Blog has moved, searching new blog...

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Buchanan on the Passing of the White Race

Plugging his new book, Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?, Pat Buchanan concludes his 17 October column, A.D. 2041 – end of white America?, with this:
Can Western civilization survive the passing of the European peoples whose ancestors created it and their replacement by Third World immigrants? Probably not, for the new arrivals seem uninterested in preserving the old culture they have found.

Those who hold the white race responsible for the mortal sins of mankind – slavery, racism, imperialism, genocide – may welcome its departure from history. Those who believe that the civilization that came out of Jerusalem, Athens, Rome and London to be the crowning achievement of mankind will mourn its passing.
Buchanan clearly sees the malevolent, external forces at work here - the "replacement by Third World immigrants" and "those who hold the White race responsible for the mortals sins of mankind". He may as well drop the rhetorical tone and detached posture and clearly identify it as genocide. What we need are advocates, not mourners.

Of course he would be mocked and hated all the more for crying foul play. But that's exactly the point. If it were suicide there wouldn't be such venom and force directed against those who speak in favor of Whites. The hostility comes from those who discount our concerns or see them conflicting with their own. Many imagine their anti-"racism" only harms stupid/crazy/evil White "racists", not themselves.

Joan Walsh's review of Buchanan's book provides a good example. Walsh ridicules Buchanan's thesis as "silly, a crazy mashup of stereotypes and paranoia", "he sees anti-white racism everywhere". She makes it quite clear she doesn't share his concerns:
The book mourns the decline not only of white Christian America, but of Europe, since we share a common white European heritage. But then he runs down the history of European wars and ethnic nationalism, which makes me wonder what constitutes a “European” heritage or identity, other than (some comparative shade of) white skin — and why it matters anyway, if Europeans fight so much.
Walsh claims to identify with Buchanan as a fellow political pundit, especially because they are fellow Irish Catholics, though she married out. Even in her criticism of Buchanan she clearly expresses a more sober concern for the well-being of jews than Whites:
In Buchanan’s dim view of civilization, it’s not only white Christian countries, or cultures, that are on the decline. “American Jews seem to be an endangered species,” he declares (a little comically, since he’s never been a particular friend of American Jews). In fact, the U.S. Jewish population is declining, in part because of intermarriage, and each younger generation getting progressively less observant in our overall less tribalist society. But Buchanan doesn’t mention any of that: he blames birth control and abortion, which is a form of karmic payback in his telling, since Jews tend to support reproductive rights. “How many of the 50 million abortions since 1973 were performed on Jewish girls or women?” Buchanan asks. “How many Jewish children were never conceived because of birth control?” It would be funny if it weren’t so creepy.
No, not funny at all. Walsh criticizes Buchanan for having and defending a European identity that she could share but does not value, and she does it while defending a jewish identity that she cannot share despite her own creepy "intermarriage". Walsh isn't suicidal. She just fancies herself on the other team.

Labels: , , ,



Blogger Franklin Ryckaert said...

When you are talking about the defense of the survival of an ethnic group and the subject of the debate is mass immigration of aliens,there are two arguments that should NOT be used:1)the "utility-argument,2)the "maintenance"- argument.

The utility-argument is used to assess which group of immigrants is "useful" to the receiving group :are they willing to do the work autochtons refuse to do?Do they have a good work ethic,are they intelligent,are they law-abiding,do they have strong family values? etc. etc.It doesn't question the idea of mass -immigration at all.If one group is rejected according to "utility"-criteria it doesn't offer any resistance to the acceptance of others.

The "maintenance"-argument asks whether the alien immigrants can maintain the autochtonous civilization.What if that is indeed the case?What if Chinese can indeed maintain the highly developed Western civilization?What if they can indeed play Mozart and Beethoven as good as Europeans?Does that offer any resistance to race-replacement?

There is only one - read:ONE - valid argument against mass immigration of aliens and that is the IDENTITY-argument.Mass immigration of aliens - no matter how "useful" or "modernized" they may be - means the death of our people.Say: we want our people to survive,if you have a problem with that then that means you are our existential ennemy and should be treated as such. Period.

10/23/2011 03:46:00 AM  
Anonymous sk said...

Exactly. Our enemies are seeking GENOCIDE of our race, the white race. This should be shouted from the rooftops.

10/23/2011 07:25:00 AM  
Blogger Franklin Ryckaert said...

The morbid part of it all is that among "our enemies" many are Whites themselves. They see it as their highest ideal to "end racism".What that means in concrete terms is to allow mass immigration of non-Whites and to promote mass-miscegenation.When that process has been completed and there are no more Whites left,Utopia will be reached.Trying to debate with them is exasperating.These are the ACTIVE racial suicidalists.There exists also a PASSIVE version of this species.When you debate with them they will ask you questions like:"But what is the USE of the white race?"Or:"Why should we CARE if the white race disappears?".Others will DENY that races even exist or will say:"But we all came from Africa"(the "out of Africa"idea).
Nothing is more hopeless than trying to save people who DO NOT WANT TO BE SAVED.

10/23/2011 10:43:00 AM  
Anonymous sk said...

I agree that it is boring, frustrating and disheartening talking to many whites these days. But repitition sells to even the most dull. That is what has been done to us, and we need to do it ourselves. Anti-racist is a code word for Anti-white. Asia for Asians, Africa for Africans ,White countries for EVERYBODY. This is a program of Genocide.

10/23/2011 12:27:00 PM  
Anonymous Armor said...

"There is only one valid argument against mass immigration of aliens and that is the IDENTITY-argument"

I like the analogy once made by Svigor :

Allow me to demonstrate how odd your thinking is to me with an analogy: "I'd like to improve my lot; I should give my house, wife, and kids to Bill Gates - then I'd be a billionaire!"

10/23/2011 04:26:00 PM  
Anonymous Armor said...

"Anti-racist is a code word for Anti-white."

And diversity is a code word for race-replacement.

I think that Bob's mantra isn't magical. It can't be placed in every conversation, and it doesn't sum up everything that can be said. It's good, but we need more short texts and mantras in the same vein.

10/23/2011 04:40:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Buchanan's a pussy. I have no sympathy for him after reading Walsh's mockery of those cringe-inducing statements about the poor American Jews. He left himself wide open by putting that shit in there. Buchanan clearly intends to go out with a whimper, not a bang.

Looks like this book is nothing more than the latest in a string of colossal "look, I'm not a racist" fuckups by Pat, including Ezola Foster in 2000, putting half-Korean/half-Jew Epstein in charge of his foundation, and selling The American Conservative to Jew Ron Unz.

It also looks like he mostly wrote this book to make a buck. Is there anything here that he hasn't said before? This looks watered-down even by his usual standards.

10/23/2011 05:27:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Buchanan does get weepy a bit much.

10/23/2011 06:00:00 PM  
Anonymous sk said...

Bob's mantra is not magical. It can't be placed in every conversation. Does not sum up everything that can be said. Well, so what? If it shoots, why not use it as much as possible? Can we wait around until something magical and sums up everything that can be said comes along?

10/23/2011 06:54:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Buchanan had pulled no punches in this book, it would not have a publisher and he would not have any media outlets to appear on. He is the only mainstream commentator who is making these points. In case you have not figured out, the so-called "conservative" establishment is dominated and controlled by neocons. All the talk radio hosts, talking heads on TV, conservative print media and even popular internet sites promote the neocon agenda.

Buchanan is the exception. One of the criticisms of the book is that Buchanan pretty much misses the "glory days" of the 1950's.

10/23/2011 09:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Armor said...

Franklin Ryckaert: Nothing is more hopeless than trying to save people who do not want to be saved / there exists also a passive version of this species.

Most people don't want to be race-replaced. You should talk to them, not to the minority of deliberately unhelpful people. Passive aggressive types will behave in the same annoying way whether you are trying to get them interested in saving the white race, or in organizing a picnic. Teenagers sometimes act in that way with their parents. Internet trolls do the same thing. It has nothing to do with their opinion about race. They just think it is funny to sap your energy.

There are also the self-defeatists: people who complain about immigration, but who will disagree if you propose to take political action. Their philosophy is that nothing can be done!

It will probably end in violence. Then, people will wonder why spells of violence have to alternate with spells of complete inaction. What's wrong with people? Why not try a moderate approach instead? Part of the problem is that people are not completely rational. But the main problem is that today the democratic process is being blocked by the usual suspects.

10/23/2011 10:09:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Buchanan had pulled no punches in this book, it would not have a publisher and he would not have any media outlets to appear on.

Whatever. Buchanan's getting old, he's rich, and he has no children. He's also famous and could do a lot of good for us if he took the gloves off and told the whole truth. He could self-publish a book and still sell a lot of copies on Amazon, using his already established reputation, and the controversy that such a book would undoubtedly generate. So what the hell is he waiting for?

Buchanan is at best an incompetent leader or total sell-out, and more likely is controlled opposition. More of this lightweight, philo-Semitic bullshit is not what we need at this stage. Buchanan is an enemy.

10/24/2011 12:16:00 AM  
Anonymous Scott said...

Buchanan is an enemy.

I would encourage you not to think that way. Using the purity of another's position as your criterion for friend/enemy (i.e. making it a binary thing, only 100% pure = friend, with purity = sharing all of your positions) is a recipe for failure. Is Buchanan a net plus for your cause? Would he fight on your side against your enemy if confronted with the choice?

I find his philo-semitic interjections frustrating too, but calling him an enemy is absurd. I've seen people do that here and other places (e.g. with Dennis Mangan), and it really sets off my troll radar.

10/24/2011 11:28:00 AM  
Blogger Rusty Mason said...

Exactly right, Tan, EoH. et al. I'm glad to see more people awake and ready for action these days. Though everything needs to be rebuilt, I think for most of us it should begin with what each can do right here and now to rebuild real community.

From a review by the Alamaba Policy Institute of Russell Kirk's The Conservative Mind:

"The most serious injuries sustained by conservatism are the decline of leadership
and the problem of reconciling individualism with the sense of community necessary to
society. ... conservatism’s greatest task in our time is the provision of leaders who can strike a balance between the isolation of single persons in a group, a lonely crowd, and the myth of the unified, all-powerful state. Men must fall in love again with what Burke called the 'little platoon,' the local voluntary associations and institutions that
draw men out of them and engage them in the community while providing a buffer between men and the state. ... the idea of normality in society; we must hold forth standards to which men may repair.
What is needed is a new philosophy that combines freedom and tradition. Its object would not be to liberate the abstract individual. Instead, it would recognize as the basic unit the group: the family, the local community, the trade union, the church, the college, the profession. ... A conservatism devoted to valuing the individual person within a traditional social context would be, in Kirk's view, a substantial step toward the restoration of genuine community."

None of that is unrealistic. It requires no grand strategy, no committees, no relocations to a new homeland. The only thing lacking is the will to do it. I think the new philosophy will come out of the actual rebuilding process.

10/24/2011 11:41:00 AM  
Blogger Rusty Mason said...

It is not a question of "going back," either. Our institutions, our society, entire civilizations are "artifical," created things. We can create what we want.

Courage mounteth with the occasion.

10/24/2011 12:16:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is Buchanan a net plus for your cause? Would he fight on your side against your enemy if confronted with the choice?

Good question. Would he? Is he trying to advance our cause or keep a lid on it?

The Ezola Foster, Michael Epstein, and Ron Unz incidents suggest, to me, that Buchanan cannot possibly be on our side, even secretly.

10/24/2011 06:46:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anybody here know why Buchanan is childless?

10/25/2011 07:51:00 AM  
Blogger ML22 said...

I can't believe the negative comments about Buchanan. Again, he is writing a book and trying to get his message across to mainstream conservatives. So what if he throws some bone out to the neo-cons, especially if it gets him air-time, calms the vocal opposition and reaches out to a broader audience. From what I read of the reviews, the bulk of the book lays out the problems and he does not hold back naming some of the names, ie his consistent reference to "Marxists" ect.

If anyone would be called "philo-semitic" it can't be Buchanan. The man has been smeared more than any political figure or talking head. The "anti semitic" label has been thrown at him by everyone from Buckley, Michael Savage, Don Imus, Bill Clinton to just name a few off the top of my head.

Yes, he has had a successful career, but his career plateaued due to his "controversial views." He was by far the best debater and commentator of my generation. Had he given in to the Neocon agenda, he would have been even more successful as a writer and possibly would have become President (he was Dole's only legitimate opposition in 1996).

10/25/2011 08:56:00 PM  
Blogger dudhduddhd said...

If anyone would be called "philo-semitic" it can't be Buchanan.

The rumor is that his staff is filled with Jews.

10/25/2011 09:57:00 PM  
Anonymous ben tillman said...

When you debate with them they will ask you questions like:"But what is the USE of the white race?"Or:"Why should we CARE if the white race disappears?".

And you should respond by reframing the racial in terms of the personal. Nobody -- absolutely nobody -- believes in the principle that humans are fungible. That's why your idiotic interlocutor will care about his own personal "disappearance" and will care enough about his personal possessions not to hand them over to you if you ask. His actions will demonstrate that he recognizes the legitimacy of self-interest.

And, of course, there is no difference between personal self-interest and racial self-interest except that Jewish propaganda demonizes the latter. But in principle they're exactly the same.

Which proves there is nothing principled about the demonization of White racial consciousness. Principles have no boundaries. It's all who/whom.

10/25/2011 10:06:00 PM  
Anonymous Armor said...

A few months ago, there was a video of Jamie Kelso posted on the Occidental Observer blog where he was trying to talk nationalist politics with young people at a CPAC conference. Some of them had that stupid "so what" attitude. I think people have been trained by the media to react in this way when someone talks seriously about white people's collective interests.

It reminds me of several interviews of young Germans that I saw on TV years ago. They kept insisting that they were not proud to be German, as if they thought we cared whether they felt patriotic or not. Obviously, they were parroting the lesson they had been taught. And now, young Americans have been taught the same kind of lesson. But I think the brainwashing is only superficial.

10/26/2011 12:22:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Color Of Change Urges MSNBC To Fire Pat Buchanan:

"African American political advocacy group Color Of Change has called for MSNBC to fire longtime analyst (and even longer-time lightning rod) Pat Buchanan for what it called his "white supremacist ideology."

The advocacy group sent petition letters to its members on Tuesday. The letter said that MSNBC gives Buchanan a platform to pass off his often loaded remarks as "legitimate mainstream political commentary."

While Color of Change cited comments made by Buchanan from as early as March 2008, the advocacy group highlighted Buchanan's new book "Suicide Of A Superpower" and a Saturday appearance on the controversial radio show "The Political Cesspool" (whose host has described his ideology as "pro-white") as current reasons the network should fire Buchanan.

Advocates for non-White interests openly attack even a weak, indirect defense White interests, such as Buchanan's. Whites are not to blame for the conflict of interests. The consequences of pretending that we can or must appease non-Whites by abandoning our own interests are genocidal.

Via Mangan's.

10/26/2011 11:43:00 AM  
Blogger FlippityFloppity said...

" exists to strengthen Black America's political voice. Our goal is to empower our members - Black Americans and our allies - to make government more responsive to the concerns of Black Americans and to bring about positive political and social change for everyone."

[You will note on their web-site they capitalize the "B" in Black"]

" is comprised of Black folks from every economic class, as well as those of every color who seek to help our voices be heard."

But they're not racists.

10/26/2011 01:21:00 PM  
Blogger dudhduddhd said...

And you should respond by reframing the racial in terms of the personal. Nobody -- absolutely nobody -- believes in the principle that humans are fungible. That's why your idiotic interlocutor will care about his own personal "disappearance" and will care enough about his personal possessions not to hand them over to you if you ask.

And of course they will get all weepy about Tibetans, Jews, salamanders and bald eagles disappearing too.

10/26/2011 03:04:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

James Edwards Interviews Pat Buchanan.

10/26/2011 05:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Captainchaos said...

Buchanan is an old man possessed of a subtle mind and a profoundly Catholic moral sensibility. Mourning at the extirpation from this earth of all he came to love and pledge his loyalty to in his youth is undoubtedly his honest and overriding sentiment. In that sense then, to say differently for him would be the true lie.

10/26/2011 10:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Sam Davidson said...

"A few months ago, there was a video of Jamie Kelso posted on the Occidental Observer blog where he was trying to talk nationalist politics with young people at a CPAC conference. Some of them had that stupid "so what" attitude."

A good response is to bring up the large numbers of anti-white hush crimes that we never hear about in the media. People don't realize the severity of the situation because nobody bothers to tell them.

10/27/2011 06:06:00 AM  
Blogger ML22 said...

Anonymous Sam Davidson said...

"A few months ago, there was a video of Jamie Kelso posted on the Occidental Observer blog where he was trying to talk nationalist politics with young people at a CPAC conference. Some of them had that stupid "so what" attitude."

Don't get too worried about that scene. Most of the young people that attend Republican/Conservative conventions (and generally all young political junkies regardless of party affiliation) come from upper middle class or upper class backgrounds. As a result, their experience directly with various minority groups are rather limited. Its sort of plausible that they went to school with blacks who were children of professional athletes or lawyers ect and seem to think that all blacks have the ability to become as successful with hard work and opportunity. So it is extremely unlikely they have had to work or be educated with large groups of other races. Or had to change neighborhoods due to changing demographics and crime.

But foremost, unless you dig deep, your not going to come across white nationalist views. They certainly will not be exposed to these ideas in schools, the media, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh or browsing Freerepublic. In fact, those entities actually work against the interests by promoting token minorities such as Alan Keyes and Alan West--and playing the same race card when they are attacked.

At this point in time, it is surprising that so many people still hold these views since by our current society's standard, its more unusual and unpopular to propose that there are inherent racial differences then to say the earth is flat.

10/27/2011 10:26:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'As a result, their experience directly with various minority groups are rather limited."

Don't kid yourself, they know. Deep down inside they have pretty much the same beliefs (about blacks in particular) that you do. They're just in it for the money. They're plugged into the system and they're going to do what's best for themselves and their class.

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
- Upton Sinclair

10/27/2011 11:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What we need to remember is that nothing Whites do will be effective in remedying the ongoing and intentional destruction of the White race - so long as jewish monopolies exist within our societies. Why is it that Buchanan's voice is the only voice of any significance heard? It IS the same reason that there are such creatures as the anti-Whites who parade as "anti-racists".

The "anti-racists" are that way because of the media and other monopolies established by jewry. The entire "establishment" system has been co-opted by jews or by communist types of change agents operating in their stead. None of that will change until several or all of the points monopolized by jewry are broken and replaced.

There are historical reasons why the entirety of jewry were able to accomplish these various monopoly postions. Some of those are recited in another comment where I recount some of those. The actions of jewry are not directed only against the White race, but against all non-jews. The White people are the jews first target because it is Whites who remain capable of stopping them, and jewry uses other races to divert the attention onto others.

"That jewish monopoly attitude is showing in every aspect of jewish control, both within the US and without. The jewish actions implementing and perpetuating this planned jew monopoly is treasonous to America, as well as to Whites, Americans, and to all non-jews."


10/30/2011 01:37:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If by some chance you expect the politicians to help the Whites and true Americans, you had better read the words of another author who wrote about similar events in 1869. Those words follow after the information in the Rhodes Journal of 1881 about Russian finances.


10/30/2011 02:23:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tan, My apologies for the duplicate comments. The comment editor shows that they do not post, and when I return to check they appear in duplicate. The last comment is not showing now, but it may appear later also, so I'm just going to leave you with the link. If people think that politicians are going to help Whites and Americans, they need to read what Lysander Spooner had to say in 1869.

You have a great posting and observations as always, and you are very right, especially that we need "advocates, not mourners". We have to learn to become our own advocates and develop our own capabilities to unify in order to do so. The entire jewish infrastructure is allied to prevent us from doing so. Flanders

10/30/2011 02:54:00 AM  
Blogger Brandon said...

Thanks anon for the link.

10/31/2011 11:17:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OT. Entertaining new video on Jews/Israel:

11/01/2011 08:01:00 AM  
Blogger Average Joe said...

I wouldn't worry about the negative views of a race traitor like Joan Walsh. In fact, I would be more concerned if she supported Buchanan's analysis of our current diversity-related problems.

11/01/2011 11:21:00 AM  
Anonymous MajikFireHornet said...

Buchanan, as always, does a fair job defining the Problem. But - like Jared Taylor - he's deathly afraid of the Jews, and so cannot deal with the dynamics (and therefore solution) of/to the Problem. He actually sent an inscribed copy of his book to Ilana Issacson (alias Mercer), a rabid "libertarian" Zionist. Pitiful but indicative.

11/02/2011 11:39:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tan, This is a link to an article which you and many others here will be interested in seeing if you are not already aware about it.

It reports that Fjordman is back at Gates of Vienna. It also reports about the identities of the Baron and Dymphna, as well as Sultan Knish, and has information about other connectees.


11/04/2011 01:23:00 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

"The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy, no more, no less."

Islam deserves phobia and anything coming from someone who opposes Islamophobia is irretrievably corrupted, regardless of surface accuracy.

11/07/2011 03:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

Besides which, Bodissey's true name is not a secret. He revealed it himself when he started writing for Breitbart. Pretending there's some sort of exposing going on here is just blatantly dishonest.

11/07/2011 03:13:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Through the use of the Money Power, International Jew Finance is now able to direct the internal and external policies of the Governments of the impoverished States of Europe and also America. By this power, it has forced Gentile Governments to further the political aspirations of Zionism, and to refrain from protecting the interests of their own nationals from the activities of Bolshevists who are undermining the economic, social, moral and religious systems of all States." - A. Homer, JUDAISM and BOLSHEVISM, [page 6]

I suspect that anyone who goes around spouting such pithy phrases as, "Islam deserves phobia and anything coming from someone who opposes Islamophobia is irretrievably corrupted...", is either deceived, or are themselves a part of organizations which are similar in nature to those connected with Gates of Vienna, or to this one:

I don't see Islamists printing worthless money for the markets of the world, or having controlling ownership of a corrupted media. Most Islamists who are in our countries are there because of the efforts of a larger segment of jewry, while another segment of the same jewry seeks to gain hypocritical attention to the plight of the "poor jews" who claim to be adversely affected.

By the way, when did Fjordman decide to reveal his identity, and does he yet reveal that his background is jewish?


11/08/2011 12:11:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Mangan's: ADL Denounces Buchanan

11/08/2011 01:38:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Flanders, on Fjordman see: Genocide Excused, Opposition Blamed, Fjordman Out

11/08/2011 01:39:00 PM  
Anonymous Pat Hannagan said...

OT: You've probably seen this but thought I'd put it here for posterity:

French President Nicolas Sarkozy called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a "liar" in talks with US President Barack Obama, who then complained of having to deal with him daily.

The private conversation, held during the G20 summit in the French city of Cannes last week, was overheard by a number of journalists after it was inadvertently transmitted over a system used for translation, media website Arret sur Images reported.

"I can't stand him anymore, he's a liar," Sarkozy said in French during the talks.

"You may be sick of him, but me, I have to deal with him every day," Obama replied in comments that were translated into French.

A number of journalists have confirmed hearing the remarks.

Meanwhile, Beware the ticking Iran time bomb. Comments to that article are very interesting. This one sums up my own impression of Ozzie attitudes:

We have fought far to many wars for other people and to be perfectly frank I would not really wish to defend either Arabs or Jews from the front lines.

As our ex deputy secretary of defence for Australia, Paul Dibb summarises:

''Unless you have ironclad intelligence - and not just the technical intelligence that the Americans are good at, but human intelligence - about where the hidden underground facilities are and just how serious the program is, you will get a shit sandwich.''

11/08/2011 02:05:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Flanders, thanks for the Khaled link. Let's continue discussion at Where Jihad and Counterjihad Agree.

Pat, thanks as well, see Trashtalking the Boss.

11/08/2011 04:18:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home