"God, I thank you that I am not like the so-called 99%. I am not lazy and entitled, and have achieved financial prosperity through my own efforts alone by using the freedom everyone has in America, and I am content to enjoy the fruits of my labor instead of envying others."
For discussion by Patrick Henry Reardon of the original parable of the Pharisee and the Publican.
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Barbarians on the Thames
Theodore Dalrymple for City Journal
Too harsh on the UK rioters?
There is reason to think that it should so apply. One rioter told a journalist that his compatriots were fed up with being broke all the time and that he knew people who had absolutely nothing. It is worth pondering what lies behind these words. It is obvious that the rioter considered being broke not merely unpleasant, as we all would, but unjust and anomalous, for it was these qualities that justified the rioting in his mind and led him to suggest that the riots were restitution. Leave aside the Micawberish point that one can be broke on any income whatever if one’s desires fail to align with one’s financial possibilities; it is again obvious that the rioter believed that he had a right not to be broke and that this right was being violated. When he said that he knew people with “nothing,” he did not mean that he knew homeless, starving people left on the street without clothes to wear or shoes on their feet; none of the rioters was like this, and many looked only too fit for law-abiding citizens’ comfort. Nor did he mean people without hot and cold running water, electricity, a television, a cell phone, health care, and access to schooling. People had a right to such things, and yet they could have them all and still have “nothing,” in his meaning of the word. Somehow, people had a right to something beyond this irreducible “nothing” because this “nothing” was a justification for rioting. So people have a right to more than they have a right to; in other words, they have a right to everything.
Tangible benefits, on this view, come not as the result of work, effort, and self-discipline: they come as of right. This inflated doctrine of rights has turned into a cargo cult as primitive as that in New Guinea, where the natives thought, after a laden airplane crashed in the jungle, that consumer goods dropped from the sky. Apparently, all that is necessary for people like the rioters to live at a higher standard of living, equal to that of others, is for the government to decree it as their right—a right already inscribed in their hearts and minds.
This doctrine originated not with the rioters but with politicians, social philosophers, and journalists. You need only read Henry Mayhew’s nineteenth-century account of the laboring poor in London to realize that the notion of having rights to tangible benefits was once unknown to the population, even during severe hardship. But the politicians, social philosophers, and journalists transformed things evidently desirable in themselves—decent housing, for example—into rights that nothing, including the behavior of the rights holders, could abrogate. It clearly never occurred to the well-meaning discoverers of these “rights” that their propagation might influence the human personality, at least of that part of the population destined to become increasingly dependent on exercising them; and it required only an admixture of egalitarianism to complete the dialectic of ingratitude and resentment.
Too harsh on the UK rioters?
'Tis the season to give to the less fortunate
Walking past the Salvation Army volunteer at the post office yesterday (I didn't say, "Sorry, I contribute only to Catholic charities."), I was thinking that it is relatively easy for people who have the equivalent of at least 200 slaves working for them (because of cheap energy) to give some extraneous wealth away. The giving of alms is not the most important sign of how "Christians love one another." At Patriactionary, someone asked whether Christians ever had a separatist mentality. I still have the suspicion that the early Christians of the Roman Empire did maintain some social distance from their pagan neighbors, or more accurately, preferred to show love towards their fellow Christians first (and also to other non-Christians of good will). They were enjoined to love others as well, but with whom did they associate and form intimate friendships? I believe that it was primarily with other Christians, and if true it should be a warning to us that our understanding of charity (which is more liberal than Christian) is wrong. I just need to find some historical documentation to back this thesis up in order to convince uhmerican Catholic liberals.
Apple country
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Friday, December 09, 2011
Comparative history question
How did the British settling of America differ from that of Canada and Australia (and New Zealand), with respect to the ethnic and cultural background of the colonists?
Another connection between Harry Potter and Uhmericans...
The resonance of a decadent, "homeless" group of people with their hero, despite all of his purported virtues; a hero for the modern welfare-bureaucratic industrialized and atomized nation-state.
A comment at The Thinking Housewife:
JK Rowling as a welfare mom married to the state?
A comment at The Thinking Housewife:
KB writes:
Already the Ring tempted him, gnawing at his will and reason. Wild fantasies arose in his mind; and he saw Samwise the Strong, Hero of the Age, striding with a flaming sword across the darkened land, and armies flocking to his call as he marched to the overthrow of Barad-dûr. And then all the clouds rolled away, and the white sun shone, and at his command the vale of Gorgoroth became a garden of flowers and trees and brought forth fruit. He had only to put on the Ring and claim it for his own, and all this could be.
In that hour of trial it was the love of his master that helped most to hold him firm; but also deep down inside him lived still his plain unconquered hobbit-sense: he knew in the core of his heart that he was not large enough to bear such a burden, even if such visions were not a mere cheat to betray him. The one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due, not a garden swollen to a realm; his own hands to use, not the hands of others to command. – The Return of the King. (pg 880 – 881)
“His own hands to use, not the hands of others to command.” Contrast that with JK Rowling’s vision of a Ministry of Magic in Harry Potter that would combat everything from racism to homophobia. The only difference between the Harry Potter bureaucrats & the Lord Voldemort bureaucrats is that of policy, not ideology. They both want big government to do big things for them.
The beauty of Sam’s wisdom and experience in The Lord of the Rings is that he returns to his people to share it, like other classical heroes (Odysseus, Beowulf, Aeneas). Most fantasy stories usually include Nostos, homecoming. It is part of a heroes journey. It’s also another reason I dislike Harry Potter. He hates his boring suburban adoptive parents, who are nothing but abusive to him. It’s as if the Odyssey ended with Odysseus marrying Calypso or Nausica because you know..Penelope is a non-intellectual redneck who shops for mayonnaise at Costco in a minivan. It’s a seductive message to check out of society, keep playing video games and keep partying.
JK Rowling as a welfare mom married to the state?
Sic transit gloria mundi.
On Friday morning a new BevMo! store opened in San Jose near Westgate. As part of the celebration of the grand opening, management was giving $25 gift cards to the first 500 customers, and some $100 gift cards to a lucky few. I didn't think that many people would show up, since it was a weekday and the gift card could not be used for alcohol, but I was wrong. I did snag a gift card though, but I think I must have been at the end of the 500.
The check-out line was too long so I decided not to get anything today.
I couldn't wait to leave that place. The Uhmerican sheeple was a depressing sight. "I see dead people." (The Sixth Sense) or "All I see are dead people." (Twelve Monkeys) There is a memorable line of dialogue in J.J. Abrams's Star Trek, spoken by Karl Urban's Leonard McCoy: "Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence."
For some reason that line comes to my mind frequently - probably because it was used in the trailer to introduce us to McCoy. We need something comparable that describes this "society" in which we find ourselves, something fitting for Uhmerica, a swirling tempest of ignorance, pride, narcissism, entitlement, impiety, propelled by the pursuit of self-interest and pleasure. A veritable catalog of the vices of the megapolis. Society is a word that is used loosely with respect to the Uhmerican megapolis. We may live among more people but have we less friendships in comparison with other and earlier polities. The people in line - all strangers. How many of them will I encounter again in the future? I would not be surprised if the number is 0.
I, too, was waiting in line for a freebie, and more than a few of them would probably agree that there is more to life than shopping and consuming. How many of them are Tea Partiers? True conservatives? Do they not know how dire our situation is? How problematic our political system and economy are? How ignorant are we of its complexity, or of the various exchanges and productions that are not obvious to us because they take place somewhere far away! What of our faith that this will all continue definitely? Our political economy is morally insane, but we act like this is all normal because we were born into and raised in it.
How can we take a magister seriously when he, too, is ignorant of first principles and has bad habits into which he has been trained in order to live and function in this society? Does he not become a mere "expert" with no moral witness?
In such a society a man who is naturally inclined to work for the good of the whole and "social altruism" is not sufficiently appreciated. He is not rewarded for his loyalty and affection; he's just another nameless individual, except to a few. Many do not believe in reciprocity or even simple gratitude; they pass over the chance to develop the requisite social virtues because "it's all about me."
Is it so "rational" to be so generous rather than acting like everyone else? How can this culture not turn men who should be virtuous into self-interested men? It's what everyone else is doing, and they are not looking out for him and his own. We may not live in Hobbes's dog-eats-dog state of nature, but aren't we close. Relentless competition for wealth, comfort and pleasure, promotion of one's own, living with narrowly defined associations instead of fuller civic friendships.
In such a fragmented "society" what can he do but live according to the order of charity as best as he can, fulfilling his obligations and duties to his family and his friends and work to consolidate wealth, power, and influence in whatever group he finds himself? Isn't that the rational thing to do, since he cannot expect anything from the strangers who live nearby and probably have different priorities and moral attitudes? Wouldn't a simple cost-benefit analysis show this to most people who understand the world they actually inhabit?
I expect that the number of disaffected men will grow, and after a certain point the elites may feel threatened by them. When vets begin to feel underappreciated or discarded, what then?
On Thursday, I was in the staff lounge for lunch and I heard an one of the teachers, a man in his 50s or 60s, asking a woman teacher (in her late 20s?) when her wedding date was, and when she would "no longer be living in sin." They were openly joking about it, and then another teacher, a woman in her 50s, added that she was cohabitating with her fiance, and his father refused to step foot in their residence until after the wedding. The first teacher proclaimed that he couldn't understand why people were like that. Really?
Not only is there no shame because they do not think cohabitating is wrong, but they are not aware or do not care about the opinions of others who might overhear their conversation. They are "proud" of living in such a manner. They may mock traditional mores but they are the ones who are lost but do not know it. They may think they are fine, upstanding individuals, but such attitudes and behavior is indicative of vice.
Vice is not necessarily knowingly doing something that is wrong (that might be incontinence), but doing something that is counter to reason, being dominated by one's appetite so that one believes that the good one wants is the true or complete good.
Such moral blindness may be more the effect of vice than the cause of vice for those who were raised with true opinion or with Christian faith. Those who sin knowingly because they love the apparent good too much eventually reject the truth in favor of their own moral truth? However, those who are raised with very little or no moral guidance become vicious if their appetites are not disciplined; living in accordance with [disordered] appetite is becoming vicious. Even though they may be so ignorant that they are excused with respect to sin.
One of the teachers mentioned the Arizona Sonora Desert Museum. I've never been there.
The check-out line was too long so I decided not to get anything today.
I couldn't wait to leave that place. The Uhmerican sheeple was a depressing sight. "I see dead people." (The Sixth Sense) or "All I see are dead people." (Twelve Monkeys) There is a memorable line of dialogue in J.J. Abrams's Star Trek, spoken by Karl Urban's Leonard McCoy: "Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence."
For some reason that line comes to my mind frequently - probably because it was used in the trailer to introduce us to McCoy. We need something comparable that describes this "society" in which we find ourselves, something fitting for Uhmerica, a swirling tempest of ignorance, pride, narcissism, entitlement, impiety, propelled by the pursuit of self-interest and pleasure. A veritable catalog of the vices of the megapolis. Society is a word that is used loosely with respect to the Uhmerican megapolis. We may live among more people but have we less friendships in comparison with other and earlier polities. The people in line - all strangers. How many of them will I encounter again in the future? I would not be surprised if the number is 0.
I, too, was waiting in line for a freebie, and more than a few of them would probably agree that there is more to life than shopping and consuming. How many of them are Tea Partiers? True conservatives? Do they not know how dire our situation is? How problematic our political system and economy are? How ignorant are we of its complexity, or of the various exchanges and productions that are not obvious to us because they take place somewhere far away! What of our faith that this will all continue definitely? Our political economy is morally insane, but we act like this is all normal because we were born into and raised in it.
How can we take a magister seriously when he, too, is ignorant of first principles and has bad habits into which he has been trained in order to live and function in this society? Does he not become a mere "expert" with no moral witness?
In such a society a man who is naturally inclined to work for the good of the whole and "social altruism" is not sufficiently appreciated. He is not rewarded for his loyalty and affection; he's just another nameless individual, except to a few. Many do not believe in reciprocity or even simple gratitude; they pass over the chance to develop the requisite social virtues because "it's all about me."
Is it so "rational" to be so generous rather than acting like everyone else? How can this culture not turn men who should be virtuous into self-interested men? It's what everyone else is doing, and they are not looking out for him and his own. We may not live in Hobbes's dog-eats-dog state of nature, but aren't we close. Relentless competition for wealth, comfort and pleasure, promotion of one's own, living with narrowly defined associations instead of fuller civic friendships.
In such a fragmented "society" what can he do but live according to the order of charity as best as he can, fulfilling his obligations and duties to his family and his friends and work to consolidate wealth, power, and influence in whatever group he finds himself? Isn't that the rational thing to do, since he cannot expect anything from the strangers who live nearby and probably have different priorities and moral attitudes? Wouldn't a simple cost-benefit analysis show this to most people who understand the world they actually inhabit?
I expect that the number of disaffected men will grow, and after a certain point the elites may feel threatened by them. When vets begin to feel underappreciated or discarded, what then?
On Thursday, I was in the staff lounge for lunch and I heard an one of the teachers, a man in his 50s or 60s, asking a woman teacher (in her late 20s?) when her wedding date was, and when she would "no longer be living in sin." They were openly joking about it, and then another teacher, a woman in her 50s, added that she was cohabitating with her fiance, and his father refused to step foot in their residence until after the wedding. The first teacher proclaimed that he couldn't understand why people were like that. Really?
Not only is there no shame because they do not think cohabitating is wrong, but they are not aware or do not care about the opinions of others who might overhear their conversation. They are "proud" of living in such a manner. They may mock traditional mores but they are the ones who are lost but do not know it. They may think they are fine, upstanding individuals, but such attitudes and behavior is indicative of vice.
Vice is not necessarily knowingly doing something that is wrong (that might be incontinence), but doing something that is counter to reason, being dominated by one's appetite so that one believes that the good one wants is the true or complete good.
Such moral blindness may be more the effect of vice than the cause of vice for those who were raised with true opinion or with Christian faith. Those who sin knowingly because they love the apparent good too much eventually reject the truth in favor of their own moral truth? However, those who are raised with very little or no moral guidance become vicious if their appetites are not disciplined; living in accordance with [disordered] appetite is becoming vicious. Even though they may be so ignorant that they are excused with respect to sin.
One of the teachers mentioned the Arizona Sonora Desert Museum. I've never been there.
An end of an era in the Bay Area?
Something relatively minor, but meaningful for me, since I grew up watching Japanese television shows. As far as I can tell, KTSF no longer has any weekend evening Japanese programming. I haven't checked to see if it still has weekday morning news and other programming. Does this reflect local demographic changes? I have heard that a lot of Japanese have moved back to Japan because of the bad economy. Many weer here temporarily because of corporate assignments? I have also heard that more Koreans are moving here. There will probably be plenty of Japanese programming in Hawaii. How about L.A.? San Jose Japantown will be a relic, if it isn't already. It's no longer a "living neighborhood." SF Japantown is mostly a tourist attraction, though it is frequented by Japanese people. There are a lot of Korean businesses in Japantown. I don't think there is a section of SF that could be considered Koreatown. (Our local Koreatown in Santa Clara is labelled on Google Maps.)
Thursday, December 08, 2011
Items of Interest, 8 December 2011
Jack Donovan, Violence is Golden
Pearl Harbor:
Thomas Fleming, Pearl Harbor: Someone Had Blundered
Mere Comments: Pearl Harbor, the Dust of Time
FDR, Pearl Harbor and the U.N. by John V. Denson
Empire:
Reading Cicero's "On Old Age" At Any and Every Age by Robert M. Woods
Iran War Already Begun
Justin Raimondo, The Untouchables
Washington’s Secret Wars by Philip Giraldi (The Changing Face of War)
The Remoteness of 1% Wars by William J. Astore
Why our wars of choice may prove fatal
Freedom Means War by Leon Hadar
Why libertarians can’t do foreign policy.
Fast and Furious:
Confirmed: ATF Plotted to Use Fast and Furious to Demonize Second Amendment
CBS
Paul Gottfried:
Leo Strauss and the Conservative Movement
Cambridge University Press
How the GOP Swallowed the Conservative Movement
His review of The Servile Mind: How Democracy Erodes The Moral Life by Kenneth Minogue.
Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt: Towards a Secular Theocracy
States' Rights:
One sheriff stands up for the people he serves
Economics:
ECONOMY: Ecological Economics (EB)
Gene Logsdon, Old Tractors Never Die
A Course to Keep You From Crashing (Chris Martenson)
John Michael Greer, What Peak Oil Looks Like
A review of his The Wealth of Nature.
John Robb, Technology Shifts and Economic Depression and US Economy Breaks Bad
System, not consumers, are the big green problem by Simon Butler (EB)
Old Tractors Never Die by Gene Logsdon (EB)
Relocalization:
Durban Dollars: Tck Tck Tck Money by Albert Bates (EB)
The Beautiful, the Local, the Slow by Marta Madigan
How Transition initiatives shone in the Energyshare vote: a podcast
OWS:
Farmers Come to Wall Street
Shannon Hayes, From the Farm to the Occupation (EB)
Ralph Nader, Not made in America (same article posted at Counterpunch last week)
Energy:
‘Net Energy’ ignorance reigns on Capitol Hill by Megan Quinn Bachman (EB)
Diet and Health:
Karen De Coster, The Industrial Food Machine Addiction
Food Matters from LuMeL on Vimeo.
official site
Whole30 Paleo: How I Failed But Succeeded
The 100 Most Influential People in Health and Fitness 2011
Education:
When an adult took standardized tests forced on kids
Pearl Harbor:
Thomas Fleming, Pearl Harbor: Someone Had Blundered
Wilfred Owen was quite wrong. Though it is a hard thing for young men to die, it can be dulce et decorum pro patria mori, so long as the war is just and the leaders something better than the cynical butchers that lead their countries unnecessarily into war.
It is natural for a man to value the polity above himself. But what if the polity itself is an illusion and just an aggregate of individuals and their families, nothing more?
Mere Comments: Pearl Harbor, the Dust of Time
FDR, Pearl Harbor and the U.N. by John V. Denson
Empire:
Reading Cicero's "On Old Age" At Any and Every Age by Robert M. Woods
Iran War Already Begun
Justin Raimondo, The Untouchables
Washington’s Secret Wars by Philip Giraldi (The Changing Face of War)
The Remoteness of 1% Wars by William J. Astore
Why our wars of choice may prove fatal
Freedom Means War by Leon Hadar
Why libertarians can’t do foreign policy.
Fast and Furious:
Confirmed: ATF Plotted to Use Fast and Furious to Demonize Second Amendment
CBS
Paul Gottfried:
Leo Strauss and the Conservative Movement
Cambridge University Press
How the GOP Swallowed the Conservative Movement
His review of The Servile Mind: How Democracy Erodes The Moral Life by Kenneth Minogue.
Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt: Towards a Secular Theocracy
States' Rights:
One sheriff stands up for the people he serves
Economics:
ECONOMY: Ecological Economics (EB)
Gene Logsdon, Old Tractors Never Die
A Course to Keep You From Crashing (Chris Martenson)
John Michael Greer, What Peak Oil Looks Like
A review of his The Wealth of Nature.
John Robb, Technology Shifts and Economic Depression and US Economy Breaks Bad
System, not consumers, are the big green problem by Simon Butler (EB)
Old Tractors Never Die by Gene Logsdon (EB)
Relocalization:
Durban Dollars: Tck Tck Tck Money by Albert Bates (EB)
The Beautiful, the Local, the Slow by Marta Madigan
How Transition initiatives shone in the Energyshare vote: a podcast
OWS:
Farmers Come to Wall Street
Shannon Hayes, From the Farm to the Occupation (EB)
Ralph Nader, Not made in America (same article posted at Counterpunch last week)
Energy:
‘Net Energy’ ignorance reigns on Capitol Hill by Megan Quinn Bachman (EB)
Diet and Health:
Karen De Coster, The Industrial Food Machine Addiction
Food Matters from LuMeL on Vimeo.
official site
Whole30 Paleo: How I Failed But Succeeded
The 100 Most Influential People in Health and Fitness 2011
Education:
When an adult took standardized tests forced on kids
Yesterday I collected some rough data on the digit ratios of the girls in the classroom. 14 had a digit ratio of 1 or greater, while 8 had a ratio less than 1. Only a couple of the girls in the latter group might seem tomboyish. What are the implications of this for the claim that digit ratio is a sign for prenatal androgen exposure? Maybe the sample needs to be analyzed carefully before any meaningful conclusions can be drawn.
Last week in the K class there was a mom volunteering for the morning class - she reminded me of someone who went to that school 15 years ago? Was it the same girl? She had a daughter in K.
Last week in the K class there was a mom volunteering for the morning class - she reminded me of someone who went to that school 15 years ago? Was it the same girl? She had a daughter in K.
There was a Korean girl in today's class- she was wearing a Miraculous Medal so I was trying to find out if she was Catholic and a member of the local Korean Catholic community. She wasn't exactly ESL but she didn't know Christian terms in English, but I found out that the head of her church is a minister (I won't attempt to transliterate the Korean). Her grandmother is the one who gave her the medal. I wonder if one of her parents became Protestant or if her grandmother was in a mixed marriage. And do they know who is depicted on the medal? The girl thought it was Jesus; I told her it was His mom.
Wednesday, December 07, 2011
Was at Stanfurd tonight for the concert. Anyway, I may be cutting back on blogging for the short term. Even the round-up posts might have to be eliminated. (Those take more time than one might think.)
Tuesday, December 06, 2011
The consequences of social atomism
Does liberalism promote an absolute levelling of loves, so that a moral agent is not to give preference to a family member over a stranger, all other things being equal?
Just as there is no real common good to be aimed at if there is no real community, can there be true solidarity (understood as not only encompassing legal justice but civic friendship as well) either? What regard can one have for one's fellows, if they are strangers, unproven and untested, and do not really regard him as one of their own? Sympathy as a motive for rendering assistance to another can only go so far. One's fellow citizens may not be fellows, after all - no shared living, no familiarity, no trust. Is it reasonable then to expect the exercise of solidarity from people living in such a collective of individuals and families?
Just as there is no real common good to be aimed at if there is no real community, can there be true solidarity (understood as not only encompassing legal justice but civic friendship as well) either? What regard can one have for one's fellows, if they are strangers, unproven and untested, and do not really regard him as one of their own? Sympathy as a motive for rendering assistance to another can only go so far. One's fellow citizens may not be fellows, after all - no shared living, no familiarity, no trust. Is it reasonable then to expect the exercise of solidarity from people living in such a collective of individuals and families?
Items of Interest, 6 December 2011
Playing With Fire
Obama's risky oil threat to China
Daniel Larison, Obama Must Be a High Hamiltonian Now
Robert Stark interview with Dylan Hales
Distributist Review: Journey into a Libertarian Future
Relocalization:
4 Reasons Why The Future Of Capitalism Is Homegrown, Small Scale, And Independent (via BALLE)
Policies for a shareable city #11: Urban agriculture (EB)
Counterpunch:
DEAN BAKER, Wrecking the World Economy
JULES LOBEL, The Future of the Occupy Movement
DOUG DOWD, The Decline of Imperial America
JOHN V. WALSH, Washington Post Boosts Obama’s Declaration of War on China
THOMAS H. NAYLOR, Is America’s Health Care Crisis Fixable?
Diet and Health:
Jimmy Moore, Jessica Biel Personifies Carbohydrate Addiction Better Than Anything I’ve Ever Seen
Higher Education:
James Schall, SJ, Why Bother Going to College?
Thomas C. Reeves, Are American Colleges Cheating Students?
John Zmirak, Where Theology Keeps Her Crown: Thomas More College
Jackie Evancho:
"I'll Be Home for Christmas"
Obama's risky oil threat to China
Daniel Larison, Obama Must Be a High Hamiltonian Now
Robert Stark interview with Dylan Hales
Distributist Review: Journey into a Libertarian Future
Relocalization:
4 Reasons Why The Future Of Capitalism Is Homegrown, Small Scale, And Independent (via BALLE)
Policies for a shareable city #11: Urban agriculture (EB)
Counterpunch:
DEAN BAKER, Wrecking the World Economy
JULES LOBEL, The Future of the Occupy Movement
DOUG DOWD, The Decline of Imperial America
JOHN V. WALSH, Washington Post Boosts Obama’s Declaration of War on China
THOMAS H. NAYLOR, Is America’s Health Care Crisis Fixable?
Diet and Health:
Jimmy Moore, Jessica Biel Personifies Carbohydrate Addiction Better Than Anything I’ve Ever Seen
Higher Education:
James Schall, SJ, Why Bother Going to College?
Thomas C. Reeves, Are American Colleges Cheating Students?
John Zmirak, Where Theology Keeps Her Crown: Thomas More College
Jackie Evancho:
"I'll Be Home for Christmas"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)