Friday 24 June 2016

Four Limericks On The Friday Britain Took Her Leave.

Or Not: David Cameron's future as Britain's Prime Minister looks decidedly shaky in the aftermath of Britain's narrow, 52-48 percent, decision to leave the European Union. Cameron wagered everything on his country voting to remain in the EU - and lost. Anyone for Boris?
William, with a conqueror’s grin,
Told the English: “It looks like you’re ‘In’!”
But, after one thousand years,
It’s all ending in tears.
Europe’s welcome has worn wafer thin.

Sheffield used to make knives, forks and spoons,
And sang all of the Left’s favourite tunes,
Until Labour’s “Remain!”,
Drove it’s voters insane,
And now UKIP is over the moon!
Scotland’s voters were all shouting “Boo!”
As the Sassenachs turned England blue.
“If you all lack the brain
To vote for ‘Remain’,
Well then, fuck-it-all – we’re leaving too!” 

Nigel Farage cried: “Look what we’ve got,
Without having to fire one shot!”
He’s forgetting the price,
That Jo Cox was shot thrice,
In the name of – come on Nigel – What?

These limericks were originally posted on The Daily Blog of Friday, 24 June 2016.


jh said...

The shooting of Jo Cox was one individuals choice as with Anders Breivik. You can't blame Nigel Farange or Jo Cox despite being in opposing camps.
I don't think Faranges poster of a stream of refugees was over the top any more than Winstom Peters referring to a tsunami of migrants (despite Mary Wilson asking "should we even report him?")
The lesson is nations look after themselves first. The supra nationals talk of "small minded nationalism" and the ability of a supra national to solve problems nations can't (such as spread the population around - Abdullah with his 20 children and five wives).

greywarbler said...

What a travesty of democracy the practice and thinking of FPP is - it leads to too much jiggery-pokery. A vital, long lasting decision like this on a simple majority basis?? It should be at least 60% and better if it was 66%.

The BBC results:
Vote share
Votes 17,410,742 Votes

Vote share
Votes 16,141,241 Votes

Guerilla Surgeon said...

JH. Funny how the killer of Joe Cox, and the murderer Anders Breivik are somehow solely responsible for their actions, but any Muslim does a killing and all of a sudden it's their religion's fault. Both of these people had connections to far right organisations, and one of them described himself as a fascist. So these organisations should take at least some of the blame.

greywarbler said...

Monty Python pre-imagined the general trend of British and continental discussions and the conferences with Europe as ancient enmities are are allowed to flourish again.

Anonymous said...

What a travesty of democracy the practice and thinking of FPP is - it leads to too much jiggery-pokery. A vital, long lasting decision like this on a simple majority basis?? It should be at least 60% and better if it was 66%.

Democracy is majority rules. Arguing that 35% should overrule 65% is the very definition of undemocratic.

peteswriteplace said...

A good decision for the Uk, and perhaps for NZ too down the road a bit. They can now control their own destiny. NZ will never join with Australia even if there has been an empty chair for us since 1901. Rather join with the Antarctic.

Stephen Franks said...

It is scarcely epochal for people to want to be governed by their own MPs, laws and judges. To want to know they can dump those in whom they've lost confidence. It's exactly the spirit that animated the SNP.
And the argument that you'll be the poorer for it has been true many times around the world but most people still honourably prefer independence, not to be under even the benign yoke of those they see as "other".

Guerilla Surgeon said...


jh said...

JH. Funny how the killer of Joe Cox, and the murderer Anders Breivik are somehow solely responsible for their actions, but any Muslim does a killing and all of a sudden it's their religion's fault.
The difference is that Islam is full of *overt calls to violence* against infidels. Christianity has some but they are somewhat buried in the ancient bible. Jesus makes unequivocal statements (some might say too strong) such as "turn the other cheek", "give him your coat". Having said that it didn't stop the inquisition. I've been thinking that there is also a strong cultural identity and (so) in group - out group, where culture needs space and dominance?

jh said...

Kim Hills guest Tim Bale thought the rhetoric was bad on both sides but a bit worse on the leave side. Especially they egged on the idea of a group of elites who override and trample on the wishes of the *people*. Why would that resonate?:
Labour decided to increase immigration to "rub the rights noses in diversity"

“Well what you said about the nation, I agree with that. The nation is a racist mechanism both internally and externally in the way it includes and excludes, ah, the nation it comes from the word natio which means to be born is a racist concept. To move beyond that is one of the settled tasks.

"The greatest mass migration in our history has taken place.

The newcomers are lawfully here.

They have the jobs, live in the houses, use the NHS.

Their children are in the schools.

Come to that, they are paying tax.

Our leaders only had to go to Boston, any time in the past five years, and they would have known.

But all our leading politicians were afraid of knowing the truth.

If they knew, they would at least have to pretend to act.

And the truth was, they liked things as they were.

And it was at least partly my own fault.

When I was a Revolutionary Marxist, we were all in favour of as much immigration as possible.

It wasn't because we liked immigrants, but because we didn't like Britain. We saw immigrants - from anywhere - as allies against the staid, settled, conservative society that our country still was at the end of the Sixties.

Also, we liked to feel oh, so superior to the bewildered people - usually in the poorest parts of Britain - who found their neighbourhoods suddenly transformed into supposedly 'vibrant communities'.

If they dared to express the mildest objections, we called them bigots."

IN NZ we have Labour also (Lange government):

"This process of population replacement is occurring at a time when natural increase amongst all
components of the New Zealand resident population is falling."

"The attitudes of New Zealanders in the mid-1990s towards immigration may not have reflected the positive perspective on the value of diversity in our society that is contained in the Review of
Immigration Policy August 1986. But this does not mean that the globalisation of immigration to New Zealand was an “unintended consequence of policy changes in 1986”. It was a deliberate strategy, based on a premise that the “infusion of new elements to New Zealand life has been of immense value to the development of this country to date and will, as a result of this Government’s review of immigration policy, become even more important in the future” (Burke 1986:330)."

"In New Zealand we celebrate diversity" Michael Woodhouse.

Dime says:
"Cracks me up how people get so riled up about immigrants. Especially them chinese.

Dime loves em – i like their food, i like their reasonably priced blow jobs, i like that they only seem to commit crimes against each other, i like that they have made me a fortune in property, i like that they built me a kick ass house."

dime (12,864 comments) says:
June 16th, 2016 at 8:58 am am i alone in not giving two fucks about these losers living in cars???
Dime feels for the mentally ill who end up on the street. but not losers who cant wipe their own ass.
Popular. Like or Dislike: 33  5 You need to be logged in to vote

The Great Debate: XENOPHOBIA - Why do we fear others?
Even bees do it but the humans must rise above it: lead by academics, actors, singers, J. K. Rowling, celebrities, lawyers who charge $1000/hour, BNZ and others who are unaffected.

Anonymous said...

Immigration and refugees from different cultures where/are the problem in Britain.
The Labour and Green parties are leading the charge for more refugees in NZ.
Islamic refugees have completely opposing views on most of our values including our laws and human rights.
We should have a referendum on what NZ people think about Islamic people coming to our country, I believe I know the answer.
We need a political voice on this matter, Winston is not effective on his own and he needs help from a major political party.
The LabGreens support the refugee islamic's so we need a movement in the National Party to get the country on the right track even if this means dumping on the messiah John Key.

Patricia said...

Oh we live in such interesting times! The people have spoken and how they have spoken. Basically it was only London and Scotland that voted to remain. I think this is the start of the end of globalisation. Scotland and Northern Ireland are talking about a referendum to leave Britain. Holland is talking of a referendum in that country. Hollande of France would be wise to call a referendum in order to quell the riots there. Spain has a general election on (their) Sunday. Italy's left wing anti EU party is on the rise and Italy has elected one of that party to be Rome's first woman Mayor and then we have Trump in America. The Brexit vote will certainly have helped him. Then there is poor Greece.... I am sure all the right wing Governments of the World will be looking over their shoulder. Our Labour Party should be using it to their advantage because, in my view, the election next year would now be theirs to lose.

Nick J said...

I watched Tariq Ali, editor of the New Left Review a few weeks back, he got it right. This encapsulates the real issues especially for the Left.
If you read Raol Meijer at for post vote analysis you will note a huge vacuum at the centre of British politics. Labour may be worst off, they deserted their traditional heartland who sided with Farage. Incidentally so did George Galloway.

There is a huge lesson in this for Little and NZ Labour, I am unsure that they have the wit to take notice of who their true support comes from.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

JH you mean Christian violence is buried in the old Testament? Fair point, but I do regard it as a bit of a copout. Fundamentalist Christians seem to be able to use the old Testament when it suits them, and ignore it when it doesn't. Not to mention that Jesus said he wasn't here to change the laws. (Please don't tell Brendan I said that, as I'm not theologically qualified.) And while Jesus did generally endorse peace, he was by no means a pacifist himself. He did say "I come not to send peace, but a sword" or some such. He also seemed to approve of killing disobedient children. But still, as you say most of the violence against "evens" is contained in the old Testament. I wouldn't say buried though. And in case Brendan is listening, an eminent theologian once said:

"An attentive study shows that the NT complements, rather than contradicts the teachings of the OT regarding warfare…A balanced reading of the NT texts suggests that there is a basic agreement between the Old and New Testaments on their teaching on warfare."

Guerilla Surgeon said...

Okay, I'll assume I've been modded again for telling Robert that he is wrong – in the wrong way. But perhaps you will allow me this rant. We are living in what someone I was reading this morning calls a "nonfactual world." This is what Colbert called "Truthiness". We have people and governments that thinks that because something feels right then it must be true.

This has led to a number of things, including Brexit. You have people in Britain who have never seen a migrant, yet claim that they are "taking our jobs", clogging up the welfare system, not paying taxes – none of which is particularly true. Indeed a huge part of the welfare system, the national health service in Britain could not run without migrants – and I suspect that this is true of the New Zealand system as well.

Truthiness also means that Conservatives and right-wing radicals can get ordinary working people to vote against their own interests by scaring them with bullshit.

In New Zealand we have a government that upon finding out that the 90 day probation period for new workers has not, according to researchers actually fulfilled its purpose of increasing the number of people in employment hasn't bothered even to criticise the research as far as I know, but has simply said that that wasn't its original purpose. (An out and out lie in fact as shown by national radio at least.) Because they know in their gut that it's the right thing to do.

The use of unsupported opinion is rife in these columns, and yes it offends me, and yes sometimes I express myself in ways that Chris doesn't approve of. But if we don't point out that Truthiness is wrong what is it going to lead to?

As someone said on Vox the other day, "When Michael Gove said, ‘The British people are sick of experts,’ he was right. But can anybody tell me the last time a prevailing culture of anti-intellectualism has led to anything other than bigotry?
I certainly can't think of any examples, and as far as I'm concerned anti-anti-intellectualism is probably our only hope. :)

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"Immigration and refugees from different cultures where/are the problem in Britain."

See, this is what I mean. Imagine the national health service without immigrants if you are actually capable of imagination. IT.WOULDN'T. WORK.

greywarbler said...

Two spurious points:
1 The people have spoken. Yes and there is very little difference in numbers between pros and antis. To imply that the people mostly agree by their voting to getting out of EC is incorrect, obviously there is a deep divison, getting out was only marginally ahead.

2 To say that a simple majority of votes is the only way that a democracy works is simple-minded. The general term for a democracy is 'for the people, by the people'. Voting can be affected by all sorts of arguments, and/or promises or even gifts. Any thinking, reflecting person knows that. That is why it is good for a democracy to set a higher ratio of votes to trigger change. Thinking people would do this and save endless arguments and disruptions to good governmental planning and policy.

I wish Anonymi would sign their pseudonyms at the bottom so I and others would know whom to respect and whom to scorn. This can be done so that it is both easy to drop in and comment without a lot of hoo-ha, but still be identifiable if they want to participate.

greywarbler said...

@Nick J
There is a huge lesson in this for Little and NZ Labour, I am unsure that they have the wit to take notice of who their true support comes from.

I would like to know who Labour's true supporters are? This is a genuine naive question. I think it still is probably unions, the workers, but that voter pool is so shallow and muddy now. Then the bennies who vote, who for? Labour didn't come out strongly enough on their side to break the downward slide from loss of jobs after the country was flooded with cheap goods and our businesses, cut off at the knees closed down. All to aid the dairy industry and give more buying power to the comfortably off. Those previous workers are now scrabbling for work or begging for their daily bread and bed.

Okay Labour are going for the centre. The working professionals, teachers, nurses, often connected with government services? That's before the RW government rates on them and privatises all the services it is supposed to be providing fairly.

Professionals more connected with facilitating business who get good salaries like lawyers, accountants, financial joes and josephines, would probably lean to National. And the snobbish very wealthy and social climbers are too superior to vote anything but National.

The retired are enchanted by Winston and those disenchanted by Maori rights and recompense to them for wrongs, are drawn to him as well.

greywarbler said...

This from Radionz 4.46 pm 25 June our time. -

Pre-vote polls indicated that young people were more likely to vote Remain, so many commenters using the hashtags were decrying the result.
Other than anger, a common theme was frustration among 16- and 17-year-olds, who were not allowed to vote in the poll.

Last year an initiative backed by Labour, the Lib Dems and the Scottish National Party proposed lowering the voting age to 16, but the government rejected the idea on the grounds of cost, and it was voted down.....

Meanwhile, a parliamentary petition calling for a second referendum has already gained more than 500,000 signatures - and caused the House of Commons website to periodically crash.
The petition called on the British government to implement a rule that if the remain or leave vote is less than 60 percent, based on a turnout less than 75 percent, there should be another referendum.

The British Parliament considers all petitions with more than 100,000 signatures.

greywarbler said...

From Scoop:

Lisa Owen interviews Gerri Peev
Saturday, 25 June 2016, 3:09 pm
Press Release: The Nation
Most Londoners voted to stay. Now, that's probably a reflection of the fact that London is a more global city. More of the jobs here rely on the EU and on globalisation in general. House prices are rising. A lot of Londoners feel relatively prosperous, although there are those who don't.

The rest of the country, however, just is slightly fed up with London running things, and it was a bit of a anti-London vote too, to be honest.

Yeah, but what about Scotland and Northern Ireland? What's going to happen with them?
Scotland and Northern Ireland were the slight exceptions to all this. They, along with London, voted against leaving the EU. I think that's because they see their identities as being quite distinct from the rest of the UK anyway, in many respects.

Wales, however, was an interesting one as they voted to leave. A lot of the counties around the UK, they actually stand to benefit the most from EU funding, were the ones that voted against staying the EU. So it was quite a surprising vote all round....

actually, I think the real repercussions will be felt for some time to come because a lot of jobs rely on the EU. A lot of the global institutions that make their home in London are here because they see the UK as a gateway to the rest of Europe. So this will have massive repercussions to come.

So the people have spoken have they? Or did they mumble "Curses on all your houses"? It sounds like a bunch of disgruntled citizens that know diddlysquat about how Britain is managing to survive in the present day and will cut off their nose to spite their face, shoot themselves in the foot etc. with a scornful jibe, 'That'll show them'. They are thinking of the politicians and perhaps the superior Londoners, but on examination it seems to show that everyone will be worse off.

Anonymous said...

Importantly Britain will want to ditch the metric system.

All you need to know is:

The length of a cricket wicket is 22 yards; and

after a days play pints are enjoyed in the club house.

No european nonsense involved.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

The problem is of course that those who sponsored Brexit have touted it as the answer to all Britain's problems. They now have to deliver on that. And I think most people are in for a bit of a nasty shock. Though to be fair, economists can't seem to agree on what is going to happen. Increased productivity or to hell in a hand basket.

jh said...

"The politicization of immigration in New Zealand has contributed to a growing public ambivalence about immigration and its contribution to the development of New Zealand's society and economy. Briefing papers prepared for the recently re-elected Labor government signal a number of concerns about current levels of immigration in general and the impact of immigration on Auckland's society and economy in particular. Minister of Immigration Lianne Dalziel has indicated that several aspects of the current policy, in addition to the level of English required by prospective residents, will be reviewed over the next few months.

Notwithstanding this ambivalence, there seems to be clear recognition and acceptance that New Zealand society is going to become more diverse in terms of ethnic and cultural groups over the next 20 years. Immigration will play a major part in this diversification of communities, especially immigration from countries in Asia. Fortunately, there seems to be a broad consensus among the main political parties as well as many of the minor ones that this is not something to be feared or resisted at all costs. In this regard, there appears to be some consensus of party view (excluding the position adopted by New Zealand First) that continued immigration at or above present levels will produce positive outcomes for the country's economy and society."

New Zealand: The Politicization of Immigration
January 1, 2003

By Richard Bedford

charles e said...

Most of you seem to miss the main point the exit vote was wanting to establish and it is profoundly democratic. The fact that you miss it is a worry and may indicate that the left no longer really support democracy. The EU rulers obviously do not, so you are with them.
The Majority of the English & Welsh want to be governed by their peers, in their Parliament. That's it. It's not about money or foreigners entering their land, at the core of it. It is about self rule.
The irony is the Scots want self rule too but voted for Brussels to rule them. Perhaps because they hate the English more. There's spite slapping them in the face.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

Ah well, some people who voted to leave are already having buyers' remorse it would seem.

Anonymous said...

Please wake up, Winston Peters for Prime Minister.

jh said...

On Kiwiblog Sam Green has linked to post Brexit racial incidents and asks "Is this the world you want?"
The alternative (apparently) is *super diversity*. The goal is to dissolve difference in difference and make a greater whole, one where people walk around on a Saturday morning and "celebrate" the diversity. What do the bottom half of those in the new situation of majority > minority get out of it? What if people bond to their own groups and (eg) Chinese become the landlords and Muslims dominate through birth rate? What if the economy suffers from old fashioned economic problems with it's larger (crowded) situation? Multiculturalism is sold with the idea that a lager population makes everyone better off.

If the bottom half of the "rich" country were exchanging migration opportunities with other "rich" countries in (say) warmer climates with golden sanded beaches then they might welcome migration, otherwise what do they get out of it? Imagine if Lord of The Rings was about Gandalf and a group of elites and their plan to ease Mordor's overcrowding by settling them in the Shire?

Nick J said...

Interesing question who Labours true voters are Grey and as you allude there is no simple answer. In reality it should be all those on the wrong side of the ledger, whom as you say are a fractured lot who represent a variety of postions and opinions. What I can say is that it is not the centre who are a fickle mix. Both major parties play to them.

Nick J said...

So many issues Grey. The young are saying their future was taken away. Galloway disputes this on the basis of regionalism i.e youth in the North voted very differently to those in London. Older people might reply "Hey, our past and present have been taken, that which we worked for".

The Scots voted to remain in the United Kingdom. Now they want out. Seems very selective to me, also a little bullying. "Do as we say England or else". I think they should consider that outside of North Sea oil they are an economic dependency. Maybe they need to look at the EU and talk to the Greeks.

The call for another petition..."we didnt get our way so we wont accept it". Very democratic of them, so when they win what is to stop another petition?

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"Most of you seem to miss the main point the exit vote was wanting to establish and it is profoundly democratic. "
I would call it more superficially democratic than profoundly. It was a reaction of people who have been profoundly ignored by the ruling classes for some time now, two fingers up in response to lies put out by a certain section of that ruling class which wants to take advantage of this dissatisfaction. And at least one of the Brexit supporters had so little faith in the process, that they had started a petition before the results were in, for another referendum. Which has now been taken over by the "remainders" to my gentle amusement. The result was also very, very close, and it seems that many people voted to leave because they thought their vote wouldn't count. But still, if there is another referendum we should be able to find out if that's true or not shouldn't we? :)
Again, JH the London School of economics claims that migrants pay 34% more in taxes than they claim of the social welfare, and have little effect on wages or employment among the native population. And the Brits have been bitching about migration since before migrants became even 1% of their population. So it seems to me it's racism pure and simple.

greywarbler said...

By the way - the name is Jo Cox, not Joe, which is the generally used male spelling. That is her name. Which lives on, while the vital, thoughtful, socially active person does not. Kicked to the ground and stabbed three times by some man. Violence rules Okay!!

Moko kicked around by a man and woman in NZ, meant to look after the little fellow. Another example of violence. It is a mistake to go into a paroxysm of grief and denouncement against the perpetrators.
Change is what must be invoked, within society and in laws to limit such behaviour. Change personal and governmental thinking and actions; there are many ways to hurt people before life gets extinguished.

I note that a 77 year old man acted to try and help Jo Cox. He is one of an active group in society trying to protect the remaining principles of respect for all. This seems to comprise some active retired people who remember a society to be proud of, and many young people who can see the deep pitfalls arising from ignoring the need to embrace society, and instead focussing on the personal.

greywarbler said...

Your thought opens up much space for imagination.
Imagine if Lord of The Rings was about Gandalf and a group of elites and their plan to ease Mordor's overcrowding by settling them in the Shire?

Imagine if Key or Michelle Boag or one of that lot, was Gollum crawling around searching for the golden ring "my precious". Imagine the final exciting tussle on the edge of the fiery volcano as National struggled to retain that poisonous ring and our brave hero grappled with the villain and finally pushed National and the Ring that Rules them All into the cauldron. What a dramatic, satisfying fireside story of virtue over evil for us in the Shires.

We wouldn't need to agitate against immigrants, as we would have brought our smarts to bear on our problems and ensured jobs and basic homes for all. And we wouldn't need the flood of wealthy immigrants feeding money in to the country and onto our financial records so it appears that we are a functioning and well-balanced economy though in fact that is a ponzi illusion.

Anonymous said...

We must all take into account Winston support for Brexit, his migrant opinions and his statements on vetting the migrants.
A serious question that the LabGreen team must now answer is will they let Winston be the Prime minister if he holds balance of power in 2017.
I believe John Key and National will say no but they would offer a high ranking cabinet position.
Determining the LabGreen position is harder to call but I believe Andrew Little would say yes as he is not really interested in being PM, he only wants a safe Labour seat and that is the real reason he put his name forward for leadership. Had he lost the leadership vote he still knew it could still have helped him to get a safe seat.
Metiria Turei and James Shaw will bluster but will probably say yes as long as they both alright in cabinet rankings.
Winstons polling percentages will rise because of Brexit and so will his demands on coalition partners.

Hold on to your hats, stormy and uncertain times ahead, Winston is dressing, acting and talking like a man who knows his time has come.

jh said...

UKIP supporters (NZ First) are considered to be far -right extremists, however I just heard an economist on *The Panel*: he said "I see globalisation as the ultimate democracy . Everyone benefits. The problem is the people in those countries (UK) who don't understand that".
This is the certainty of a Donald Sutherland who says "The UK should be forced to be more multicultural" and "All the evidence is that everyone benefits".

As I said before that was what the man from the council said at the local zoning meeting: "well we have immigration and you have to have population growth to increase the wealth, so I suppose it is a priority of central government". How do countries that have met their potential benefit from a greater population (apart from people who ponce about flying business class to superdiversity extravaganzas and the chamber of commerce (non treadeables))?

I fear the elites will decide they have to double down their educating efforts. Fortunately we have many sources of information and Joe Bloggs is going outside MSM posting items on Yahoo mail etc.

jh said...

Blogger Guerilla Surgeon said...
The problem is of course that those who sponsored Brexit have touted it as the answer to all Britain's problems. They now have to deliver on that. And I think most people are in for a bit of a nasty shock.

"As Malik points out you could re-tell the story of the Merton Mosque a different way revealing the moral commitments evident in the initial version. For example, during the seven years when the Dairy was effectively an industrial ruin, drug users made it into a ‘crack den’. “So, one story we could tell,” suggests Kenan Malik, “is the that of economic forces closing down an unprofitable dairy, with the loss of several hundred jobs, and of local Muslims subsequently rescuing the abandoned, crime-infested site, creating news jobs and in the process transforming Merton for the better” (2013: 42). However, doing this would change the point of the story. It would shift a tale of culture loss and white melancholia to a one of urban renewal and cultural reconstruction. The problem herein though for people like Goodhart and his ‘White Heritage Elder Male’ is that this still wouldn’t make the Merton Mosque English or amenable to inclusion within ‘fellow citizen favouritism’ (2014: xxxvii).

I think people would rather have *run down* and *theirs* than *swept up* and another cultures (i.e foreigners) even if it is run down flowers will bloom amongst the concrete cracks and there is always a chance of improvement in the future. Also the Merton Mosque would be just one experience in a larger picture.

Recently a woman came to the house from Forest and Bird wanting monthly payments for their work. Our family used to belong and took an active interest. However a lot of water has flowed under the bridge since then. The farm my grandfather owned with it's steep volcanic landscape and tumbling stream is long ago sold and real estate in that vicinity is for sale in HK. All over the country land prices are sky high and foreigners are encouraged to buy. What does it have to do with me if the water races on the Canterbury Plain are dirty?

Nick J said...

Charles Im pleasantly surprised you can see the democratic argument. Plenty Left and Right who wont.

Guerilla Surgeon said...