My first song
My second song
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
file:///C:/Users/Owner/Videos/RealPlayer%20Downloads/Podcasts%20%20%20Listen%20Online%20%20%20TruthTalkLive.com.mp3My first song
Saturday, November 6, 2010
RADICAL HOMOSEXUAL MARKETING STRATEGY
WHAT IS THE HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA
Dr. Judith A. Reisman in her extensive Crafting “Gay” Children,[6] reports that Harvard homosexual Toby Morotta, PhD, stated that in the 1970s, members of the Gay Activists Alliance - who were trained in the “zapping" of any who rebuffed homosexuality.[7] And that these formed the “Gay Academic Union,” (GAU) which was made up of faculty and students in major universities. She states that the GAU has long fought for domination of its worldview within the academic community, and professional journals commonly assigned GAU and other homosexual peer reviewers to research touching on homosexuality, generally resulting in a quick death to possible unfavorable findings. [8]
This and the general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called After the Ball, by gay rights activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in the late 1980s, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame:
"The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior." [9] "Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are 'not Christian' and the propaganda can further show them [homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned..."[10]
Focus on the Family provides additional quotes from After the Ball, outlining key points of the homosexual agenda:[9][11]
1. "Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible."
2. "Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers."
3. "Give homosexual protectors a just cause."
4. "Make gays look good."
5. "Make the victimizers look bad."
6. "Get funds from corporate America."
The goals of the homosexual movement include:
1. Destroying Christian morals
* Changing the definition of marriage, even if doing so infringes on the religious rights of Christians not to recognize it as anything other than sin [13]
2. Promote pseudoscience that legitimizes homosexuality, such as claims of a never-identified gay gene[14]
* Censoring evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax[15]
3. Censoring speech against homosexuality by branding it to possibly be "hate-speech"[16][17][18]
* Censoring biblical statements condemning homosexuality[19]
4. Establishing affirmative action for homosexuals[20][21]
5. Expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation[22]
6. Ending the military's and Boy Scout's restrictions on homosexuality[23]
7. Stopping children as young as 5 years old from attending therapy to repair their sexual preference[24]
8. Promote homosexuality in schools[25]
* In places like Massachusetts and California, where the gay lobby is the strongest, it starts as early as pre-school. They tell seven- or eight-year-old boys, "If you only like boys, there's a chance you may be homosexual," or "If you only like girls, maybe you are lesbian." Well, at that age, all members of the opposite sex "have cooties."
* You're planting a seed that can totally mess up the normal development process later, when at 12 or 14, kids enter the age of sexual confusion and discovering the opposite sex. [26]
9. Force businesses to accommodate their lifestyle[27]
* Suing an online dating website for discrimination[28]
10. Undermining the resolve of latent homosexuals so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality[29]
11. Pushing for legalized adoption by gay individuals and couples[30]
The state-by-state push for same-sex marriage can be viewed as a means to the above goals, or a goal in itself.[31] An example of this would be the recent New Hampshire law that makes same-sex civil unions legal[32]
Strategies and psychological tactics
Homosexual activists are often seen as engaging in specious argumentation, such as attempts to controvert the consistent teaching of the Bible on homosexual relations, (see homosexuality and biblical interpretation) and using false analogies, in order to gain acceptance of homosexuality. One common argument used by homosexual activists seeks to compare their quest for equal rights to that of others.[34] This argument is countered by the observation that blacks were able to peacefully argue that mankind should not be "judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character"[35], as the former yields no certain moral distinction. In contrast, homosexual activists are seen to seek acceptance of an immoral practice(s), and in addition, to overall engage in certain coercive and manipulative means to do so. This is evidenced to include the use of a demonstrative manner of protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.[36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46] In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.[47]
While not all homosexuals agree the use of deceptive psychological tactics in order to gain or coerce acceptance of homosexuality, these has been promoted by leading homosexual activists. The aforementioned book, After the Ball, is widely regarded as the handbook for the gay agenda, in which Harvard trained marketing experts and social scientists Marshall Kirk (1957 - 2005) and Hunter Madsen advocated avoiding portraying gays as aggressive challengers, but as victims, while making those who opposed them as evil persecutors. As a means of the latter, they promoted jamming, in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the gay agenda are publicly smeared. In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector ... The purpose of victim imagery is to make straights feel very uncomfortable, they suggested.
Jam homophobia (i.e., disagreement with homosexual behaviors) by linking it to Nazi horror, was the strategy of Kirk and Madsen. Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered, hysterical backwoods preachers, menacing punks, and a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed. Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..."[48]
Kirk and Madsen's open admission of their deceptive tactics is noted as most revealing: [O]ur effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof. "...the person's beliefs can be altered whether he is conscious of the attack or not"[49] “The campaign we outline in this book, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed propaganda, firmly grounded in long-established principles of psychology and advertising.”[50][51]
Similarly, author Robert Bauman additionally records, It makes no difference that the ads are lies . . . because were using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones. [52]
The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the nature of the homosexual lifestyle.
“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.”[53]
Marshall Kirk died in 2005 at the age of 48. The cause of death has not been publicly revealed.
Often cited as an early example form of such tactics was the role of homosexual activists in persuading the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II). Dr. Ronald Bayer, though being himself a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, described this removal as being the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, rather than any new scientific discoveries.[54] In so doing, like slavery before it, the homosexual agenda is seen to threaten basic freedoms, principally the First Amendment.[55]
The charge of "homophobia" has also been increasingly evidenced as being part of a means of intimidation used in promoting the homosexual agenda. Due to what homophobia has been made to denote, that of being a repressed homosexual, or possessing an irrational fear of being approached by homosexuals, or of being a bigot persecuting victims, the widespread use of the term "homophobic" attaches a powerful stigma to anyone who may even conscientiously oppose the practice of homosexuality, thus silencing many who might otherwise object to it.[56]
In relation to such oppression, psychologist Nicholas Cummings, former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), observed, "Homophobia as intimidation is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda." As an example of such fear within the APA, in addressing 100 fellow professionals Cummings related that while writing "Destructive Trends in Mental Health," with psychologist Rogers Wright, a number of fellow psychologists were invited to participate. However, these flatly turned them down, as they feared loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. "We were bombarded by horror stories," Dr. Cummings said. "Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA.[57]
Noted homosexual activist and pornographer Clinton Fein, in his article, The Gay Agenda stated, Homophobic inclinations alone, even without any actions, should be criminal and punishable to the full extent of the law.
Erik Holland, author of "The Nature of Homosexuality," perceives that homosexuals have become so reckless in labeling others homophobic that "anyone who questions their labeling someone a homophobe himself. Even quoting factual statistics about the connection between homosexuality and AIDS is allegedly homophobic." In addition, according to pro homosexual author Vernon A Wall, "even acceptance of homosexuality can be seen as a form of homophobia, because to talk about the acceptance of homosexuality is to imply that there is something about homosexuality that needs acceptance."[58]
It may be speculated that if the liberal use of the term homophobia is not primarily a psychological tactic, then it indicates a psychological condition on the part of those who use it, in which they imagine that those who oppose them are fearful of them, or of being one.
Influence in the Academic World
Professor Jerry Z. Muller described in an article titled, "First Things" (Aug/Sept. 1993), how the homosexual lobby has gained widespread acceptance in the educational realm.
[Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.[59]
http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_Agenda
Dr. Judith A. Reisman in her extensive Crafting “Gay” Children,[6] reports that Harvard homosexual Toby Morotta, PhD, stated that in the 1970s, members of the Gay Activists Alliance - who were trained in the “zapping" of any who rebuffed homosexuality.[7] And that these formed the “Gay Academic Union,” (GAU) which was made up of faculty and students in major universities. She states that the GAU has long fought for domination of its worldview within the academic community, and professional journals commonly assigned GAU and other homosexual peer reviewers to research touching on homosexuality, generally resulting in a quick death to possible unfavorable findings. [8]
This and the general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called After the Ball, by gay rights activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in the late 1980s, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame:
"The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior." [9] "Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are 'not Christian' and the propaganda can further show them [homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned..."[10]
Focus on the Family provides additional quotes from After the Ball, outlining key points of the homosexual agenda:[9][11]
1. "Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible."
2. "Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers."
3. "Give homosexual protectors a just cause."
4. "Make gays look good."
5. "Make the victimizers look bad."
6. "Get funds from corporate America."
The goals of the homosexual movement include:
1. Destroying Christian morals
* Changing the definition of marriage, even if doing so infringes on the religious rights of Christians not to recognize it as anything other than sin [13]
2. Promote pseudoscience that legitimizes homosexuality, such as claims of a never-identified gay gene[14]
* Censoring evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax[15]
3. Censoring speech against homosexuality by branding it to possibly be "hate-speech"[16][17][18]
* Censoring biblical statements condemning homosexuality[19]
4. Establishing affirmative action for homosexuals[20][21]
5. Expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation[22]
6. Ending the military's and Boy Scout's restrictions on homosexuality[23]
7. Stopping children as young as 5 years old from attending therapy to repair their sexual preference[24]
8. Promote homosexuality in schools[25]
* In places like Massachusetts and California, where the gay lobby is the strongest, it starts as early as pre-school. They tell seven- or eight-year-old boys, "If you only like boys, there's a chance you may be homosexual," or "If you only like girls, maybe you are lesbian." Well, at that age, all members of the opposite sex "have cooties."
* You're planting a seed that can totally mess up the normal development process later, when at 12 or 14, kids enter the age of sexual confusion and discovering the opposite sex. [26]
9. Force businesses to accommodate their lifestyle[27]
* Suing an online dating website for discrimination[28]
10. Undermining the resolve of latent homosexuals so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality[29]
11. Pushing for legalized adoption by gay individuals and couples[30]
The state-by-state push for same-sex marriage can be viewed as a means to the above goals, or a goal in itself.[31] An example of this would be the recent New Hampshire law that makes same-sex civil unions legal[32]
Strategies and psychological tactics
Homosexual activists are often seen as engaging in specious argumentation, such as attempts to controvert the consistent teaching of the Bible on homosexual relations, (see homosexuality and biblical interpretation) and using false analogies, in order to gain acceptance of homosexuality. One common argument used by homosexual activists seeks to compare their quest for equal rights to that of others.[34] This argument is countered by the observation that blacks were able to peacefully argue that mankind should not be "judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character"[35], as the former yields no certain moral distinction. In contrast, homosexual activists are seen to seek acceptance of an immoral practice(s), and in addition, to overall engage in certain coercive and manipulative means to do so. This is evidenced to include the use of a demonstrative manner of protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.[36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46] In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.[47]
While not all homosexuals agree the use of deceptive psychological tactics in order to gain or coerce acceptance of homosexuality, these has been promoted by leading homosexual activists. The aforementioned book, After the Ball, is widely regarded as the handbook for the gay agenda, in which Harvard trained marketing experts and social scientists Marshall Kirk (1957 - 2005) and Hunter Madsen advocated avoiding portraying gays as aggressive challengers, but as victims, while making those who opposed them as evil persecutors. As a means of the latter, they promoted jamming, in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the gay agenda are publicly smeared. In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector ... The purpose of victim imagery is to make straights feel very uncomfortable, they suggested.
Jam homophobia (i.e., disagreement with homosexual behaviors) by linking it to Nazi horror, was the strategy of Kirk and Madsen. Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered, hysterical backwoods preachers, menacing punks, and a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed. Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..."[48]
Kirk and Madsen's open admission of their deceptive tactics is noted as most revealing: [O]ur effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof. "...the person's beliefs can be altered whether he is conscious of the attack or not"[49] “The campaign we outline in this book, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed propaganda, firmly grounded in long-established principles of psychology and advertising.”[50][51]
Similarly, author Robert Bauman additionally records, It makes no difference that the ads are lies . . . because were using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones. [52]
The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the nature of the homosexual lifestyle.
“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.”[53]
Marshall Kirk died in 2005 at the age of 48. The cause of death has not been publicly revealed.
Often cited as an early example form of such tactics was the role of homosexual activists in persuading the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II). Dr. Ronald Bayer, though being himself a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, described this removal as being the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, rather than any new scientific discoveries.[54] In so doing, like slavery before it, the homosexual agenda is seen to threaten basic freedoms, principally the First Amendment.[55]
The charge of "homophobia" has also been increasingly evidenced as being part of a means of intimidation used in promoting the homosexual agenda. Due to what homophobia has been made to denote, that of being a repressed homosexual, or possessing an irrational fear of being approached by homosexuals, or of being a bigot persecuting victims, the widespread use of the term "homophobic" attaches a powerful stigma to anyone who may even conscientiously oppose the practice of homosexuality, thus silencing many who might otherwise object to it.[56]
In relation to such oppression, psychologist Nicholas Cummings, former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), observed, "Homophobia as intimidation is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda." As an example of such fear within the APA, in addressing 100 fellow professionals Cummings related that while writing "Destructive Trends in Mental Health," with psychologist Rogers Wright, a number of fellow psychologists were invited to participate. However, these flatly turned them down, as they feared loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. "We were bombarded by horror stories," Dr. Cummings said. "Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA.[57]
Noted homosexual activist and pornographer Clinton Fein, in his article, The Gay Agenda stated, Homophobic inclinations alone, even without any actions, should be criminal and punishable to the full extent of the law.
Erik Holland, author of "The Nature of Homosexuality," perceives that homosexuals have become so reckless in labeling others homophobic that "anyone who questions their labeling someone a homophobe himself. Even quoting factual statistics about the connection between homosexuality and AIDS is allegedly homophobic." In addition, according to pro homosexual author Vernon A Wall, "even acceptance of homosexuality can be seen as a form of homophobia, because to talk about the acceptance of homosexuality is to imply that there is something about homosexuality that needs acceptance."[58]
It may be speculated that if the liberal use of the term homophobia is not primarily a psychological tactic, then it indicates a psychological condition on the part of those who use it, in which they imagine that those who oppose them are fearful of them, or of being one.
Influence in the Academic World
Professor Jerry Z. Muller described in an article titled, "First Things" (Aug/Sept. 1993), how the homosexual lobby has gained widespread acceptance in the educational realm.
[Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.[59]
http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_Agenda
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Glenn Beck Doesn't Get It!
As much as I like Glenn Beck... Glenn doesn't seem to understand that those pushing the acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle, (that is well proven to be a changeable behavior) in our schools, and society are doing so through force of government. It seems sexual appetite trumps freedom of conscience. Looking at our founders understanding of morality, this libertine heathenism is not what they fought and died for as a societal norm. It's none of my business what sexual appetite some might engage in within the privacy of their home... (within the confines of the law) ... BUT! Do not force me and my family to sanction, endorse and put the societal stamp of approval on a behavior that conflicts with my freedom of conscience. That's the problem with the homosexual agenda.
The enigmatic Glenn Beck
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=205569
The enigmatic Glenn Beck
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=205569
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Civil Unions & Same-Sex Marriage WILL Affect Your Life.
Below is an excellent article by Jennifer Roback Morse on just how Civil Unions, and Same-Sex Marriage WILL affect you, and your family. And how these radical cultural and societal transformation will infringe on American's fundamental liberty and freedom.
Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ and the Persecution of Civil Society
http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/15099/
...(Response to debate on Facebook concerning Conservatism and the mainstreaming of same-sex marriage and civil unions....
Obviously we have a lot of folks that have no idea of the history of Conservatism... starting with Edmund Burke... you can't build a sound foundation for anything without knowing where the concepts and philosophies that you say you support come from. How can you defend your position against Marxist ideas of high taxes, larger, ever growing government, entitlements, and redistribution of wealth if you have no foundational basis to argue from. The Marxist Left is not only radically transforming the financial structure ... they are determined to radically transform the fundamental structure of the family.
Ohhh don't say the C word(Conservative)... it might upset some... to bad!!!
AND!!!! Until the federal government gets out of the public schools, I will fight homosexual indoctrination of our kids till my last breath.
A person's sexual appetite is none of my business, but on the other hand, don't expect me and my family, through force of government to condone, embrace, encourage and sanction whatever bizarre, aberrant sexual appetite some might fancy.
I like to ask those who support homosexuality, just what homosexual sex position do you prefer being taught to your kids in the government schools? Maybe the booklet that was endorsed and handed out to kids in Massachusetts will help you choose. None of this radical societal reorganization is done in a vacuum. Everyone's children will be targeted for indoctrination, in order to subvert the historical and traditional values taught by the parents.
"The Little Black Book - Queer in the 21st Century"
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/black_book/black_book_inside.html
Is this the future? This booklet was distributed to hundreds of kids (middle school age and up) at Brookline High School, Brookline, MA, on April 30, 2005. It was written by the Boston-based AIDS Action Committee, with help with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health and the Boston Public Health Commission.
We already see this transformation going on in Calf. where historical and traditional gender terms such as Mother, Father, husband and wife are being removed from school text books, because of discriminatory complaints. Oh yeah!... the mainstreaming of homosexuality, and that deceptive, and bogus argument that civil unions and same-sex marriage will not effect any one else's life is just duplicitous and egregiously fallacious. . Give me a break!!!!
Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ and the Persecution of Civil Society
http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/15099/
...(Response to debate on Facebook concerning Conservatism and the mainstreaming of same-sex marriage and civil unions....
Obviously we have a lot of folks that have no idea of the history of Conservatism... starting with Edmund Burke... you can't build a sound foundation for anything without knowing where the concepts and philosophies that you say you support come from. How can you defend your position against Marxist ideas of high taxes, larger, ever growing government, entitlements, and redistribution of wealth if you have no foundational basis to argue from. The Marxist Left is not only radically transforming the financial structure ... they are determined to radically transform the fundamental structure of the family.
Ohhh don't say the C word(Conservative)... it might upset some... to bad!!!
AND!!!! Until the federal government gets out of the public schools, I will fight homosexual indoctrination of our kids till my last breath.
A person's sexual appetite is none of my business, but on the other hand, don't expect me and my family, through force of government to condone, embrace, encourage and sanction whatever bizarre, aberrant sexual appetite some might fancy.
I like to ask those who support homosexuality, just what homosexual sex position do you prefer being taught to your kids in the government schools? Maybe the booklet that was endorsed and handed out to kids in Massachusetts will help you choose. None of this radical societal reorganization is done in a vacuum. Everyone's children will be targeted for indoctrination, in order to subvert the historical and traditional values taught by the parents.
"The Little Black Book - Queer in the 21st Century"
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/black_book/black_book_inside.html
Is this the future? This booklet was distributed to hundreds of kids (middle school age and up) at Brookline High School, Brookline, MA, on April 30, 2005. It was written by the Boston-based AIDS Action Committee, with help with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health and the Boston Public Health Commission.
We already see this transformation going on in Calf. where historical and traditional gender terms such as Mother, Father, husband and wife are being removed from school text books, because of discriminatory complaints. Oh yeah!... the mainstreaming of homosexuality, and that deceptive, and bogus argument that civil unions and same-sex marriage will not effect any one else's life is just duplicitous and egregiously fallacious. . Give me a break!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)