isn’t obedient, for that matter? Does any part of you genuinely think there is a single Democrat in the House who cares at all about who Jeffrey Epstein abused? 

Democrats didn’t say a word about any of them for 4 years, now they can’t shut up about it. But only about the one man in the “files” who is only complained about by Epstein, as President Trump booted him from his life more than 20 years ago. Everyone else in there is a Democrat – all the people who stuck with him after his time under house arrest for soliciting sex from minors are Democrats. That’s not a coincidence, it’s a pattern. It’s who Democrats are.

So, it’s not that the party produces idiots, although it certainly is a magnet for them, it’s that it attracts horrible people who are awful to the children, women, animals, plant life and everything else that is not them or could hinder their goosestepping march to power. It’s not the 3-minute mile, more like the 3-point IQ. It’s who Democrats are.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

Minnesota Insurrection Proves ‘Blue State Model’ Has Failed

 

I wanna talk a little bit about the open defiance of the federal government. I’ve mentioned that earlier, but when you collate everything that Attorney General of Minnesota Keith Ellison has said, Gov. Tim Walz, Mayor Jacob Frey of Minneapolis, it’s unabashed, unapologetic, insurrectionary rhetoric.

It’s not just that they’ve told Immigration and Customs Enforcement to leave. It’s not just that they’ve told their own police forces and law enforcement in Minnesota, in general, not to come to the aid of ICE. It’s that they’re actually working hand in glove with people on the street.

In other words, they encourage them to take pictures, to harass, to block ICE law enforcement activity. And you get the impression that they feel there’s no consequences.

In other words, they’re saying to the rest of us, the 330 million people outside Minnesota, that we, Minnesota elected officials, have the God-given right to pick and choose which federal laws we’re going to obey. And we are just not going to obey the enforcement of federal immigration law. We don’t really care about 10,000 people coming across the border during the Biden administration per day, but we do care about the federal government rectifying that lapse or that crime, by trying to find out where and who and how to get these people out, in Minnesota.

Nor do they care that ICE, according to its own figures, has rounded up 4,000 people with various criminal misdemeanors and felonies, and got them out of Minnesota. And that has contributed to Minnesota’s low crime rate.

But the problem is this, that they understand that the Trump administration, if they were to enforce immigration law to the full letter of the law, that would include collateral people, that when they’re going after criminals, they say, “Or how about you? You’re in the house. Do you have ID?” And if they’re not, then we’re going to deport them. They don’t want any of that. And they don’t want to turn over people, as I said, in the jails.

And that is a model for what I would call the blue states. Is it new? I mean, the Democrats get very upset when you say, you’re the party of insurrection, going back to the civil rights movement and before, the Civil War.

You know, April 12, 1861, when state’s righters in South Carolina said that we’re not going to honor federal law within the confines of South Carolina, along with six other Confederate states, at that time, who had seceded. And we don’t think federal property belongs to you.

So, this is the tradition that Walz, Frey, and Ellison are relying upon. And it’s an unbroken tradition going all the way from John C. Calhoun, as I said, all the way to Orval Faubus, George Wallace, Lester Maddox, segregationists of the 1960s. And the Left has never really confronted it. They said, well, these were just Dixiecrats or Southerners, and we were on the vanguard of civil rights.

No, but when you look at the actual vote of the 1964 and 1965 Civil Rights Act, the Democratic Party voted 60% to 65% in the House and Senate, maybe a little higher, 67%, in one case, to pass those legislations. But the Republicans had a much higher percentage—80% in the Senate and the House on the particular votes were for civil rights.

So, this is something that’s disturbing, that it’s a trademark of over 150 years that the Democratic Party has, maybe it feels that it’s more a people’s party, but they feel they can defy federal law at their own volition.

And again, how do you respond to it? If you don’t respond to it, then you set the precedent that states that are blue can arbitrarily pick and choose which federal laws they want. Although, of course, they want federal monies to come back. And it’s a very dangerous precedent because we’ve seen it in the 1860s, where it led to.

And finally, something else to keep in mind: It’s symptomatic of a larger problem in the blue states. And we’ve kind of flipped the blue/red state paradigm in which we’re seeing 3 million to 4 million people fleeing, for the most part, northern industrial, what we would call in the old days, Yankee blue states, going to the South, which were, traditionally, up until the 1960s, less dynamic societies—more rural, more pyramidal in their economic classes: small group of wealthy, large group of poor, very little middle class—dating back to the Antebellum states.

But what we’re seeing is a complete failure of the blue state model. And the failure is ironic because it’s neo-Confederate. Just like the old Confederacy and the Antebellum South, these blue states are obsessed with race. This is where DEI comes from. This is where, if you’re one-sixteenth of this, or you have DNA of that, you identify, primarily, by your ethnic or racial background and not your common humanity or your common American citizenship. Very similar to the South.

In these blue states and California, from where I’m speaking, there is no middle class. It’s disappearing. It either leaves or realizes that the high tax, highly unregulated, high crime paradigms, and high deficits as well, high debt obligations, in all of these places, like Chicago or Minneapolis or Washington or Baltimore, it’s not a very conducive atmosphere—in Portland, Seattle—for the middle class.

Their downtowns are dying. People are leaving. That’s another trace that we see going back to the neo-Confederate period, that there wasn’t a middle class in the early South. By the way, it’s very ironic that there is a middle class in the South. There is a dynamic economy and there’s less emphasis on race.

Of course, the main neo-Confederate characteristic, all these states feel that they’re unique, they’re chauvinistic, that Minnesotans or Californians or Oregonians are superior morally. And therefore, they have the moral, spiritual, the intellectual right to say, I’m not gonna follow the federal government, if I decide not to.

Now, of course, it’s pick and choose. During the Obama period, they wanted the federal government to suppress state rights, in cases where people question the federal government, who were conservative. But for the larger part, they feel that they’re a law and a culture unto their own.

In conclusion, what’s gonna stop it? People have to identify this blue state model for what it is. It’s a desperate anger, sense of failure, frustration that they cannot create heaven on earth. The high tax, high regulation, green frenzies, woke ideology, DEI, anti-business, billionaire’s tax—all of this is drying up the economy. The crime policies that George Soros DAs, prosecutors—there’s high-crime areas and people don’t want to be there. And they understand that. And their reaction to it is to get angrier, more chauvinistic, and more defiant, especially of the federal government.

If they would relax and say, my gosh, President Donald Trump is gonna send people in to lower our crime rate, to get criminals off the street, to work with us—you think they would enjoy that? No. It’s nihilism. And it’s spreading.

And unfortunately, as I said earlier, in an earlier podcast, there’s nothing in the Constitution about a state leaving the Constitution, the Constitution of the states. But there is something about how federal law, the supremacy clause, supersedes state law.

So, what I’m getting at is all of these states, and Minnesota, now, in particular, are openly defying the federal government, in the tradition that led up to the Civil War and after the Civil War, led to Jim Crow and the crisis and the confrontations of the 1960s.

Final irony: This is all from left-wing, liberal, progressive, enlightened people. And they have chosen a most unenlightened, backward position because the common denominator is they feel that this is a source of power and continuity of their control of government.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

Trump, Beware—These ‘Unforced Errors’ Could Hand Democrats a Midterm Win

 

Well, I think the best simile is that there’s a pathway over the mountains, like a pass, but on one side there’s a shear drop, and the other, there’s, on the right side, there is ample room, if you travel close to the mountains and not get near the precipice.

Now, what is the precipice? There is a pathway to save the Republican Congress and thereby to save the Trump counterrevolution. We saw what the alternative was under Joe Biden, but it’ll be much worse in 2028 if a Kamala Harris wins and has a Democratic Congress waiting for her, which she could have, at least at the beginning of it in November.

So, what do we have to look at? What are the perils that you’ll fall over the cliff as you go on the pass to the midterm? The first is these unforced errors. I don’t want to get into who did it or whose fault it is. I’m just suggesting that when you say Rob Reiner after his death, you say something untoward, I’m talking in a strict political sense now, it’s not good.

Why? Because to repeat the Trump success in 2024, you must do three things. You must win black males at 26%. You must win Hispanic males about 55% and get them out to vote. And you must win or come break even with independents. That’s in addition to getting your base out.

But if you make fun of Rob Reiner after he’s dead and not say, you know, not honor the old Latin warning [de mortuis nil nisi bonum], don’t say anything bad, don’t say anything unless it’s good about the dead, then you’re going to offend whom? The independents.

And so, this week we had this strange little meme or video that President Donald Trump was sort of the Lion King, and all of his enemies were various animals that inhabit the jungle. And I think Joe Biden was an ape and all that. But there was the Obamas portrayed as primates.

Now, you could argue two things. Well, Joe Biden was too, so it wasn’t racial or he didn’t care what you thought of it. He didn’t think it was racial. And the Obamas, remember, Barack Obama engineered, tried to engineer his destruction in August, September, October of 2015, before the election, when they called in John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, and said, ignore the intelligence, go after Trump. But that doesn’t matter. The matter is there’s a whole history of the United States of racism that equates people who are black with primates.

So, whoever did it in the White House, or whether it was an ad for an upcoming TikTok video, it doesn’t matter, people don’t matter, the independents don’t like that. And you will either lose independent votes or you will lose a week of precious time trying to explain what I just did.

And then finally, as you’re going toward the midterms, there’s a sheer drop, another sheer drop, and that’s called history. Only three times in the last hundred years has an incumbent president in his midterm, first or second—this is Trump’s second midterm—picked up seats. They usually lose seats.

The problem is, in the House, he can’t afford more than four or five seats, depending on these special elections. He could even lose the Senate. I don’t think that’s possible, but it could happen. We saw what happened in 2020 in Georgia when he lost two conservative seats in one of the most conservative states, Georgia, to, not Democrats, but hard leftists. It’s possible.

So, you have to break history’s pattern. George W. Bush did it. He picked up seats. And you can do it. FDR did in his first, I think, 1934 election. You can do it, but you have to do everything right, keep away from the precipice.

So, what’s in his favor? In his favor is he has already enacted the architecture of a radical economic revolution that’s going to pay dividends in March, April, May, and just get better. And that’s based on, not speculation on my part, but fact. The biggest deregulation movement since the Reagan revolution. Tax cuts, and not just tax cuts for affluent people, for waitresses, for people on Social Security, etc. And then there’s energy development. We’re gonna get up to 14 million, 15 million barrels of oil.

So, whatever’s gonna happen in the Middle East, we have a buffer that we’ve never enjoyed before. And then in addition to that, there’s, Trump says, $18 trillion in foreign investment. Just cut it in half and say $9 trillion. That’s nine times larger than Joe Biden’s trillion dollars over four years. So, we’re gonna see massive foreign capital coming in here, creating jobs. The gross domestic product is going to take off with tax cuts and deregulation.

I know Kevin Warsh, he’s a wonderful, professional economist, colleague of mine at the Hoover Institution, he’s absolutely independent, but he will look at this empirically in a way that his predecessor did not. And he will see that there is a lot of growth and there has been a lot—GDP’s up to 5.5, but the inflation rate has gone down. And he will cut interest rates, not radically, but insidiously and continually.

And you put all that together and it’s gonna really make a big difference if the president and his team talk about it daily and compare it to the Biden disaster.

The other thing is Trump’s biggest asset was immigration. He stopped it. He didn’t curtail it. He stopped illegal immigration. They said that was impossible, comprehensive immigration—no, he didn’t need any of that. He just followed the law.

But now he’s getting these bad optics and these blue enclaves where it’s organized, the opposition is organized by left-wing money, Antifa, etc. And they want Immigration and Customs Enforcement to be portrayed as Nazis, they want to dox them. So, ICE wears masks. And you know the whole story.

They’re looking, they want to encourage people, they being elected officials—Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey. They want people to go out and confront them, and they actually want people to be hurt or worse, to be martyrs.

Why not just stay in places like we saw last week in West Virginia? Four hundred or 500 criminals rounded up. People who are happy. Law enforcement, both state, county, and local, complied. Not in the news, except the dividends that it’s a safer place and the law was enforced. Doesn’t mean you’re going to neglect the blue states. You’re just going to until the midterms.

Look at places like Arkansas or Wyoming or Montana. Just look at places where you have a receptive population and a compliant and cooperative law enforcement entity. And that will give you great publicity that there’s no violence, there’s no protest, but you’re deporting thousands of criminals.

And if you go into a criminal enclave and there happens to be somebody there and you say, I have, by law, I have to ask you what’s your status, and he is here illegally, then deport them. Doesn’t mean you have to neglect the law.

There’s another advantage that Trump has. They’ve raised, I think, $90 to $100 million. They’ve out-raised the Left by three or four times. And the billionaire class of Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg, not to mention Marc Andreessen or Elon Musk, they have defected, and it’s really hurting the Democrats.

What they’re looking at in California with this billionaire’s tax, you can be a billionaire and have property and investments, homes, but you might only have, I don’t know, $100 million. They’re gonna take $50 million from you on your aggregate worth. That’s not gonna go over well with the billionaire class.

And there, that’s just a foretaste of what Kamala Harris will do if she has a Democratic Congress. So, they’re gonna be able to raise more money, not just from the rank-and-file MAGA people, but from the donor class, which has been historically Democratic.

And finally, there’s known unknowns. We’re at the precipice of radical things that are going on in Ukraine and the Middle East. They could be very bad, but they could also be very good. Mostly, foreign policy does not change a midterm election unless it is dramatic, fundamental, and a peace in Ukraine where you’re not getting 10,000 or 20,000 people killed and wounded a week, total casualties, not just fatalities, or you see that Iran’s government is overthrown and there’s a popular uprising where the United States is not seen as it was in Iraq as an invading foreign occupier, but as a helper of popular descent, that could be enormous.

Just to review, there’s a lot of pros that could disrupt the historical cycle and see the Republicans hang onto the Congress. But there’s a lot of dangers, and you can go over the cliff if you continue to go into places like Minnesota, where they don’t want you, and you don’t really want to be there, but you feel obligated. I can understand that. But do that after the midterms.

And the same thing is true—ignore what history says. This is a whole new ball game. We’ve never seen politics like this, and you can win the midterms even though you’re an incumbent president. And don’t make errors that don’t need to be made.

Just put a czar on social media and say anything that comes through to the public from social media, from the Cabinet, has to be looked at first. Put Don Jr. in it. Put Eric. Just tell him somebody has to be responsible so this doesn’t get out and lose constituencies that won you the election in 2024.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

China’s Quiet Infiltration of America

 

I'd like to talk about our two cold wars, the one that we won against Russia and the one that we’re de facto in against China. They’re very different. And I would argue that the 45-year Cold War with Russia was much easier to win, despite their 7,000 nukes, than it will be with China for a variety of reasons that we should all be aware of.

No. 1, Russia was Russia, kind of a pariah state. It was isolated from the so-called free world. Europe was Europe, and Asia and the United States had guardrails against it. There were no students de facto from Russia in the United States. None. Statistically, almost none. There was no conduit for espionage or the expropriation of American scientific and engineering knowledge out of our Ph.D. programs, MBA programs, you name it. There was very little espionage by students. There were very few Russian nationals in the United States. We just didn’t let them in. There was no American investor class in Russia.

Remember how controversial Armand Hammer was? He was the head of Occidental Petroleum. He had the pencil monopoly in Russia. His parents had been living in Russia. They had been pro-communist, at least his father, as I recall. And then they’d gone back to the United States. He’d grown up part of his youth in Russia. He spoke fluent Russian. And he was our de facto business liaison with the communist government. Every time there was a JFK or Nixon or Johnson administration, and they wanted a back channel, they called up Armand Hammer.

I don’t know quite what his sympathies were, but he was about the only one, and he was a pariah. People were angry at him.

Take the example with China today. It’s much different. And funny, there was a sense that Russia had very bad propaganda. People thought that Russians were crude. They thought they were cruel, that nobody liked them in the Third World when they came in.

Even today in Hollywood, have you noticed that almost every villain in every movie is a Russian? He has that kind of guttural Russian accent. He’s got a shaved head. He has a tattoo when he takes off his shirt. He’s covered with tattoos. There’s the three-bar Orthodox cross. It’s a very cruel caricature, but we don’t do that with China.

And remember that we thought we were going to be blown up by Russia. They had 7,000 nuclear weapons. They had the mother of all bombs. I think it was a 50- or 100-megaton bomb they dropped. It was all over our childhood in school. That propaganda wasn’t propaganda. Actually, it was the truth. I can remember having to do drills.

So, we were clear who the enemy was and what they were capable of. China is very different. They were an ally of ours in World War II. But unlike Russia, that we did not include in the Marshall Plan, and we stopped Lend-Lease right after, we had a much more empathetic view.

China was deindustrialized. It didn’t really have a chance. It hadn’t made a deal with Hitler as the Russians did. It had been preyed upon by Japan. And so, there had been American missionaries, not colonialists or imperialists. We never had an imperial project in China. But it was sort of a goodwill. It wasn’t even lost during the Korean War.

We had this good feeling about China, and there are 300,000 students. People in the administration, I don’t know why, are thinking of having 600,000. If you have 1% engaged in active espionage, that would mean you would have 3,000 students who are actively trying to glean information in labs, in research projects, in joint endeavors with American academics, sending that home. Almost every student who leaves the United States and goes home to China is interrogated by the intelligence arms of the People’s Liberation Army.

It’s nothing—the Russians had no such clout. There were almost no, as I said, no Russians here. Three to 5 million people are foreign-born from China. I think 3 million of them who are in the United States are not U.S. citizens. They’re residents. That would be unheard of in the Cold War with Russia.

I don’t know how much investment there is, but it seems like every American capitalist has made a fortune in China. People have suggested it might be trillions of dollars over the last 40 years. I’m not saying they have dual loyalties, but there’s an insidious idea that China’s not really an enemy because of the massive amount of money that has been invested there.

And that means, put the Chinese students, the Chinese residents, the foreign investment, and our history of empathy with China—it’s very, very hard to tell people that China is an existential enemy in the way that Russia was.

And we all know that they played the DEI, woke propaganda card. Especially, we saw that with COVID. It wasn’t just that we were supposed to believe that crazy idea that a sick pangolin or a bat 100 miles away gave the world COVID when the Wuhan lab was right there, a level 4 lab with American expertise, instrumentation, and some money provided by whom? Anthony Fauci and Peter Daszak, and others, Francis Collins, perhaps.

And so, what I’m getting at is, every time that we tried to criticize the corruption of the World Health Organization or China, they came back and said, here you go again. You’re racist. You’re racist. This is the Yellow Peril all over again. This is the Rape of Nanking, your style. It was almost as if they had studied the DEI mosaic in the United States, and they had tapped into it in a way that the Russians couldn’t.

They were lily-white, guttural-speaking enemies on the Hollywood big screen. And the result of that is, as we speak today, can you imagine if there were Russian bio labs? One was about 10 miles from here. I used to work there in high school at the packing house. It was used later by this operative of the Chinese Communist Party. There was one in Las Vegas. There may be more.

Can you imagine if the Russians bought farmland next to U.S. high-security military bases? We would have never allowed that to happen. We would have never funded a Russian lab.

So, there are so many different ways that China has infiltrated the cultural, social, economic, political life, the military life of the United States, that they are much more insidious, much more powerful. And of course, they have 1.4 billion people. The Soviet Union at its height, I think, had 240 million. So, they are a much more formidable enemy, and they’re much more adept at knowing where we are strong and especially where we are weak.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,
Subscribe to: Comments ( Atom )