| THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016). |
|---|
The Leftist oriented Washington Post ran an article this week that caught my attention and was the inspiration for this week's column. The article in question is titled "Old South Goes With The Wind: Workers Reflect Region's Racial Transformation". At first glance you might think that the article is talking about the rapid racial transformation of Southwestern States like California, Arizona, New Mexico, and perhaps Texas, since all four States border Mexico and demographers readily acknowledge that they will soon to be Hispanic dominated States. The influx of tens of millions of legal and illegal immigrants has indeed transformed the Old Southwest into something new. California, overwhelmingly white a mere 30 years ago, now has a minority white population. With birth rates two to three times that of other racial or ethnic groups, and no end in sight to our virtual open border policy, it is easy to see that Hispanics will soon control the destiny of that, and every other State they choose to come to. The kinds of problems and changes that will bring, nobody seems to want to talk about, and we all know why. White people are paralyzed with fear to speak of themselves as "a people" with their own interests. They make up only about 10% of the world's population, a distinct minority, yet refuse to act as every other racial or ethnic group on earth does. When Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton speaks about "their" people, and their interests, no one charges them with "racism" etc., nor should they. It is natural, and yes, human, for people of the same ethnic or racial heritage to feel a kinship with one another. To deny this in the face of all evidence to the contrary is asinine. Yet, in politically correct America, only whites are forbidden to think and act as if they have their own legitimate interests. This is why the people in California and elsewhere have stood by, silently watching, while the Federal Government and their own State leaders allowed their State to be invaded by illegals from another country. To speak out would have invariably invited the usual charge of being racist or a xenophobe. We all know this to be true so why aren't we saying so? It's too late for California and probably the rest of the Southwest. The writing is already on the wall. Those States are going to be Hispanic States. As some of their more outspoken leaders have said, "If you don't like it, leave! Studies show that many Californians are following this advice and heading elsewhere. Is it racism that drives these Californian's out? No, I don't think so. They are doing something very human and seeking to live amongst those that share the same cultural values as they do. Racism as a term is misapplied so frequently in this country that I think it needs to be strictly defined and understood. I see its only legitimate meaning as stemming from the deliberate attack upon someone, or some group, seeking to do them harm solely because of their race. The question I wish to pose today, and get people to start to think about, concerns the legitimate interests and welfare of the white population of this country. If you think that whites have no legitimate rights or interests in the racial transformation of their country, fine, you are entitled to your opinion, but if, after discussion and debate, we see that their interests are indeed harmed by their reduction to minority status, then we may have to evaluate your motives in supporting policies that will cause them harm. Now, it must be clearly stated that what is in the legitimate interests of our white citizens does not necessarily mean that they are in conflict with those of other groups. Indeed, for all the imperfections they share with every other racial group on earth, none have been as open-minded, tolerant, and yes, liberal in their relations with those of other racial groups. In fact, it is the white race's preoccupation, bordering on obsession, with proving that it has no racial hatred or hostility toward others that has led to their willingness to dispossess themselves of their own countries. We see the same thing going on in every white country in Europe and North America. I titled this column today, "The Suicide of the West" because that is exactly what we are witnessing today. "Western Civilization" of which this country is a product cannot hope to survive apart from the people that have sustained it. Retaining a numerical majority is the only way we can hope to preserve our heritage of limited government, Constitutional liberty, economic affluence, and Christian cultural influence. You cannot expect waves of foreigners with no link to this heritage to work for its preservation. If I am wrong, I would like to be shown how. The Washington Times article previously mentioned, was not focusing on the racial transformation of The Southwestern States, it was talking about the Southeast. Apparently Dixie is next in line for what amounts to the final Reconstruction of our homeland. This, no doubt, has the old South-hating Leftists smiling with glee, anxious to dance a jig on the grave of what remains of the old Confederacy and what America was intended to be. In looking back, we can see that white Southerners were "politically dispossessed" of their country in the War of Yankee Aggression. What we've experienced since then has euphemistically gone under the name of a "Culture War". It is a war we've been losing for some time that has resulted in what amounts to our "cultural dispossession". The only thing left in our obliteration from history is our "geographic dispossession", which is well underway as we can see from articles such as this. Our people have never given their approval to any of this. Our so-called leaders have never asked us if we wanted to become a minority in our own land. This is because they already know that we overwhelmingly oppose it. Every poll ever taken has shown that American's are opposed to immigration policies, open borders, and the routine pardon given to millions of illegals every few years. Our leaders simply don't care what you and I think. They listen to other voices with dollars behind them. Unless and until you speak out and demand a moratorium on the mass migration of the Third World into our country, you will witness the Californication of your State too. Is that the inheritance you wish to bequeath to your children? Will you be paralyzed in fear of being falsely accused of racism, or will you hurl the invective back in their faces for opposing what you know is in the best interests of your people. I stand for the original American model and a homeland where my culture can flourish and live. Where do you stand? I welcome comments to email address provided. |
I found it engaging, and wanted to share it with you. I have provided the author's name, email address and the website I discovered this piece. |
author's hmmm that seems to be it |
I guess i forgot the email address |
who wants to talk to that guy? It's sure easy to couch your racism in soft language these days, it seems. Just saying you aren't racist doesn't make it so. SPunky, what do you think? It seems to me he's trying to hide some racist assumptions behind the language of PC. Kind of seemed he was arguing that the SE would be a better place if it were whiter. |
|
HOWEVER, I can say I do agree with this statement: "White people are paralyzed with fear to speak of themselves as "a people" with their own interests. They make up only about 10% of the world's population, a distinct minority, yet refuse to act as every other racial or ethnic group on earth." "To deny this in the face of all evidence to the contrary is asinine. Yet, in politically correct America, only whites are forbidden to think and act as if they have their own legitimate interests." You have to admit, looking at your own post, that is does have a ring of truth to it. |
If your not prejudiced, or racist articles like that should be below you, why would you need to read about the racial devisions/diversity in an area. It wouldn't matter, now would it. "Will you be paralyzed in fear of being falsely accused of racism, or will you hurl the invective back in their faces for opposing what you know is in the best interests of your people." - this sounds like typical neo-nazi crap, 'the nation sucks because of the immigrants. Its not my fault im lazy and work at burger king. Its the immigrants' - that mind set is the one that causes so many peoples to hate america... The (sophisticated) popular version, is as shown in that article... big words some stats. and a lot of smoke being blown up collective asses... Ok, so as not to miss anything here, i just read the whole damn thing... still say the same thing.. what an ass. |
I'm not sure why the author had to start with a tangent about the Southwest when that had nothing to do with the Washington Post article, except to get a chance to spew such garbage as: "With birth rates two to three times that of other racial or ethnic groups, and no end in sight to our virtual open border policy, it is easy to see that Hispanics will soon control the destiny of that, and every other State they choose to come to. The kinds of problems and changes that will bring, nobody seems to want to talk about, and we all know why." Not a particularly compelling article, to put it mildly. |
It is almost impossible these days to talk about these things without sounding racist, because that is the way we have been conditioned to think. |
It is a horrid example to be honest. |
|
|
Remember the Know-Nothing Party? And I wasn't aware that "the Hispanics" acted as One, like the Borg or something. If they do, someone had better teach the rest of us how to be that organized. |
But most things that "control the destiny of the states" do not appear on a ballot. |
BTW, spunky, you do know that Forrest was the guy who founded the KKK, right? "SPUNN-KEE, youse gots some 'splaining to do!" IMHO, people who try to play down the slavery aspect of the Civil War are the same as Holocaust deniers. "White people are paralyzed with fear to speak of themselves as "a people" with their own interests. They make up only about 10% of the world's population, a distinct minority, yet refuse to act as every other racial or ethnic group on earth." Tell that to the Bosnians/Croations/Serbians. Tell it to the Irish. Tell it to the Basques and Corsicans. Tell it to the Georgians and Ukrainians. Tell it to the Czechs and Slovaks. Etc, etc. In other words, bullshit. "To deny this in the face of all evidence to the contrary is asinine. Yet, in politically correct America, only whites are forbidden to think and act as if they have their own legitimate interests." Also bullshit. White americans have the dominant culture. When you are a part of a dominant culture, you are from birth the inheritor of the ideology that comes along with it. As such, it is common to not even recognize that you even follow an ideology, and for many, it comes as quite a shock to realize you do. That's why feminism, despite its faults, ranks as one of the most valuable schools of thought from the 20th century, in that it has been quite effective in identifying this ideology as it works in our culture. Spunky, if you and Eri come to visit Kazoo at all in Atlanta, make sure she takes you to the MLK National Historic Monument. It's an eye-opener for sure. |
|
|
oh YEAH. I forgot that America is the white people's homeland. We were here first n' all. |
well thats a bit much. the converse is a bit much too. if slavery didnt exist would the civil war have happened? id say its doubtful so to disregard the slavery aspect and its role in the war is indeed wrong. I think though when people say "slavery didnt cause the civil war" they are often referring to the morality of slavery. the war wasnt fought for the morality of slavery. the economy of slavery is a bit more accurate because to abolish slavery was a direct stab at a lucrative trade, not to mention the very direct hit on agriculture. Its like the French in the recent Gulf War. Fuck those guys. They werent objecting to the morality of the war like some said...it was the economy and the direct kick in the ass they french were and are going to take. I mean if anyone knows about colonizing....its the French. |
|
Second point is a repeat. Why is he a bigot? Was MLK a bigot? Was Malcom X a bigot? This guy is not even inciting violence. He is trying to plead the case that being proud of heritage is fine. For blacks, and for whites. But if you proclaim you are proud of being white, you get called a bigot. or racist. Try and deny it. |
|
white culture dominates! what the fuck is he even talking about? how? I, as a caucasian, have never felt this forbiddence (is that a word?). "Retaining a numerical majority is the only way we can hope to preserve our heritage of limited government, Constitutional liberty, economic affluence, and Christian cultural influence. You cannot expect waves of foreigners with no link to this heritage to work for its preservation." this..to me...is bigoted because its completely in denial of the tenets this country was founded on. This statement implies that somehow "Constitutional liberty, economic affluence and christian cultural influence" are threatened by other cultures and races, as if they are complelely unable to embrace such ideas. The dumbass forgets that such things are not exclusive to America. Its not like we created and branded liberty, affluence and christianity all our big bad selves. For much longer than this bigot has been on this earth we have sought to embrace the melding pot idea. I don't know about you, but i have never, ever, felt in my life that my "caucasian culture" (is that the likes of britany spears and justin timberlake?) was under attack or in anyway threatened. I get drunk on St. Pats just like id get drunk Cinco de Mayo or the 4th of July. My "hertitage" is being an American and enjoying the benefits and contributions from everywhere. Thats why I ran from the suburbs as soon as I could. I want thai, mexican, carribean, japanese etc influence in my neighborhood. white by itself is boring. "what remains of the old Confederacy and what America was intended to be" whats that? A bigoted monoculture? What exactly was this country meant to be? To even compare this guy to MLK is absurd. Spunk....i can't bring you to see the grey. I can't explain as well as id like to. The fact that the idea of "minority", "majority" is so important to him, you....well....thats sad. Many people who pick up and leave their homeland behind and come here seeking a better life are no different than those Eurpoeans who founded this country, no different than those Europeans who many on this board cite as their ancestors, nor any different than the tribes who supposedly migrated across the land bridge in modern-day Alaska and Russia....to say they are incapable of adopting, protecting our creed of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness (THATS what is says in the Constitution by the way). |
the civil war was northern aggression against a union of states who legally seceded. i'm glad it happened, the civil war, because it increased the power of the USA significantly. but it wasn't about slavery. hey spunk, why don't you go on a rant about the religious right? maybe tie in some 1984. i'd think that would be right up your alley. emmanuell goldstien and the religious right, compare and contrast. then we can draw out the bullshit tolerance of the PC left, who will disregard opinions before they've even heard them, claiming they sound like racism or sexism. |
the civil war was northern aggression against a union of states who legally seceded. i'm glad it happened, the civil war, because it increased the power of the USA significantly. but it wasn't about slavery. hey spunk, why don't you go on a rant about the religious right? maybe tie in some 1984. i'd think that would be right up your alley. emmanuell goldstien and the religious right, compare and contrast. then we can draw out the bullshit tolerance of the PC left, who will disregard opinions before they've even heard them, claiming they sound like racism or sexism. |
|
|
Yes or no: Is that bad? |
Of course the issue of slavery played a big part in the Civil War. Yes, the war was chiefly over the states' rights vs. centralized govt idea, but to say that it had nothing to do with slavery is just not true. What specific rights do you think the states' rights people were trying to defend? They were protesting the fact that the Northern states, who didn't depend on slavery to support their economy and social structure, were casually contemplating the idea of abolition, when that would completely screw up the Southern way of life. They didn't like the idea of not being able to decide for themselves what their own interests were, in general, which led to secession...but it was slavery in specific that set them off. I mean, it wasn't a coincidence that the war followed the growing abolition movement, John Brown's raid in Harper's Ferry, etc. How did we get on this topic, anyway? |
Of course, being a white male yourself, perhaps you don't see a problem with that. You need to take some time and think about your racism. |
|
Instead of putting words in my mouth, which you accuse me of, you are tying to put words in my heart and brain. I have no desire to whipe anyone out. Point out where I suggested it? You cannot brainwash me into believing that because I believe in EQUAL RIGHTS FOR EVERYONE that I am racist, since that means EQUAL RIGHTS FOR WHITES. Typical. |
Example.....black history month....is there german history month? scottish history month? irish history month? british history month? Here in SA, there is tons of hispanic history taught, tons. And what they teach our kids is very contradictory to the actions of the hispanics in the area (Fiesta being one example) and you have it shoved down your throat so often that you get tired of it. Not that we don't want to know the truth about the Alamo and not what is commonly taught in textbooks. We do. We want to understand why they have this huge Fiesta every year. We don't have a problem learning about their culture and about how it effects the state we are in, but that is ALL you hear about. His question is why isn't it equal? We are a minority where we live, who cares. If we spend all of this time learning about other cultures until we are blue in the face, then what is wrong with speaking about our own cultural history? If you do this and you are white you are concidered racist, when all you are asking for is the same as the rest. I personally would like to learn more of the "potato famine" in Ireland that lead so many people to come to America under seriously deadly circumstances, where they would willingly sacrifice their lives and the lives of their children at the thought of crossing American borders. That information is not taught because it is not an important part of history. What is important here is learning about the liberation of Texas from Mexico which is filled with half truths and unbelievable amounts of bias at best. Spunky isn't saying "power to the white man" "all else are scum". He is saying why can't we have the same? Not more but equal. |
|
what the fuck are you talking about? you are advocating a racists point of view! you don't even understand what this essay is saying. you think you do, but you don't. you are advocating and supporting a racists point of view by suggesting the author of this essay is right. |
So you start out with rich white guys up here and poor black women down there, and then you give poor black women a hand up to the rich white guy level. So to the rich white guys, it looks like the poor black women are getting all this stuff, and they pout and moan about it not being fair. "Hey, how come we don't get any of that stuff, huh?" Well, that's because they already had the stuff. Now we're sharing it with the poor black women. So now everybody gets the same stuff. No one is getting more than anyone else. Get it? |
"Retaining a numerical majority is the only way we can hope to preserve our heritage of limited government, Constitutional liberty, economic affluence, and Christian cultural influence. " you and spunk are really really really missing the point of all of this. you guys are so stuck on "heritage" as if its antiquity in a museum and everyone else is trying to steal it or keep the museum locked up. If you have a problem with school curriculum, thats another subject. Schools have all kinds of issues going on with their curriculum. Otherwise who gives a rats ass about dedicated historical months. Also, to say our education is lacking in "white" culture is idiotic. If you arent getting enough white bread, then you arent paying attention. god damn this is such a ridiculously mundane thread and subject matter. yeah im sneering spider....so what....it begs the issue. |
Then shut the fuck up. You are telling me what I am doing. That is how you are putting words in my mouth. You are informing me of how I feel about other people. You are telling me what I am saying. |
|
Spider, I completely understand what you are saying. I just have always happened to live in a place of minorities and have learned about the minorities, but that's it. I just think that information of different histories should co-exist. If there is african american history month, then there should be hispanic history month, asian history month, scottish history month, italian history month, etc. Therefore making information to all equal regardless of race. Oh, and I am only using this a an example of how I see this, not particularly the end all be all of it, but an example. But as I can see, my idea of wanting the same access to different types of history (including white history, but not limited to) apparently makes me idiotic. Racist. I believe that was Spunky's point. You can't say it or you are racist, right? He isn't advocating power, or riches, or rights above other races, but equality in free speech and knowledge which is lacking cuz if you want to know about "white history" or you want to speak about your "white heritage" then you are a racist. |
|
Second of all, what the hell is white heritage? Define it for me. |
can either one of you show an example of this? ", but equality in free speech and knowledge which is lacking cuz if you want to know about "white history" or you want to speak about your "white heritage" then you are a racist." example? i dont think either of you know what you are talking about. i don't think you are really thinking this so called "inequality" you claim you are victims of through. spunk, if you think anyone is putting words in your mouth...you need to talk to a therapist or a shrink or get off those over the counter cold pills you get hopped up on. you're delusional. |
And you call me dense. |
|
"Where's my White History Month?" I really don't get why this should even be an issue. When you're learning about the different presidents, the Revolutionary War, the New Deal, the Cold War....what are you learning but White History? |
|
and spider, your points about slavery and the civil war don't make sense. the civil war wasn't started by the south. it was started by the north. |
|
I am, General, very respectfully, your obedient servant, ROBERT ANDERSON, Major, First Artillery, Commanding." this is a the US government refusing to leave confederate land. that started the battle you mention. |
|
|
I used to be really interested the Civil War, studied it for about 4 years, and I never once came across anybody who seriously believed that the North started the war. (Hey, maybe there are people out there who do...but I've read a lot, and I've never seen them.) But why would they -- the South was proud to secede and fight for their independence. See, this is what I mean by the indiscriminate devil's advocacy going on. It's annoying. |
i love that historical shit. |
On my first dig in South Carolina, I was excavating in the area of a freed black homestead and found a button from a colored regiment from Connecticut that dated to that regiment's participation of the occupation of Beaufort. How cool is that? |
I've been to Gettysburg maybe 7-8 times. One year I went to the re-enactment they hold every year on the anniversary of the battle (July 1-3). I've also been to Fredericksburg, VA. |
"But why would they -- the South was proud to secede and fight for their independence." but why did the South need to fight for their independence? shouldn't it have been recognized as legal by the US and allowed to happen? |
It was still a nice experience, and (this seems to be true no matter when I've gone) everyone is extremely friendly there. I tell you, I don't think I've ever had better and more spontaneous conversations with complete strangers than at Gettysburg. Oh, your brother should rent a guide to tour the battlefield with! Those guys know EVERYTHING. |
Every state creates material resources and $ that contributes to the value of the whole country....why would the govt want to give that up without a fight? |
i am ashamed of the colour of my skin i am ashamed of my heritage of my people immigrating to this country for a better life, starting with nothing and making it. i am ashamed my great great grandfather worked the soil, and built his own home from logs he cut down himself. i am ashamed my grandfather started with little more then the house he inherited from his grandfather. i am ashamed he sent himself to school, got a well paying job, and was able to buy his own home. I am ashamed i was proud of my heritage. |
no one is saying be ashamed of anything. lay off the cold pills. "but why did the South need to fight for their independence? shouldn't it have been recognized as legal by the US and allowed to happen?" so the british should have rolled over as well? |
Where did anyone say you should be ashamed of your heritage? No one is saying that. I know I'm not saying that. I'm saying, before you get all pissy about other people getting their month-of-the-year specials, you should stop and think a minute about *why* they're getting them. |
|
spider: "Why, it's South Carolina, a member of the United States that doesn't recognize secession." south carolina led the secession. the states seceded because the lincoln's federal government supported northern states' defiance of federal law and the constitution. article I, section 10 of the constitution illustrates all of the rights denied to states. nowhere is secession forbidden. there is no argument that you can make that secession was illegal at the time of south carolina's leap from the union. |
|
My dad and I had this conversation about the Kurds in Iraq. He wanted to know why some country in the Middle East didn't just carve out a chunk of their territory and give it to them to live on as a sovereign nation. Well, because that chunk of land's resources could be going to Iraq or Turkey or wherever, and those countries certainly aren't going to give up that great wealth out of charity. |
"The foundation of the Constitution is Federal, which regards the Union as a Confederacy of sovereign states, instead of a national government, which regards the Union as a consolidation of the states." Federalist Paper #39 thrilled or not, it was a legal action by the southern states to secede. now, say there was a chinese military base on the california coast. and say we are having some troubles with china. and say china transports a bunch of supplies to said military base. would that be seen as an act of aggression? where the confederate states wrong to attack fort sumter when abe lincoln did that? i'll concede that slavery was part of the cause of the civil war. but it wasn't the moral issues of slavery. |
The sick part of this is that most southern land owners considered the slaves to be property and not human beings. We have some of the same struggles today, only the property is not human beings this time around. property can mean land, intellectual property, gold, etc. Nate, it did not sound much older to call them flag burning commies.............. |
Spider said: "Why, it's South Carolina, a member of the United States that doesn't recognize secession." Nate said: "south carolina led the secession." nate you may have made a misunderstand I almost made by spider's statement. maybe she should worded it this way : "Why, it's South Carolina, a member of the United States. The United States that doesn't recognize secession." At first i was a bit tripped up by the wording because indeed SC did support succession. Spunk, why do we have to spend so much talking with you about what we didnt say, rather than what we did say? |
To be honest, I don't know that much about the legal issues involving secession, other than what I've posted. (I've always cared more about, you know, artillery and stuff than about political argument.) I'm just thinking that if it was such an easy business to secede, the US wouldn't have gotten so upset. I have vague memories of the debates in Congress before the start of the Civil War, but I can't be arsed to look them up right now. |
|
but it wasn't legal. it wasn't constitutional. patrick: the federalist papers definitely give the intent of the framers of the consititution. by which it is evident that article I, section 10 gives you the rights states don't have, and that all other rights are assumed to be those of the states. |
|
|
because if it is, every day of the year (except black history month, because damn if you dont spend every waking second of that month learning about black history. I'm sure you all know everything about black people since they force you to only learn about black people every minute of that month. yes that month really sticks out) is all about the whiteys... if you want to really go through that big ball of playdoh out and find what American "pure" KKK-standard issue white culture is, sorry, you might not think its as interesting as you think,and I doubt you'd want to spend a month celebrating ballet and pasta and wait pasta came from China...see? black history month exists because you can tell if someone is black pretty damn easy. For everything else you need a family tree and a phonebook to the afterlife. White history month would probably be a long list of mergers and aquisitions, pictures of handshakes between lame people, and toothpaste and soda commercials. I'm of the breed that thinks most of the last 100 years, culturally, black people really do rule, and white people co-opt everything. We do it pretty well in some cases though. Living Color vs. Faith No More? no contest. |
"because if it is, every day of the year (except black history month, because damn if you dont spend every waking second of that month learning about black history. I'm sure you all know everything about black people since they force you to only learn about black people every minute of that month. yes that month really sticks out) is all about the whiteys..." Exactly! But then you get carried away. :) There is plenty of art and culture that's original to white people, and plenty created by black people that has not been co-opted. Off the top of my head, bluegrass and country musicians seem to be almost all white, and there are some fashions that I've only seen worn by black people. I'm sure there are more examples... And European white history is a hell of a lot more than handshakes and mergers. As for American white history....well, again, we already know all about that, because that's most of what we're taught. (I need to learn more about Canadian history. All I know is: fur-trapping, Northwest Passage, war of 1812, the slaughter of the Hurons and the Jesuit missionaries, and the Quebecois separatist movement.) |
|
|
|
|
"I personally would like to learn more of the potato famine in Ireland" You remined me of something i haven't thought of in years.... in highschool, even though we learned all about it in history class, our vice principal was OBSESSED with the potato famine. I think his parents must have come over during it, that's the only good reason i can think of. He talked about it all the time, and i don't just mean when he was asked. He'd just bring it up casually, or as casually as one can bring up a famine. He would work it into every speech he gave to the school, he even managed to somehow go off on a tangent about it in the middle of his final speech to our graduating class. Don't ask me how he did it, but he did. Minutes after a perky talk by the valadictorian, he's lamenting on about strife and starvation and government corruption. And potatoes. It's gotta be one of the most memorable speeches ever given to highschool grads. this man was a jem. |
between shows on certain canadian channels they show these little "Heritage Minutes", about canadian history. you can watch all of them: here superman, winnie the pooh, basketball, insulin.... (they're shown so often that parts of some of them have become jokes, but i don't have time to talk about that. "I SMELL BURNT TOAST!"...classic.) |
|
I didn't think about it until after i posted. he was pretty old, though. i guess he really was crazy. in other news, i'm hooked on the fucking Heritage Minutes now. So many i haven't seen! So many highschool names explained! |
