Home

Defining ourselves as conservative or liberal
  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next  Last >>
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Interesting Discussions

Report offensive ad

View latest: 24h 48h 72h


marina









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 3:41 pm
Fox wrote:
Bots are only useful for manipulating engagement statistics. Bots do not make videos or write essays on Facebook. So for the first few weeks after Straka released his initial video, there was an upsurge in what was likely bot-driven engagement. Um, okay. So people measuring social media engagement may have thought that #WalkAway was generating more re-tweets, etc., than were really legitimate. That still has no impact on the number or content of the videos or Facebook narratives. .


Enjoy this podcast about fake articles/posts/essays written by paid russian operatives.

https://www.wnycstudios.org/st.....ke-factory
Back to top

marina









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 3:43 pm
Fox wrote:
Well, arguably, things have gotten worse for African-Americans and the working poor under liberal governments:

* Decades of progress in black communities were wiped out by Clinton-era law enforcement acts (protecting us from so-called "super-predators").

* NAFTA decimated lower-wage and manufacturing jobs -- and President Obama basically said, "tough luck."

* Illegal immigration has driven down low-wage and entry-level wages.


This is an example of the victim hood narrative that we discussed yesterday. The only difference is that you are blaming the left for all these outcomes and ignoring any other factors.
Back to top

marina









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 3:45 pm
amother wrote:
We are beyond that. Minorities have all the same legal rights. Obviously having all the rights on paper doesn't always translate into being treated correctly across the board in every situation in every nook of society, but that is not something that can be legislated anyhow. And trying to understand how the poor became poor is not a function of government.


Why can't it be legislated? Isn't enforcing good behavior the ultimate goal of any legislative body?

Why isn't understanding poverty a function of government? Doesn't it benefit government if its taxpayers are wealthier?
Back to top

Fox









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 3:54 pm
marina wrote:
This is an example of the victim hood narrative that we discussed yesterday. The only difference is that you are blaming the left for all these outcomes and ignoring any other factors.

How is this a victimhood narrative? Liberals have claimed that they "care more" about minorities and low-wage workers. Yet many of their policies have not only not improved things, but have actually made things worse. And when this is pointed out, they double-down and refuse to engage in any substantive arguments. How is that connected to victimhood? It seems like that's just connected to efficacy.

Or is it not permitted to examine whether a particular policy actually works or not -- just whether it sounds good?
Back to top

PinkFridge









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 3:59 pm
Ravenclaw wrote:
Oh gosh I totally agree. When people ask me what I am, I say “Ask me about a specific policy and I’ll tell you.”
I don’t believe in excessive social programs, but I do think there should be more help gaining opportunities. I think the second amendment is wonderful (though I am not a fan of semi-automatic rifles), while rooting for the Dreamers. Am I liberal? Some people tell me I am disparagingly. But I am totally conservative when it comes to gender, affirmative action, etc. I hate victim culture.
Why does it have to be either or?


I wasn't going to comment till the end but I think this is something we all share: life isn't black and white.
I remember having heard that a certain very conservative (politically) prominent Rav (sorry I won't share his name, am not 100% sure) said that one should vote Republican unless there is an incumbent who has been doing his/her job well. I'm contrasting this to the ranting I've heard from Hugh Hewitt, to vote exclusively Republican, that there is no way we can reward any Democrat for anything.
The polarization is really staggering.
Back to top

southernbubby









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 4:18 pm
marina wrote:
Why can't it be legislated? Isn't enforcing good behavior the ultimate goal of any legislative body?

Why isn't understanding poverty a function of government? Doesn't it benefit government if its taxpayers are wealthier?



I think that what this poster means is that in situations where the law allows us to determine who we want to associate with, there is nothing that the government can do to prevent that type of discrimination. Thus, if I have a private club, I can include or exclude whoever I want. I think it is called freedom of association or something like that where the government can't make us act like nice and decent people. Legally we can snub whoever we want as long as we are not doing it as part of a business.

I don't think that Democrats are calling for laws to stop private pool owners from inviting only their straight or white neighbors over for a swim.
Back to top

marina









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 4:21 pm
Fox wrote:
How is this a victimhood narrative? Liberals have claimed that they "care more" about minorities and low-wage workers. Yet many of their policies have not only not improved things, but have actually made things worse. And when this is pointed out, they double-down and refuse to engage in any substantive arguments. How is that connected to victimhood? It seems like that's just connected to efficacy.

Or is it not permitted to examine whether a particular policy actually works or not -- just whether it sounds good?


You can certainly examine whether a particular policy is effective or makes a particular social difficulty worse. That's great and everyone should do it.

But when the reasons given for a particular societal problem are not associated exclusively with democrats or liberals, you - and others - disparage them by claiming it's all part of victimhood culture.

Like if we discuss why minorities are more likely to be in prison or on government assistance and come up with a viewpoint or policy associated with extreme conservatism (e.g. institutionalized racism), very often the automatic response is OH VICTIM CULTURE, PUT YOUR BIG BOY PANTS ON AND GO GET A JOB. If the viewpoint or policy is associated with liberals, though, aha, then we are just statistically examining the policy's efficacy, of course and it is so terrible what those awful liberals have done to minorities, isn't it?
Back to top

Fox









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 4:22 pm
marina wrote:
Enjoy this podcast about fake articles/posts/essays written by paid russian operatives.

https://www.wnycstudios.org/st.....ke-factory

This is interesting, but it's not similar to the #WalkAway model. I'm not sure what nibbling around the edges of my observations proves. Is it possible there are fake narratives and videos using the #WalkAway tag? Obviously. There may even be reviews of Kylie Jenner makeup products by people who have never really used them.

But I'd be interested in what liberals believe today and how what you've described as "moderate liberalism" differs from what younger conservatives, such as the TPUSA kids, believe.
Back to top

marina









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 4:22 pm
southernbubby wrote:
I think that what this poster means is that in situations where the law allows us to determine who we want to associate with, there is nothing that the government can do to prevent that type of discrimination. Thus, if I have a private club, I can include or exclude whoever I want. I think it is called freedom of association or something like that where the government can't make us act like nice and decent people. Legally we can snub whoever we want as long as we are not doing it as part of a business.

I don't think that Democrats are calling for laws to stop private pool owners from inviting only their straight or white neighbors over for a swim.


yes, there's definitely a limit to what we can and should legislate.
Back to top

marina









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 4:27 pm
Fox wrote:
This is interesting, but it's not similar to the #WalkAway model. I'm not sure what nibbling around the edges of my observations proves. Is it possible there are fake narratives and videos using the #WalkAway tag? Obviously. There may even be reviews of Kylie Jenner makeup products by people who have never really used them.

But I'd be interested in what liberals believe today and how what you've described as "moderate liberalism" differs from what younger conservatives, such as the TPUSA kids, believe.


What I want is for you not to present the Walk Away movement as a completely legitimate group, free and clear of all controversy, when it is so sketchy and you are surely aware of that.

Kylie Jenner is a red herring here because those make up products do not affect our elections so I don't care who uses and doesn't use them. Your attempt to include Kylie here is a way to minimize my point (same for nibbling language) and I am calling you out on that dismissiveness.


Last edited by marina on Wed, Oct 10 2018, 4:29 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top

naturalmom5









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 4:28 pm
southernbubby wrote:
I think that most Americans, and probably citizens of other countries as well, are aware of the current "war" going on is social media between conservatives and liberals. It spreads to family gatherings when families can't come to any type of gathering without the "snowflakes" and the "bigots" can't get together and even discuss what type of dog to buy. I see one relative who got into too many FB arguments and who is not wanted at a funeral or a seder and most of his liberal FB friends and relatives, long ago blocked or unfriended him.

It also happens that many ideas are packaged together as being either liberal or conservative when those ideas poison the general outlook on the ideas being presented. For example the liberals defended gender neutral bathrooms while the conservatives defended Confederate statues. Personally, I don't need either of those two things but it makes me see both groups through those lenses and fail to see the merit in their other policies. It also makes it impossible to work anything out IRL.

As a frum person, I don't live a liberal life. Those "friends" that I made when I was on FB sometimes chided me for belonging to a shul that doesn't recognize or practice marriage equality. They felt that anyone who belonged to or donated money to religious organizations that didn't fully recognize and honor gay marriage, was an automatic bigot, pure and simple. I also don't see any need to aid or abet any choice, be it abortion or gay marriage, that is contrary and antithetical to my beliefs. A person's rights in a free society should include marriage to the person of their choice or bodily autonomy but those rights also enable people to ignore what the Torah states for Jews and what the 7 Noahhide commandments say to non-Jews, so why should I support them?

I also don't live a fully conservative life, if conservatism means cutting off public aid to those who really need it, giving huge tax breaks to mega corporations, punishing illegal border jumpers by snatching their children, or forcing communities to retain Confederate statues when those statues represent something dark and horrible for them. I totally support students who want to change the names of schools named after Confederate generals. I think that courthouses should be free of such statues and icons.

Then there are areas that I consider challenging because of the cost of implementing them such as universal health care and gun control. Neither of those are bad things in and of themselves; just hard to implement for many reasons, one of which being that we make political issues out of everything today.



Excellent Post. My husband had this exact situation. He has a non-J friend he met in 7th grade in PS. Ironically, he became a Lutheran pastor, because when my husband became frum it inspired him.
They have been friends for over 40 years. The last five years or so this guy became a very rabid liberal. We took it in stride and just laughed at all the nonsense he posts on FB, and thought nebach.
A few months back, though my husband couldn't take it anymore. His friend was absolutely in love with Obama. Obama is "his brother ". Meanwwhile, is evil incarnate, the fuehrer..
Anyway, he condemned the Rubaskin pardon. My husband hit the roof, and called him out publicly. He posted that when they shut Postville, you were crying bitter tears over the poor illegal children and their parents . But Rubaskin being sentenced 27 years is fair and just.
Immediately, this guy unfriended my husband . We took it in stride and still sent him the birthday present we send every year. A few weeks ago, he emailed my husb a very weak grudging apology , followed by a birthday present a month later.
But he still doesn't answer emails, texts, calls, or fb messages. Nothing.. This after writing each other for 30 years.
The weird thing is that if my husb were to tell him that Xtianity is all fake, how do you believe in that nonsense; it wouldn't faze him in the slightest and they could have a rational debate.
But attack a liberal sacred cow, and all hll breaks loose...
Back to top

Fox









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 5:14 pm
marina wrote:
What I want is for you not to present the Walk Away movement as a completely legitimate group, free and clear of all controversy, when it is so sketchy and you are surely aware of that.

No, it's not any sketchier than any other political group, and I'm not sure why you're so obsessed with it. Even if it turned out to be 100 percent fake, it wouldn't change my basic argument -- the fact that moderate liberals seem indistinguishable from conservatives -- which you haven't addressed at all.
Back to top

southernbubby









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 5:37 pm
This is a very long read on this topic and while I am not a Shmuelly follower, I agree with him here:
http://jewishjournal.com/cover.....the-truth/
Back to top

Jeanette









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 7:08 pm
Fox wrote:
No, it's not any sketchier than any other political group, and I'm not sure why you're so obsessed with it. Even if it turned out to be 100 percent fake, it wouldn't change my basic argument -- the fact that moderate liberals seem indistinguishable from conservatives -- which you haven't addressed at all.


You've brought up #WalkAway in at least 6 different threads. No other poster has ever raised the subject. I hardly think Marina is the one obsessed.
Back to top

Fox









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 9:08 pm
marina wrote:
But when the reasons given for a particular societal problem are not associated exclusively with democrats or liberals, you - and others - disparage them by claiming it's all part of victimhood culture.

Like if we discuss why minorities are more likely to be in prison or on government assistance and come up with a viewpoint or policy associated with extreme conservatism (e.g. institutionalized racism), very often the automatic response is OH VICTIM CULTURE, PUT YOUR BIG BOY PANTS ON AND GO GET A JOB. If the viewpoint or policy is associated with liberals, though, aha, then we are just statistically examining the policy's efficacy, of course and it is so terrible what those awful liberals have done to minorities, isn't it?

Now we've shifted our focus to "extreme conservatism," I see.

Here's what I think: I think many liberals just make up a composite conservative bogeyman based on stereotypes and constantly argue with this make-believe bogeyman. When confronted with evidence that people who identify as conservative don't really hold the opinions of their conjured bogeyman, they nitpick at the evidence.

Precisely who are all these mainstream conservative voices whose response to racial disparity is "OH VICTIM CULTURE, PUT YOUR BIG BOY PANTS ON AND GO GET A JOB"? And please don't post memes from right-wing nut-jobs.

Do you want to know what actual, real conservatives are discussing about racism these days?

* The impact of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 on black men and families.

* Related to the above, what kind of prison reform and post-prison assistance is most needed to shore up black families.

* The impact of illegal and/or unregulated immigration on entry-level and low-wage job opportunities.

* Rolling back federal, state, and local regulations that make it tough for minority entrepreneurs to get started. State licensing of hair braiders is a flashpoint issue related to this.

* Getting more capital for small business entrepreneurs into minority communities. Steve Bannon has been yakking about this for ages.

* How to give low-income minority parents more options for school choice and how to break the lockhold that teachers' unions have on large urban school districts.

* How to educate minority communities about investment and building wealth over generations.

* How liberals are so much quicker with the racial epithets than conservatives. Exhibit A: CNN panelists called Kanye West a "token Negro" today. Now, some conservatives like Kanye; others don't. But no serious conservative of any hue is calling a prominent black with whom he/she disagrees a "token Negro" and then claiming to be "punching up" or whatever.

Who are the people talking about these things?

Of course, Thomas Sowell, who's been at it forever. But also Larry Elder, Wayne Dupree, Rob Smith, Candace Owen, Stacey Dash, Sonnie Johnson, Brandon Tatum, Alveda King, and Kay James.

This is why the left is moribund. They want to complain about "institutional racism" while simultaneously fining a woman for trying to make a business by braiding hair in her kitchen. They want to shake their heads over poverty while simultaneously charging over $1K in business license fees to some guy who wants to sell hot dogs on a street corner. They want to wring their hands over lousy education in inner city schools and then let teachers' unions craft policies to keep incompetent teachers in place.

There is absolutely nothing I can say that will convince left-leaning Imamothers that various minority communities are developing deep pockets of conservatives. Any evidence I give will be picked apart and/or mocked. But in a number of districts, it would only take 4-5 more percentage points of African-American Republican votes to routinely elect conservatives. In other words, Repubicans don't need to convince every single minority group member -- they only need to convince a few.

As Sonnie Johnson put it, "Yeah, a lot of conservatives are rich, white men. But they want me to be a rich, black woman instead of a poor, black woman, and I'm gonna go with that."
Back to top

Mommyg8









  


Post  Wed, Oct 10 2018, 11:45 pm
southernbubby wrote:

I also don't live a fully conservative life, if conservatism means cutting off public aid to those who really need it, giving huge tax breaks to mega corporations, punishing illegal border jumpers by snatching their children, or forcing communities to retain Confederate statues when those statues represent something dark and horrible for them. I totally support students who want to change the names of schools named after Confederate generals. I think that courthouses should be free of such statues and icons.

Then there are areas that I consider challenging because of the cost of implementing them such as universal health care and gun control. Neither of those are bad things in and of themselves; just hard to implement for many reasons, one of which being that we make political issues out of everything today.


I saw this post this morning but didn't get a chance to respond until now. I also didn't read through all the posts, so I apologize in advance if I am repeating something...

I used to be a die-hard conservative who believed everything I heard on Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and Mark Levine, but as I've got older I'm questioning them more and more. I'm wondering if they have gotten more rigid and right wing, or if it's actually me that has changed. Or maybe I've just become more educated. For example, I've heard Rush Limbaugh argue passionately that the healthcare system should be completely reliant on market forces, but I don't see a way for that to happen in America today based on the reality of how modern medicine actually works. I think that many many people are not getting the healthcare they need, or are not able to afford healthcare, and this should be addressed. I've also heard Mark Levine argue for following the constitution exactly. I'm not an attorney, but I get the feeling that the process is a bit more complicated then that. Society changes, and laws have to change with it. It seems to me that you can argue any way you want to say what the constitution really meant. I also see that conservatives deny that there is discrimination. I personally have seen discrimination against one group only - and that group is black.

On the other hand, the Democratic party has swung so far to the left that it is hard for me to understand how anyone here on imamother, women who are raised, or acquired, a Torah value system, can align themselves, even a little bit, with the liberal agenda. It is hard for me to understand how anyone here can be on the side of children being taught about gender identity, of allowing children to change their gender, or of same sx bathrooms. It is hard for me to understand how anyone frum can be on the side of a party that wants to not allow us to teach our Yiddishkeit according to our mesorah, and to introduce parts to our curriculum that go against everything that we frum Jews believe in.

I wish there was a group of sane people who are somewhere in the middle - committed to trying to help the poor without bankrupting the government, committed to enacting regulations without choking businesses, committed to come up with a real healthcare answer that will actually work. It seems to me - and this is one of the reasons I voted for Trump - that Trump was actually trying to address some of these issues in a nonpartisan way. He talked about developing infrastructure - which never actually happened, perhaps it will - which is actually something this country needs badly. I think that upgraded infrastructure should be much more of a priority than enacting regulations that washing machines can't actually use water to wash clothes. He spoke about fixing the healthcare system. He spoke about fixing the economy. Balancing trade imbalances. Unfortunately, it seems to take a crazy person today to actually see the truth.

I would also like to address some of the things you mentioned.

Cutting off public aid to those who need it: well, I'm pro a safety net. But there has to be a responsible safety set. Many of the programs that were designed to help the poor ended up actually hurting them. The problem seems to be that once a program is in place, it can't be rescinded (anyone reminded of Achashveirosh?) But in an ideal world, there should be an evaluation of different programs to see if they actually help, and if not, those programs should be taken away. What is happening instead is that the government is becoming more and more bloated, some people are benefiting, but many, many more are not.

Giving huge tax breaks to mega corporations: It sounds bad, but the actual reality is a lot more complicated then that. This is not Reagan's "trickle down economics" which, as others have pointed out, doesn't really work. This is more about acknowledging the reality of the global economy and how the United States will miss out on taxes - yes taxes - if companies go overseas. We have to remain competitive if we want corporations to want to do business in America. Besides, it's not just mega corporations that got a tax break but many mid size and even small businesses that have gotten lower taxes as well.

Another thing about corporate tax - and here is a secret that accountants know - many industries have lobbied for intensive tax cuts already, way before Trump became president, in the form of allowable deductions. Two industries that have benefited tremendously from these tax laws are the pharmaceutical industry and the real estate industry. Many of the companies in these industries are huge, and are making enormous profits. But these kind of things don't make headlines.

As for separating children from parents - this seems to have been a law that was already on the books, if I'm not mistaken? How can you fault an administration for - wait for this - enforce the law? And didn't Obama send back more illegal immigrants that any of his precedents? While I do fault Trump for inciting the masses on this issue, at the end of the day everybody was just enforcing the law. Enforcing the law - isn't that a good thing? Or it should be?

And universal health care is another issue that I don't think that anyone is actually trying to solve...
Back to top

Jeanette









  


Post  Thu, Oct 11 2018, 12:28 am
Quote:
As for separating children from parents - this seems to have been a law that was already on the books, if I'm not mistaken? How can you fault an administration for - wait for this - enforce the law? And didn't Obama send back more illegal immigrants that any of his precedents? While I do fault Trump for inciting the masses on this issue, at the end of the day everybody was just enforcing the law. Enforcing the law - isn't that a good thing? Or it should be?


I am just going to respond to this point.

I just read today that drug enforcement at the border is way down since Trump introduced his zero tolerance policies.

https://www.usatoday.com/story.....521128002/

Wasn't this the ostensible reason for upping border enforcement? "They're not sending their best... They're bringing crime, they're bringing drugs." And yet the administration chose to divert resources from stopping drugs at the border (which we can ALL agree is a good thing) to stopping mothers with children from crossing. And money wasn't diverted only from drug enforcement.

https://www.washingtonpost.com.....b226df5793

Quote:
DHS requested that about $9.8 million going toward FEMA efforts such as “Preparedness and Protection” and “Response and Recovery” be funneled instead into ICE coffers, specifically underwriting “Detention Beds” and the agency’s “Transportation and Removal Program.” The U.S. Secret Service was also a beneficiary of the reallocation.


https://www.nbcnews.com/politi.....on-n909016

Quote:
Many of the transfers came from key national security programs, including $1.8 million from the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, $9.8 million from FEMA, $29 million from the U.S. Coast Guard and more than $34 million from several TSA programs. DHS also transferred $33 million from other ICE programs to pay for detention and removal, making the total amount of money transferred $202 million.


As far as enforcing the laws, there are many laws on the books. Every administration makes decisions about what to prioritize. Is it more important to go after drug smugglers or after mothers bringing children into the country? Do we want funds to go towards disaster preparedness or to detain migrants? As a country, as a society, we need to think about what we want law enforcement to focus on and where we want our resources to go.

Speaking of law and order, white collar crime is the least prosecuted crime in this country. Right now the NYS attorney general is looking into the Trump Foundation and the Trump organization for fraud and tax evasion going back many decades. Maybe we should start enforcing those laws.
Back to top

sushilover









  


Post  Thu, Oct 11 2018, 9:01 am
southernbubby wrote:
Just imagine the lawsuits chas v'sholem, against shadchanim who will only set up men with women.


I never thought of that!!
Back to top

sushilover









  


Post  Thu, Oct 11 2018, 9:08 am
SixOfWands wrote:
Exactly.

Who cares? Presumably, your children will be identified as male or female. Also, presumably, you will ensure that your children marry persons of the appropriate gender.

If someone believes that s/he is not "gender binary," and wants that on their birth certificate, or if someone believes that gender is an artificial construct, or whatever it is, why does it affect you. Who cares.

Frankly, for all I care, they could put X on my kids' birth certificates. Anyone who needs to know their genders will.


I agree with you 100 percent. I don't think that gender is an artificial construct, but that's the beauty of America, you can think so, and we can still live in the same country.

The problem arises when the government gets involved and compels me to be involved in someone's gender change ceremony, compels stores to allow males to enter female bathrooms, compels teachers to teach that gender is a social construct, compels me to say certain things, or compels me to support my minor child's gender change.

America is not there YET for most of the examples above, thank G-d. But can we agree now that this is not the place for government's involvement?
Back to top

sushilover









  


Post  Thu, Oct 11 2018, 9:31 am
I identify as a conserva/tarian.

-I believe in individualism and personal liberty above almost all else.
-I believe that the federal government has gotten too powerful , specifically the executive branch.
-I believe that equality of opportunity is more important than equality of outcome.
-I believe that everyone has the right to marry whomever they wish, but I have the right to not be involved in their marriage.
-I support 2A rights, but don't see why we can't have mandatory firearms training for every gun owner (mandated by each state, not federally- though)
-I would love open borders basically, (except for dangerous people) as long as we have a truly free market.
-More realistically, I believe Dreamers should not be deported en masse, nor legalized en masse, but on a case by case basis. The ones who contribute positively to society should become legal immigrants, and the adults who have negative impact should be deported.
-Climate change is real, but many of the solutions being proposed will do more harm and/or are not based on solid science.
-Women have the right to do whatever they would like with their bodies unless it involves another human life- then it's not so black and white. The unborn are human beings and cannot be killed unless there is a serious threat to the physical or mental health of the mother.
Back to top
  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next  Last >> Recent Topics

Page 3 of 8 View latest: 24h 48h 72h


Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Interesting Discussions

Similar Topics Replies Last Post
[ Poll ] Are you a liberal or conservative?
by yo'ma
65 Wed, Dec 09 2015, 11:40 pm View last post
Spinoff: Defining Secular 3 Tue, Oct 14 2014, 6:47 am View last post
Defining lashon hara
by ora_43
1 Fri, Feb 06 2009, 7:40 am View last post
Defining Modern Orthodox (in haskafa, not practice)
by Atali
256 Thu, Nov 29 2007, 1:01 pm View last post
by gryp
Republican Diversity: Great Liberal Coverup 0 Fri, Nov 11 2016, 1:20 am View last post

Jump to:  



Report offensive ad