Archive for Democrats

Your Government at Work

Not at work for you—oh God no!

For itself:

As he prepares to leave office, Governor Deval Patrick is quietly transferring 500 of his managers into the state public employee union, a move that will qualify them for a series of 3 percent raises and insulate them from firing when the next governor takes over.

The change will automatically convert 15 percent of the 3,350 executive branch managers into members of the National Association of Government Employees, which has been fighting for the change for years, arguing the employees were “improperly classified” as managers.

While smaller clusters of management positions have been converted into union positions in the past, this is the largest sweep into the union in at least two decades, according to administration and union officials.

Rolling the managers into the 22,000-member union will effectively protect them from any house-cleaning that might occur when the next governor takes office in January — a particular likelihood if Republican Charlie Baker were to take over after eight years of Democratic leadership.

Union employees generally have to be removed “for cause,” while managers serve at will.

“With just a couple of months to go in the current administration, this has the whiff of a job protection action just before the governor leaves office,” said Jim Stergios, executive director of the Pioneer Institute, a conservative research organization.

The election to replace Patrick is barely two weeks away, and he pulls this stunt. One could almost dismiss it as Massachusetts being Massachusetts, but for the size (unprecedented) and the timing (cynical). This is Patrick (mini-me to Obama) being Patrick. Still, if it means he’s finally gone, it might actually be worth it.

Eric Kriss, who was secretary of administration and finance under Romney, was critical of the decision. “What this will do is continue to reduce, as has been done since the 1960s, any layer of what you would call managers,” he said. And once managers are moved into the union, “removing anybody is virtually impossible,” he said.

Here’s the state government, Governor Baker. Don’t choke on it.

Comments (2)

Good News, Bad News

More than 22,000 Coloradans have just lost their health coverage.

And that’s the good news:

Over 22,000 Coloradoans have had their health insurance canceled by Obamacare in the past month — and 200,000 are slated to be shut down in 2015, the state insurance department announced Friday.

The Colorado Division of Insurance wrote to state Senate Republicans Friday, notifying them that five more insurance carriers have ended plans for 18,783 more Coloradoans in just the last month. By far, the most canceled plans will come from Humana Insurance Company and Humana Health Plan.

That brings the state’s Obamacare total to almost 340,000 canceled plans, according to Republican Rep. Cory Gardner, who’s in a tight race for Senate with incumbent Democrat Sen. Mark Udall.

Udall, who voted for Obamacare and made the same debunked promises as President Obama that Americans could keep their health insurance plans, took heat earlier this year when emails suggested that his office tried to interfere with a state analysis of the number of plans cancelled by Obamacare.

One almost feels sorry for the coming Democrat slaughter in the midterm elections. Until one remembers that they have it coming. Good and hard.

Comments (1)

MSNBC Update [UPDATED]

Since viewership of Tass-TV has fallen below Animal Planet’s, we’d like to help our brothers and sisters in the media by rescuing their lonely voices from obscurity.

Besides, they’re beginning to make sense (imminent unemployment has that effect).

Chris Matthews:

MATTHEWS: So we don’t need a tsar?

[Dr. Anthony] FAUSI: I don’t think so. We have good coordination from the White House, from the National Security Council.

MATTHEWS: My concern is that this reminds me of the rollout for healthcare. The lack of a clear-cut personage, that the president could say, this person is in charge. When he was asked who was in charge of the rollout for health care, he said well it’s the person who is COO of the CAA of the HHS — someone he apparently never even met, that’s a problem.

Comparing the CDC to Healthcare.gov is a low blow, even for you, Chris.

Rachel Maddow:

MADDOW: Now that he’s out and working for a global strategy firm that’s essentially the Hillary Clinton campaign in exile, now he’s flying the same exact anti-Obama flag that the hawkish Clinton wing of the party has been flying all year trying to position themselves for the next stage in their own political careers by stepping on President Obama’s neck.

On that, Maddow sounds exactly Rush Limbaugh, who suggested last week that Panetta’s book marks a pivot away from the past (Obama) and toward the future (?), Hillary.

Joe Scarborough:

Joe Scarborough and the “Morning Joe” panel react to Alison Lundergan Grimes’ “ridiculous” answer to her voting history.

“That is so ridiculous,” Scarborough said. “And yet she told everybody she voted for Hillary Clinton. So why did you violate your ‘constitutional right’ then?”

I don’t watch news on the TV, but I can’t imagine Fox News being this tough on Democrats. As I say, losing one’s job can have that effect.

PS: C’mon MSNBC, it helps if you try:

A well-placed source tells me MSNBC will be announcing major programming changes sometime in the next month, including the cancellation of Ronan Farrow‘s afternoon program, Ronan Farrow Daily.

Mr. Farrow’s program — which now averages around just 50,000 viewers in the key 25-54 demo — has never performed well despite the hype that originally preceded it last February before its first airing. In the third quarter of this year, the show is down 51 percent from what occupied its 1:00 PM EST time slot a year ago (Andrea Mitchell Reports).

[I]n February of this year, Griffin gives Farrow — who hadn’t even hosted a community access show before — his own program. The plan was to bring in a younger audience, so why not put him at 1:00 p.m. ET when just a shade over zero of Millennials are actually watching TV?

Griffin also placed Chris Hayes — who hosted a wonky, deep-dive-into-policy weekend morning program (Up with Chris Hayes) — into the most important timeslot on any network: 8:00 p.m. weeknights. Put politics and ideology aside and go back to the Lombardi quote on scorekeeping: The awkward Hayes has trouble breaking 100 in the demo lately, and this is during an election year with Senate control in the balance. For context, Bill O’Reilly did 556 on the last show he hosted. Anderson Cooper on CNN: 282. Hayes: 104. The following night (Thursday, October 9), Hayes dropped to a 75.

Whether an even-lower-rated host (Ed Schultz, for example, who is getting beat anywhere from 5-to-1 to 9-to-1 by Fox in the demo at 5:00 PM) is also a cancellation candidate isn’t known right now. What is clear is the score these days: According to Bill Carter of the New York Times in a damning piece over the weekend, “In the first quarter of 2009, MSNBC averaged 392,000 viewers in the 25-54 demographic for its weeknight lineup. In the third quarter of this year, the number is down to 125,000.”

Maybe MSNBC should hire Al Gore to facilitate a sale. ISIS-TV is looking to make a buy.

UPDATED
Someone didn’t get the memo:

Earlier today, Alex Griswold told you about Wendy Davis doubling down on her campaign-imploding “Look at the cripple” ad. Or tripling down, or quadrupling down, or however many times it’s been at this point. She told Andrea Mitchell that the ad was “fair.” Oh, and Abbott is “working to kick that ladder down.” Well said, Wendy.

But believe it or not, Mitchell said something even dumber. At about the 1:00 mark in the above video, she emitted this brainfart:

“Could you have gone after what you see as his hypocrisy by pointing out what he did in that rape case, what he did in these other cases, without the stark image of the empty wheelchair, which seemed to be trying to point people towards his own supposed disability?”

Comments

Why Do Bad Things Happen to Good People?

Liberals just want to help people.

God help us:

Obamacare premiums aren’t rising everywhere. They just have a way of finding the states with the biggest Senate races. And that could be very bad timing for Democrats in two of the party’s key contests.

Double-digit rate hikes for individual health insurance plans have become an issue in the Louisiana and Iowa Senate races over the past week, where the Republican candidates are hammering their Democratic opponents for the steep premium increases on the way next year for some customers under the Affordable Care Act.

In Louisiana, Rep. Bill Cassidy called the double-digit increases for some insurers — including Blue Cross Blue Shield of Louisiana — “another hurdle for families and businesses already struggling under the demands of Obamacare” and blamed Democrats for “false promises” that premiums would go down. In Iowa, Senate candidate Joni Ernst used the sharp rate increases for two insurers to blast the Democratic candidate, Rep. Bruce Braley, for supporting the law, charging that “thousands of Iowans are paying for it.”

Poor Democrats. The bad news keeps on coming:

Having health insurance is no panacea for high medical costs. Overall, 1 in 4 privately insured U.S. adults say they don’t have much confidence in their ability to pay for a major, unexpected medical expense.

A new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research may help explain why President Barack Obama faces such strong headwinds in trying to persuade the public that his health care law is working to hold costs down.

The poll found the biggest financial concerns were among people with so-called high-deductible plans that require patients to pay a significant share of their medical bills each year before insurance kicks in.

Such plans already represented a growing share of employer-sponsored coverage. And now, they’re also the mainstay of the new health insurance exchanges created by Obama’s law.

ObamaCare was supposed to “bend the cost curve” of health care. Instead, it’s us who get bent. I can’t wait for Election Night. It’ll be like ISIS snuff videos without the orange jumpsuits.

Comments

Here’s Your Halo, What’s Your Hurry? [UPDATED]

No Messiahs need apply:

ANDREA MITCHELL: I want to ask you about President Obama because he hasn’t been campaigning in a whole lot of states. People haven’t been inviting him. Would you rather have President Obama campaign for you or one of the Clintons?

SEN. JEANNE SHAHEEN (D-NH): Well, we actually have Hillary Clinton coming up and former President Clinton is going to be here next week for the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner. So they’re going to be here and I’m delighted to have their support and to have them come up and help us. I think at this point in the campaign, we want to turn out everybody we can because New Hampshire has a very big percentage drop off between the presidential year and the non-presidential year. What we want is for people to know there is an election coming up November 4th and to get out there and vote.

MITCHELL: And having the president come would not be helpful?

SHAHEEN: Well, the president’s dealing with a lot of crises in the world right now, and I think it’s important for him to continue to address what’s happening with ISIS, to continue to address the Ebola scare. And so I expect him to be in Washington.

He’s a lotta places, Jeanne, but Washington ain’t one of them:

Obama Schedule || Thursday, October 9, 2014
by KEITH KOFFLER on OCTOBER 8, 2014, 9:52 PM
11:40 am ET || Departs White House
2:00 pm PT || Arrives Los Angeles
2:45 pm PT || Tours the startups area at Cross Campus; Santa Monica, California
3:05 pm PT || Participates in a town hall with members of the Cross Campus community
5:55 pm PT || Delivers remarks at a DNC fundraiser; Private Residence, Los Angeles

Obama Schedule || Friday October 10, 2014

10:40 am PT || Attends a DNC fundraiser; private residence, Los Angeles
12:40 pm PT || Delivers remarks at Frank G. Bonelli Regional Park; San Dimas, California
2:20 pm PT || Departs Los Angeles
3:30 pm PT || Arrives San Francisco
7:05 pm PT || Delivers remarks at a DNC fundraiser; San Francisco

Obama Schedule || Saturday, October 11, 2014

9:40 am PT || Attends a DNC fundraiser; private residence, San Francisco
11:15 am PT || Departs San Francisco
7:10 pm ET || Arrives White House

Fundraisers are all he has left. The hard core Hollywood elite still love him, but that’s about it. Not that I blame him. I’d rather be ogled by Gwyneth Paltrow than glared at by Jeanne Shaheen any day.

PS: Beautiful day on the East Coast. Twenty bucks says Obama gets back to work today—on the golf course.

UPDATE: Pay me my money!

President Obama today played golf for the 200th time of his presidency, a milestone that for many is emblematic of a president who has frequently seemed detached from his job, his colleagues in Washington, and the American people.

Perhaps realizing the incongruity of the president playing golf amid crises, the White House today initially loaded up the press pool to accompany Obama to his golf outing, and then had a better thought. The press was yanked out of the vans and dispatched to the windows of the Oval Office, where reporters instructed to witness the president speaking on the phone with HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell about the new Ebola case in Texas.

And then it was on to golf.

Easiest $20 I ever made. Three-day road trip followed by a half-day of golf: Obama’s got it pretty easy, too. But can he pick his daughters out of a line-up?

Comments

Hating on the Handicapped

What is it with Democrats and the disabled?

Wendy Davis is almost certainly not going to be the next governor of Texas. Apparently, though, she’s willing to try just about anything to alter that reality.

“A tree fell on Greg Abbott,” the narrator says. “He sued and got millions. Since then, he’s spent his career working against other victims.”

This ad is the sort of highly risky gambit you only see from a long-shot campaign. And, as often as not, these sorts of “Hail Marys” fail miserably.

I checked. Abbott is leading by at least 10 points in the polls. Ms. Davis is a fetching woman, with shapely legs that look nice in pink sneakers. Her footwear and and her abortion are chief claims to fame. Or infamy. Now we can add this.

You remember the other occasion a Democrat screwed up over a person in a wheelchair:

Never gets old.

At least Biden meant no harm. Unlike…well, you just have to see:

You’re one to talk:

What do you expect from the modern progressive? They even celebrate the death of a person in a wheelchair at the hands of Arab terrorists.

Comments (1)

[Bleep] You Can’t Make Up

Next, Obama will pitch to Latino voters from the casa of someone named Rico Bastardo:

President Obama blasted Republicans as the party of “billionaires” on Tuesday while mingling with high-rollers at the $26 million estate of Rich Richman — yes, that’s his real name — in Greenwich, Conn.

Richman, who built his $10 billion company developing rental housing, lives in the Conyers Farm area, where the minimum lot size is 10 acres. Twenty-five donors paid $32,400 each to get their photo taken with the president. Others paid $10,000 for dinner.

While Obama was schmoozing — and the press pool was playing billiards in the basement — he was also soliciting donations for House Democrats in an e-mail.

“If Republicans win, we know who they’ll be fighting for,” Obama said. “Once again, the interests of billionaires will come before the needs of the middle class.”

Obama arrived from New York City — where he had attended a fundraiser with hedge-fund billionaires George Soros and Paul Tudor Jones — in a convoy of four helicopters that landed at the Greenwich Polo Club.

The story mistakenly says Richman “built” his company. I hope Obama disabused the aptly named Richman of that notion:

I suppose I should add the last paragraph of the piece:

Conspicuously absent was Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy. The Stamford Advocate reported Malloy, “not wanting to alienate the state’s large bloc of independent voters, might be keeping a safe distance from Obama.”

We noted yesterday that the Democrat Party had a race problem: no one wants to be seen next to the guy.

So what’s TNFBP™ to do but raise money instead? Like he’s got anything better to do?

Obama Schedule || Thursday, October 9, 2014
by KEITH KOFFLER on OCTOBER 8, 2014, 9:52 PM
11:40 am ET || Departs White House
2:00 pm PT || Arrives Los Angeles
2:45 pm PT || Tours the startups area at Cross Campus; Santa Monica, California
3:05 pm PT || Participates in a town hall with members of the Cross Campus community
5:55 pm PT || Delivers remarks at a DNC fundraiser; Private Residence, Los Angeles

His skin may be black but the money he raises is green.

Comments (1)

“Albatross” is a Dog Whistle

Who’s more racist—the racist DEMOCRAT politicians who don’t want to stand next to TNFBP™ (The Nation’s First Black President), or the racist DEMOCRAT voters who can’t stand anyone who has anything to do with TNFBP™?

JAKE TAPPER: What Democrats told me today is that President Obama, however much they love him, he is an albatross around their necks right now. His poll numbers are so bad, people not feeling good about the state of the economy even if there economic indicators that things are getting better. Wages are stagnant.

This after the crowing and whooping over 248,000 new jobs. Even I, who can find the bad news lurking below even the bubbliest employment numbers, conceded that this was a good jobs report (with some disturbing trends—I’m not stupid).

Obama’s got a theory on that, too:

“Frankly, the press and Washington, all it does is feed cynicism,” he insisted, despite getting six years of favorable coverage from establishment newspapers and TV shows.

“Most of you don’t know the statistics I just gave you,” Obama said, after listing a series of cherry-picked data that ignored that roughly 10 million Americans who have given up looking for work, and the $7 trillion in added debt.

“The reason you don’t know [the favorable data] is because they elicit hope. They’re good news … and that’s not what we hear about,” he declared to the roughly 250 supporters who paid up to $1,000 to attend.

To the list of racist DEMOCRAT politicians, racist DEMOCRAT voters, let us add racist reporters (almost all DEMOCRATS).

Comments

Lena Whorrin’

On my worst day—and as Grand High Exalter Mystic Ruler of my own Grand Duchy, I don’t have many—but on my worst day, I can at least thank the Almighty that I am not Lena Dunham:

It’s officially fall which means pumpkins, scarves, sweater weather and of course, election season.

That’s precisely why Rock the Vote is gearing up—with the help of several famous faces—to encourage everyone to educate themselves and make their voices heard in the polls.

Lena Dunham, Glee’s Darren Criss, Sophia Bush, Fred Armisen, Orange Is the New Black’s Natasha Lyonne, celebrity trainer Tracy Anderson, Whoopi Goldberg, Devendra Banhart, Ionna Gika and Gabriel Valenciano all team up for a special rendition of Lil Jon’s hit, “Turn Down for What.”

The twist? The new track is called “Turn Out for What.”

Rock the Vote Spokesperson, Audrey Gelman, told Buzzfeed that the organization hopes to drum up attention surrounding the latest hot-button items like marriage equality, global warming, women’s rights and much, much more.

“We hope that the video will connect the dots between caring about an issue and turning out to make a difference,” Gelman explained.

“Even in a year where the president isn’t on the ballot.”

That narcissist still thinks he is!

Anyhow, if John Candy and Chris Farley can have careers playing lovable fatsos, why not Lena? (It worked out so well for them.) I need to fight any inner sexism that lingers not to cringe every time I see her, which I keep to a minimum, believe me. In fact, let’s skip the sexist comments altogether. It’s not her doughy body that’s a turn-off, it’s her exhibitionism. If she wants to support Obama and Democrats, fine, she’s got company in the entertainment (to employ the loosest possible definition of that word) world. But can she keep her bouncy chubby thighs to herself?

Comments

BTL’s Midterm Prognostication

Like Carnac the Magnificent, I can see the future.

Unlike Carnac, I do not need a turban or an envelope.

The news will do:

Angry and frustrated voters are planning to use the midterm elections in one month to tell President Obama they oppose his agenda, the highest “no vote” percentage in the last 16 years measured by Gallup.

The polling outfit found that 32 percent of voters want to send a message of opposition with their vote, compared to just 20 percent who are sending a signal of support.

That is 13 points higher than in 1998 when former President Clinton was headed to impeachment for lying about his sex affair with a former White House intern and even a smidge higher — 2 points — than in 2008, when Americans were tired of President Bush’s military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Obama is more hated, more detested, than a philanderer and a war criminal. Armed with that information (such hate speech, BTL!), let’s look at the map:

Untitled

And polling of the closest races:

Untitled

RCP averages several polls, some out of date, but let’s use these numbers. My point is that the pall of Obama is so long and dark (dog whistle!), any race (dog whistle!) in which a Republican is within four points (maybe five) is statistically tied. If I’m right, the GOP will pick up as many as 9 out of ten seats, and hold a 54-46 edge in the Senate. They’ll certainly keep, probably widen, their lead in the House.

I’ve thought this since ObamaCare self-destructed, but who even remembers ObamaCare (for the moment)? Border security and the walking dead (from Liberia) may have shot to the top of Obama’s Incompetence Chart. And his promise of amnesty for illegal aliens can’t be far from voters’ minds.

But so what? What will the Republicans do with their majority? God knows, there’s a lot they can do (or undo), but do they have the will, the nerve, even the intent to push back against Obama’s overreach? 2016 will have to wait; the Democrats are going down—have to go down—this year.

Comments

Can We Pick ‘Em?

Remember the Watergate-era bumper stickers: “Don’t Blame Me, I Live in Massachusetts”? (The only state to vote for McGovern over Nixon.)

As if Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Barney Frank, and Mike Dukakis weren’t enough proof of our miserable judgement…

We can’t even build a casino without [bleeping] it up:

State and federal indictments were made public Thursday against three owners of the land in Everett where Steve Wynn plans to build a resort casino, alleging that the men defrauded Wynn and lied to state regulators by hiding the fact that convicted felon and known Mafia associate Charles Lightbody was one of the partners.

According to the 13-page federal indictment, Lightbody and two other defendants went to elaborate lengths to cover up Lightbody’s interest in the land, fearing that if his presence were known, it would jeopardize Wynn’s chances of getting the sole Eastern Massachusetts casino license.

The state’s gambling law bars criminals from profiting from a gambling facility.

No public officials were indicted by either grand jury, nor was a fourth land owner, Paul Lohnes, a former business partner of gambling commission chairman Stephen Crosby.

Wait, one of the land owners was a partner of the gaming commission chairman? And neither of them is crooked???

We need Howie Carr to ‘splain what it all means:

Did I call it or what? The headline on my Sept. 16 column was “Everett: Can Youse Believe It?”

The only surprise is that it took the feds just two weeks to sweep the alleged hoods and assorted bad actors off the board.

The G-men didn’t just grab Charles Lightbody, the ex-jailbird who brilliantly brags on tape: “They’re … not gonna find me anywhere. You know what I mean?”

In an unrelated shakedown, they also picked up the alleged boss of the New England Family of La Cosa Nostra (NELCN), one Anthony Spagnolo, who has the moniker of a submarine sandwich — Spucky. He’s 72, and his muscle, Pryce Quintina, is a pup of 74.

Lightbody, at 57, is “The Kid.”

Everybody knew this Everett land deal was about as dirty as the King Arthur’s Lounge that Lightbody was allegedly planning to run hookers out of. Yet these statesmen on the Mass. Gaming Commission couldn’t help themselves. But what did Deval Patrick expect when he handed the chairmanship to Steve Crosby, a corpulent career hack whose brainpower lights up the world like a three-watt bulb?

Imagine. Organized crime being involved in a casino deal. Who ever heard of such a thing?

[C]ritics said the indictments reflect exactly what people fear about bringing casino gambling to Massachusetts: increased crime.

“Today, the corrupt casino culture burst into clear focus, and the voters now have an even clearer choice in 33 days,” said John Ribeiro, chairman of Repeal the Casino Deal. “The barons of Beacon Hill who empowered this new wave of corruption should feel all new shame.”

Mayor Martin J. Walsh of Boston — who had urged the gambling commission to delay issuing a license for the Eastern Massachusetts casino, in part because of controversy over the Everett land — said the commission failed “the people of Boston and of the Commonwealth by allowing, even remotely, the taint of corruption to be associated with this land transaction.”

More than a taint, Marty, and hardly remote.

Is it any wonder why this question is on the ballot?

The Affordable Casino Repeal Initiative, Question 3 is on the November 2014 statewide ballot in Massachusetts as an initiated state statute. If approved by voters, the measure would repeal a 2011 law that allows resort casinos to operate within the state.

Based on the wording of the measure, a yes vote on Question 3 means no casinos in the state, and a no vote would uphold the law, which will facilitate the licensing of up to three resort-style casinos, to stand.

I don’t gamble, but I have no problem with those who do. And I am predisposed to like Steve Wynn for what he said about Obama recently (see below). But I am voting “Yes” on Question 3. Claude Rains put up a better acting job of “shock” in Casablanca than these jabronis.

I’m sure the timing by Eric Holder’s Justice Department has nothing to do with Wynn going on CNBC Wednesday and saying of Dear Leader: “I am stunned at the immaturity of this administration. … We elected a man as president who had no experience at anything. Nothing!” Except maybe revenge.

Sorry, Steve, I couldn’t agree more. But. They. Cannot. Be. Trusted.

Comments

The Little Ball and Chain…and Hammer and Sickle

Speaking of sordid motivations (as we were in the post below), you won’t believe what was behind the near-coup against Scott Walker:

First, Milwaukee district attorney John Chisholm used a Kafkaesque procedure—a so-called “John Doe” proceeding—under Wisconsin law to transform a request by Walker’s office for a criminal investigation of an embezzlement into, wonder of wonders, a secret fishing expedition into the entire operations of Walker’s office.

Now a longtime Chisholm subordinate reveals for the first time in this article that the district attorney may have had personal motivations for his investigation. Chisholm told him and others that Chisholm’s wife, Colleen, a teacher’s union shop steward at St. Francis high school, a public school near Milwaukee, had been repeatedly moved to tears by Walker’s anti-union policies in 2011, according to the former staff prosecutor in Chisholm’s office. Chisholm said in the presence of the former prosecutor that his wife “frequently cried when discussing the topic of the union disbanding and the effect it would have on the people involved … She took it personally.” …

Chisholm added, according to that prosecutor, that “he felt that it was his personal duty to stop Walker from treating people like this.” …

Chisholm’s private displays of partisan animus stunned the former prosecutor. “I admired him [Chisholm] greatly up until this whole thing started,” the former prosecutor said. “But once this whole matter came up, it was surprising how almost hyper-partisan he became … It was amazing … to see this complete change.”

We can sort of relate. Conservatives and Republicans can be tolerated (sometimes, barely, by some) in the abstract, but give them authority to enact the policies on which they were elected, and it’s Katie bar the door.

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »