Creeping , Creepy Fascism

First posted more than a year ago.

Several years ago, during President Obama’s first term, I was warning about of “creeping fascism” in America.

We now have a president who tries to govern through fear alone. (I think he failed in the matter of sequestration, until next time.) He keeps volunteering he is not a dictator. (If I affirmed repeatedly that I am not a sex pervert, would you leave me alone with your teenage daughter?)

His wife highjacked the Oscars ceremony in a manner strikingly reminiscent of Evita Peron’s setting up of a cult of personality for herself based on a mixture of showy do-gooding and conspicuous consumption.

There is a broad attempt by his followers to annul a historically central part of the constitution ( the Second Amendment) in a way that would leave Americans at the mercy of any federal government gone rogue. (Not necessarily the present administration.)

The Attorney General has opined that the government has the right to execute Americans summarily, even inside the US. In another country, his title would be “Minister of Justice.” The government has already executed American citizens abroad without trial or even the bother of an indictment, including a teenager. The Attorney General also said that it would be OK to do it on US soil too. As of this writing (3/7/13), I am not sure whether he has walked back or not from that opinion. (Update 3/13/13: He walked back from the comment the next day but not clearly enough. Perhaps he is just inarticulate.)

In a rare display of tin-ear, the Wall Street Journal has an editorial today defending the Attorney General’s opinion and attacking Rand Paul’s brave filibuster designed to draw attention to the administration’s contempt for constitutionality and for common American decency.

What’s creeping about all this? Or is it only creepy?

PS (3/13/13)  I still don’t dislike much Barack, the man. He is  man of deep convictions, the kind of convictions that the bright but poorly educated often carry in their hearts. He is not fundamentally evil. I think of him as sort of French. Although he probably knows little  about the country, he thinks that the US should be more like France  where the government bestows and withholds most good things. (The same country where farmers burn railroad cars annually to protest the fact that the price of cauliflower is too low.) The president even has a French-like cavalier attitude toward the spirit of the law. (This is a little unfair to the French today, I admit. The French have become better about this in the past ten years. I think it comes from watching American crime serials: “Vous avez le droit de demeurer silencieux…..” )


About Jacques Delacroix

I write short stories, current events comments, and sociopolitical essays, mostly in English, some in French. There are other people with the same first name and same last name on the Internet. I am the one who put up on Amazon in 2014: "I Used to Be French: an Immature Autobiography" and also: "Les pumas de grande-banlieue." To my knowledge, I am the only Jacques Delacroix with American and English scholarly publications. In a previous life, I was a teacher and a scholar in Organizational Theory and in the Sociology of Economic Development. (Go ahead, Google me!) I live in the People’s Green Socialist Republic of Santa Cruz, California.
This entry was posted in Current Events. Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Creeping , Creepy Fascism

  1. Terry Amburgey says:

    What a load of baloney. I guess I should be happy you made it through an entire sentence before you started slicing it. Big thick slices to boot.
    “He keeps volunteering he is not a dictator. (If I affirmed repeatedly that I am not a sex pervert, would you leave me alone with your teenage daughter?)”

    Volunteering my arse. Occaisional responses to a constant stream of accusations from the teapublican echo chamber is what you see.

    • “Baloney” ! A deadly come-back. N. S. !

      • Bruce says:

        You’re exactly right about Obama. Behind the facade lives a narcisstic megalomaniac who believes he deserves to exercise complete control over our lives. I would add to the list of fascist traits his using government resources to bail out select corporations and fund new ones that support his ideology. Some are winners, others are loosers, it’s up to him. He talks about the “middle class”, whatever the hell that Marxist term actually means in America, every chance he gets. He uses the term to divide the country by economic class, just like he used class warfare in his community organizing days. Just like one of his hero’s Hugo Chavez, he has become a very rich man doing this. Just like Chavez, he appears to have no problem adjusting to the irony of his great personal wealth. He bounces aloofly between estates in Hawaii, Palm Beach and Martha’s Vinyard enjoying the perks of power with 1 percenters. He looks like he could have been Travon Martin back in the day, except for the wealthy white grandmother who was a Hawaii bank VP, and the private schools, Columbia and Harvard. He must perpetuate to the vision of himself as one who pulled himself up by his bootstraps and is now going to share his hope and experience with his flock of followers. It was said early and often that he was among the smartest Presidents ever. I guess this was done to combat the possibility that affirmative action had anything to do with his promotion through life. The Obama’s are never subjected to the normal press criticism for spending other people’s money in rough economic times. Instead they think we all must just want to know what designer First Lady Michelle Obama will be wearing to the Hamptons this spring. We’re all a buzz to know if Tiger Woods will be hitting the links with the President there. Maye we’ll be treated to a photo op with him and Michael Jordan shooting some hoops. Anything to distract us while he throws the Constitution under the bus. With a media like the one we have, who needs a Dr. Goebbels?
        We need 99 more guys like Rand Paul in the US Senate, that would take care of most of the problems we are facing fairly quickly.

  2. Bruce: If you don’t like him tell us; be frank!

    Two points: I don’t know that the president grandmother’s was wealthy. Being a bank VP sure does not qualify. Is there some other info?

    “Middle class” is not a Marxist term. I would bet good money that Marx himself never ever used the term. I doubt if any Marxist author of any stature ever did. Something more sinister is going on there, Obama the leftist (who has not read Marx) does not want to use the words “working class” in public. So, he uses a simplistic substitute. But “working” is what he means.

    The conspicuous consumption is Michele’s invention. It’s typical of nouveaux riches blacks (as anyone who watches “Housewives of Atlanta” knows). He , Lucky Hussein, is practically a foreigner in America and in black America. I don’t mean that he was born abroad; I don’t know and I don’t car much. I mean that he grew up far from mainstream America. He is almost as much an immigrant as I am. To a large extent, he would not know how to act under certain circumstances absent Michele’s guidance. Just a guess but my immigrant’s eyes know what they are seeing.

    Curiously, conservatives have adopted the fiction that he is an African-American (more or less a cousin to MLK!) He is not. He is the child of a white hippie who reared him far away and of an African alcoholic who was no more than a sperm donor. He has more in common with me than he has with the descendants of American slaves.

    Interestingly, his second name and his aunt’s Arabic first name suggests that his father was a member of one of the islamicized coastal tribes who did the slaving on behalf of Arab traders. Not his fault, of course, but if this speculation is correct, it underscores again the hypocrisy of his public relations endeavor.

  3. Terry Amburgey says:

    “I guess this was done to combat the possibility that affirmative action had anything to do with his promotion through life.”

    Heh heh. There ya go Jacques, that’s your cue for a comment on how his college transcripts have been ominously locked away.

  4. The president’s college transcripts have been “ominously” locked away? I did not say this. I would have said, “ignominously.”

  5. Terry Amburgey says:

    “What other explanation is there for the secrecy about his college transcripts?”

    As I’ve pointed out before, all college transcripts are ‘locked away’. In the U.S. student infomation is confidential. In every University I was ever at even posting test scores by student ID [no names] was forbidden. You’d know this if you’d spent less time in the faculty club ogling waitresses and more time attending to university policies.

    Here’s another quiz for you: Who was the last president to release his college grades?

  6. Ridiculous! Who was the last president to refuse to release his college grades before Lucky Hussein?

    When asked during he campaign, both G.W. Bush and his opponent, Sen. Kerry released their transcripts. Kerry turned out to have a lower C GPA than Bush. Everyone had a good laugh. No one lost any votes on accounts of transcripts.

    • Terry Amburgey says:

      That is incorrect. After the campaign Kerry released his military records which included grades, not during the campaign. Please provide proof that President Bush released his transcripts. If you can I will post here “I’m symbolically eating crow”. If you can’t I expect you to post the same thing.
      Remember, proof that BUSH released his grades.

  7. Re-reading you previous com, Terry, I am puzzled. Are you saying that the interested parties, the students themselves, cannot make their grades public? Are you suggesting that if I send a clear message to the registrar of my alma matter saying
    :” Let anyone who asks see my grades,” the Registrar will answer, “No.”

    And if you are not saying this, what are you saying? Please explain the point of your previous comment. I hope you will not forget.

    • Terry Amburgey says:

      Let’s put it to the empirical test. Call the registrar of your alma mater and say “Let anyone who asks see my grades”. Let us know what the answer is.

  8. Terry: No, I don’t want to bother.simply because you are affirming something absurd.

    Just answer my question straightforwardly and let your response stand. Why the indirectness?

    In addition, assuming I can get a copy of my undergraduate transcripts, would there be anything preventing me from posting them on my blog?

    Would anything prevent President Obama from posting his transcripts on his own well-visited blog ( next to a raised middle-finger, perhaps)?

    To what absurd lengths will you go to deny the obvious? He is hiding something with astonishing obduracy. I don’t know what it is. I hope it’s only bad grades.

    • Terry Amburgey says:

      “Terry: No, I don’t want to bother.simply because you are affirming something absurd.”

      No, you are affirming something absurd and don’t have the cojones to admit it. You can’t call your alma mater and tell them to let the public look through your records. That’s patently ridiculous and you should know it.

      “In addition, assuming I can get a copy of my undergraduate transcripts, would there be anything preventing me from posting them on my blog?”

      Of course you can get a copy of your undergraduate transcripts…for a price. You can also have them sent somewhere (to a graduate school you are applying to for example)….for a price. I thought the price was exhorbitant when I was applying to masters & PhD programs but I was poor. You can scan them. I assume you cam post pdf files on the blog But I don’t really know.

      “He is hiding something with astonishing obduracy.”

      He’s hiding the same thing that EVERY President of the USA that attended college has hidden. I see you ignored my question so let me answer it for you: NO president has EVER released college transcripts. None. Nada. Why is it an issue for the BLACK guy I wonder.

  9. Bruce says:

    Multiple Choice.
    Q: Obama won’t release any his college transcripts because.
    1. His grades were terrible and would beg the question “How did he get into Harvard Law?” Someone might start asking about standarized test scores like the SAT and LSAT, and wonder why with their higher scores they were denied admission. Then they might pile on and want to see Michele’s grades and scores. She would blame him, and be more angry than that thing with Beyonce, hangin with Tiger and now this chick in Argentina he’s going to dinner with later this week.
    2. His grades were average and would dilute the rumor that he’s the brightest president ever. His left wing flock would have shift it to his being the most humble and hardest working based on his limited abilities president.
    3. His grades were excellent but it’s beneath his dignity to have to prove anything. Go ahead picture him. Head back, nose up. Just like he looks when someone disagrees with him.
    4. His classes were left leaning and could be said to have shaped his ideology giving enemies insight into his world view.
    5. The institutions won’t release them until library fines are paid to the bursar’s office.
    6. He was really bad at math which might give ammo to Republicans about how numerical concepts seem to evade him.
    7. They show he registered as a foreign exchange student which the birthers would jump all over.
    8. He got a “C-” in Basketball Fundamentals- Hoops 101.
    9. He did not have enough hours to graduate.
    10. The more controversial things that he can pile up the harder it is to dismantle the programs he’s put in place causing extensive damage to our freedom. Like having a bear swatting hornets while standing in a tub of acid.

  10. Terry:you are skating close to bad faith. Get ahold of yourself.

    How many times do I have to repeat that Bush opened his transcripts as soon as he was challenged. So, why “EVERY”?
    IN any case, why follow the precedent? What’s to lose by not following it?

    Do you ever say “Ooops”? What happened to your assertion that I could not publish MY grades? Were you wrong?

    • Terry Amburgey says:

      Jacques: This is the second time we’ve gone through this here on your blog. I proved you wrong the first time, must I do it again? Let me type this slowly so that it might stick the second time through: George…Bush…did…not…release…his…college…transcript. How did it get out?
      “George W Bush never authorized the release of his college transcripts from either Yale (undergraduate) or Harvard Business School M(MBA), which are kept private under the federal FERPA law. However, the New Yorker did manage to acquire a “purloined” copy of what they claimed was Bush’s Yale transcripts, and published them in 1999. The Harvard transcripts remain unavailable.”
      I don’t know how much he protested SOMEONE ELSE publishing his grades but he didn’t make them public. Why hasn’t he published his Harvard grades? What is he hiding?

      “Do you ever say “Ooops”? What happened to your assertion that I could not publish MY grades? Were you wrong?”

      I never made any such assertion. I said that you couldn’t call your alma mater and tell them to let anyone who wanted look at your records. You’ve refused to make the call to prove me wrong. Privacy rules don’t keep you from your own records although you have to pay the school to send an ‘official’ transcript to a third party. After all those years as a professor how can you not know this?

  11. Terry:Would you like to bet real money that either Bush published his transcript or that they were published with no protest from him?

    Did I read you right? Did you say earlier that obtaining his records would be too expensive for the president? Another terrible effect of sequestration?

    And, of course, Bruce and the millions of others and I (III) must be racist. There is no other possible reason why we are suspicious about his record.

    No one argues that he did not pass the bar. This would shrink Bruce’s list tremendously, wouldn’t it? Isn’t it why exactly he does not want to throw his decent grades in our racist faces?

    Think it through, folks.

    • Terry Amburgey says:

      “And, of course, Bruce and the millions of others and I (III) must be racist. There is no other possible reason why we are suspicious about his record.”

      The proof of the pudding is in the taste. No president has ever released their college records [see above]. The black d00d comes along and he has to prove he didn’t get ahead as an affirmative action case. It would be completely sad if it wasn’t for your surreal argument that it was fine for Romney to not release tax returns because they weren’t relevant to the job he was seeking. That makes it more weird than sad.

      “”Did I read you right? Did you say earlier that obtaining his records would be too expensive for the president?”

      No you didn’t read me right, another figment of your imagination. I said that sending transcripts to grad schools was expensive for me when I was a poor student. Remember I was a 47% type sucking at the public teat of the GI bill after 4 years in the air force.

      • Stranger and stranger! How in the world is your past poverty and the cost of getting transcripts relevant to anything?

        So, we do agree that President Obama could afford to have his transcripts send to a couple of places, such as his blog, right?

        The first time we have a president with hair on the second knuckle of his index finger the bastards want to know his grades! If that is not a proof, what is?

        This is grotesque but the Democratic Party and liberal intellectuals are trying to censor effective critics through intimidation by lying the much-soiled race card at every little turn. Well, I am not intimidated so, let’s go for it:

        Are you implying that you are quite sure that Pres. Obama is not an affirmative action wonder?
        Or, are you denying that there are affirmative action wonders at all?
        Or, rather, much rather, are you suggesting that it’s more or less criminal to want to divulge affirmative action secrets?

        Please, try to answer. Do it publicly. Do it clearly.

        Incidentally, personally, I have little interest in the affirmative action hypothesis. It’s not what’s motivating me. In fact, if we ever learn the truth and we find out that he was a mediocre student who was pushed along because he was well spoken and clean-cut, with little trace of negro dialect (Remember who said that?); if we find out that this was the only reason for the secrecy, I will be badly deflated. Speaking for myself, as someone who thinks Mr Obama is a disastrous president, I am hoping for more terminal revelations than that.

        Just thinking that this might be the only thing being hidden brings tears of disappointment to my eyes; it makes me cry like a liberal.

      • Terry Amburgey says:

        “Are you implying that you are quite sure that Pres. Obama is not an affirmative action wonder?”

        Let me be public and clear: Yes, I am quite sure that President Obama is not an affirmative action wonder.

      • A good clear answer.

        Somehow, the tone of your objections has drifted to the point where you sound as if you were speaking to people who push the position that President Obama has some sort of obligation to disclose his undergraduate grades. I think he has no such obligation. He does not have a constitutional obligation to do so, nor a legal obligation, not even a moral obligation to disclose them. Hence the “poor Negro” song you sing is irrelevant.

        People like me are only interested in his grades because he has refused for years to take the one minute it would take to order: “Publish the suckers.” If you are right and the president owes nothing (or even little) to affirmative action he could easily confound racists like me and reward his supporters by just showing them. He would give pleasure to your kind at little cost.

        If you are right, the most innocent explanation for his refusal does not exist. Thus he is allowing political unease about his legitimacy for a reason that is worse than bad grades. What would it be? I want to know even more.

        Personally, I am curious because he sounds to me like an immigrant. He sounds like an immigrant, wherever he was born. He is someone who learned America the way I did but both much faster, much much faster, and incompletely. At times, his slip shows in ways that are incomprehensible from his official biography. Once, I heard him repeating more than ten times in a speech the word “corpsman” and pronouncing it as if it had to do with a corpse: “corpse man.” I think that’s an immigrant’s mistake.

        The story, the high achievement story of how he was plucked out of relatively ordinary Continental College by Columbia University is not well told anywhere that I could find.The Continental College period is not mentioned in his Wikipedia bio. Is this absence merely an effect of misplaced vanity? (JD’s correction: This is wrong. Occidental is mentioned briefly in Wikipedia. I am trying to go too fast. Got to slow down!)

        In my heart, I am thinking that his full transcripts would show some light on this matter. It might (MIGHT) begin to tell me how he became an American so fast, from a cultural standpoint.

        Considering Obama’s official bio, as an immigrant myself, I am puzzled by something else:

        Between ages six and ten, Mr Obama spent three and half years in Indonesia, including two years in Indonesian language school. Based on my considerable, well-informed observation (if I say so myself) of language acquisition and given that he is an intelligent person, that should have been enough to make him able to speak Indonesian quite well, with ease and speedily. (I just say speak; reading is another thing.) Yet, I have never heard anyone brag about his facility with that exotic language. I ask myself, how can this be? He is too humble? Has he forbidden his many boosters to mention that he is “fluent in Indonesian” because of the self-same humility? How about Michelle? Is she humble too or does she not know of her husband’s superior intellectual skills in that particular area?

        For a man who has written two autobio books B.H.O. has unexpected zones of shadow in his life.

        What do I suspect? I remember well the leftists of the period that invented Barack Hussein Obama the pretend African-American. They were conspirationists to the core. They were fanatics. They were capable of adapting to their failure to trigger a conventional violent revolution in several inventive ways.

    • I was wrong about BUsh releasing his college transcripts. (WRONG) He did act like someone who did not care.

      Your challenge to have the Registrar do this or that is completely irrelevant since I could post my transcript myself. You kept you mouth prudently shut on this point Pres. Obama could do the same with a one minute phone call. The mere fact that he does not make his silence his, muteness irresistible. Do you really not see this?

      • Bruce says:

        Since Obama was elected, the standards by which a president’s performance in office have been lowered. Achieving an unemployment rate of 7% would be a success for Obama. Coming up with one budget in 8 years would be a success. Benghazi was not a failure of leadership. Picking a tax cheat to head the Treasury was not a mistake. Wasting hundreds of
        millions of dollars on alternative energy was not a mistake. He only lies to the American people for their own good. He does not spend too much time on vacation and millions partying at the White House. He can be the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces even though his past history would disqualify him for the lowest entry level National Agency Check security clearance needed by an Army private before he can go to boot camp. So what if his wife wants to board and feed her mother at taxpayer expense? Taking on more debt than all the presidents before him combined is not a big deal. No solutions, no accountability, no qualifications in the first place, never had to produce in a real job before so why demand he do so now? It has nothing to do with race, I gave Herman Cain a considerable campaign contribution. Not out of white guilt either.
        The bottom line on this transcript business is that if Obama demonstrated a modicum of success as president the issue of releasing his grades would have died on the vine. Unfortunately, aside of his ability to win elections, he has been an utter failure. I’m interested in seeing them because I suspect there is a trend that maybe I can convince a few people its time we reversed. The trend of not holding people accountable based on race or political ideology. In Obama’s case I think it’s appropriate to question the fairness of womb to tomb affirmative action, especially when the stakes are so high. It should have been done from the start but was not. We’re not talking about a harmless department chairmanship at Harvard, we’re suffering with an unqualified man who was never vetted, stumbling around and trying to lead the free world when he has never so much as managed a convenience store.

      • Wonderfully well told. There have been so many waves that some of us have lost track of the sea.

      • Terry Amburgey says:

        “It has nothing to do with race, I gave Herman Cain a considerable campaign contribution.”

        Lol. Classic.

  12. Terry Amburgey says:

    Your wall-of-text is a string of opinions that I find noxious but everyone has a right to their opinions. I disagree with all of them so nothing more to say.

  13. Terry: Your response to Bruce’s remark about Herman Cain. Again, too much indirection for me to catch what you are saying. Do you mean that you don’t believe that Bruce gave money to Cain’s campaign’s effort; or, do you mean that it’s common (“classic”) for a racist to give money to the only black candidate on his side? Or, do you mean something else that I don’t catch? And, do you know yourself what you mean? Is sneering a proper answer, in your book?

  14. Terry Amburgey says:

    It’s a cliche in the US for someone to start with ‘One of my best friend’s is black/jewish/mexican/etc’ and then launching into a string of bigoted statements and or jokes. Bruce just stuck his in the middle.

    Sneering is the most proper response to the nonsense he posted. He’s entitled to his opinions and I’m entitled to sneer at them in response.

  15. Terry: Are you not patronizing me a little? What’s the chance that I don’t know the old cliche: “Some of my best friend are Jewish” after fifty years? I am very smart for an “international student”!

    So, the answer to my first question is that you do believe that Bruce gave money to the Cain campaign and that racists give money to elect black candidates all the time, sometimes, once in a while?

    Of course, you are entitled to sneer. I just wanted to make sure you really meant that it was an appropriate answer. I did not want your response to be misinterpreted. It won’t be now that you made it clear.

    Terry: You keep skating as if you were evolving in a faculty club like the recent Chinese election: 99,6% for you ( like you in this case). This blog is providing you with resistance training that would otherwise be completely lacking in your like, I speculate. I am thinking of charging you.

    Have you ever wondered why there are so few conservatives in academia? Is it because college professors are too damn smart to be conservatives? Is it because they constitute a sort of exploited class?

  16. Terry Amburgey says:

    “This blog is providing you with resistance training that would otherwise be completely lacking in your like, I speculate. I am thinking of charging you.”

    True. There is no lack of teapublicans in my life but very few are interested in reasoned discourse. The libertarians are icing on the cake as it were.

    “Of course, you are entitled to sneer. I just wanted to make sure you really meant that it was an appropriate answer.”

    Opinion is not subject to debate. If Bruce states “I think strawberry ice cream tastes horrible” I can’t prove him wrong, his tastes are his own. In his diatribe against President Obama I didn’t see any statements of fact that could be verified or disputed just variations on ‘I don’t like Obama’. Although I can’t dispute his opinion I can express my opinion about his opinions.

    “Have you ever wondered why there are so few conservatives in academia?”

    I suffer from selection bias. I’ve spent the vast majority of my academic life in business schools. In my experience, business school professors are overwhelmingly conservatives. Santa Clara may be liberal but Northwestern, Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, and Toronto had/have plenty of conservatives. For that matter, I voted republican or libertarian in every presidential election until 2004.

  17. Terry: You write: “In his diatribe [Bruce’s] against President Obama I didn’t see any statements of fact that could be verified…”

    Here is one: ” In Obama’s case I think it’s appropriate to question the fairness of womb to tomb affirmative action, ” (womb to tomb affirmative action?)

    Incidentally, I do not myself espouse Bruce’s thesis that the president is merely a product of extensive affirmative action. I suspect the real story is more sinister.

    Are there no ways to combat opinions you dislike besides sneering? What Bruce told you with unusual clarity is that there are millions who think Mr Obama is a very bad president. That’s aside from policies we dislike. The fact that he spends without a budget is not a matter of opinion. It’s not just Bruce’s opinion. And we don’t disapprove of the practice because Mr Obama does it or because he is a leftist. I can imagine a Republican president using the same high-handedness. I can imagine denouncing it.

    Another example: Almost any Democratic President would try to reform American health care; I am guessing that most would try to drive toward a single- payer government system after the European model. Yet, was it democratically proper to do it with a single bill of more than 2500 pages? What kind of health system we need and how to reach it are different issues. Don’t you see one can be judged a very bad president simply for doing it one way rather than another way?

    The incipient fascism I denounce does not lie in nationalized health; it exists because of a bill that no one had read before it was passed (also without bi-partisan input) and signed into law.

    Business school professors are overwhelmingly conservative? This is news to me. I suspect it’s news to most academics. My guess would be that conservatives a re a larger minority n business schools than say in Modern languages I can be taught however. This is just a guess.

    Does the “overwhelmingly conservative” mean that your political opinions make you a member of a persecuted minority in your business school?

    Your statement does not eliminate my question anyway it just modifies it, like this: “Why is it that in academia – outside business schools, according to Amburgey – there are so few conservatives?”

    Your transformation from libertarian leaning Republican to mainstream liberal is so unusual, I wish you would tell the story. On this blog would be good.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s