Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Barack Obama and the Progressive Dwarfs

LionLion Registered User regular
edited July 2011 in Debate and/or Discourse
This thread is for those of us on the left to bitch about President Obama. I’d like it if we could hurl valid criticism about his Presidential agenda but not forget the good things his administration has done. Let’s talk about his tactics with Congress. Let’s talk about his tactics with the American people.

We can even use this to gauge the enthusiasm for Obama’s re-election campaign as it pertains to the Penny Arcade Forums.

Round 1

Lilly Ledbetter vs. Libya.

Healthcare vs. Homosexual Acceptance.

Corporations vs. Other Corporations.

Round 2

Alliterations vs. Melosingagainstalitterations

All This

And more! Like how I don’t really know if I want to volunteer for the campaign again like I did in ‘08.

PSN: WingedLion | XBL: Winged Lion
Lion on
«1345

Posts

  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    My only real complaint about the man is that he believes in the magical unity pony, and every time you see him get pissed that it doesn't exist.. he suddenly starts believing again the next time an issue arises. He wants to be a uniting centrist figure in American politics. He's just in the absolute wrong decade for it.

  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    kildy wrote:
    My only real complaint about the man is that he believes in the magical unity pony, and every time you see him get pissed that it doesn't exist.. he suddenly starts believing again the next time an issue arises. He wants to be a uniting centrist figure in American politics. He's just in the absolute wrong decade for it.

    Will that decade ever come? Someone needs to slap some sense into the political system at some point. It's not going to fix itself.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    People obsess too much about the President. If the median member of Congress was as liberal as the President is, policy would be fucking awesome right now.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    Drez wrote:
    kildy wrote:
    My only real complaint about the man is that he believes in the magical unity pony, and every time you see him get pissed that it doesn't exist.. he suddenly starts believing again the next time an issue arises. He wants to be a uniting centrist figure in American politics. He's just in the absolute wrong decade for it.

    Will that decade ever come? Someone needs to slap some sense into the political system at some point. It's not going to fix itself.

    I was thinking he's a few decades late more than our system will magically become far better. He's just trying to unity pony with a group that has openly declared they don't give a shit about any stance other than him failing. What I don't get is how an obviously smart man doesn't say "huh, that wasn't just a tough political soundbyte, they actually just want to kill anything my name is on, even if I try and make National Reagan Month" and stop trying to play nice with them.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    It's hard to be a unity pony when you're black. Race has defined American politics since the country's founding, in many ways it still defines American politics. He's a bit too optimistic on that front, sure. But seriously: Congress!

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
  • nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    It really is frustrating that the President is the be-all end-all in most Americans minds. A day doesn't pass before someone makes a post on my facebook about "if Obama REALLY cared about the debt ceiling he would stop getting paid instead of refusing to pay Medicare or military pay" or how the healthcare reform bill was "his" even before he even looked the thing over.

    Quire.jpg
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    It's hard to be a unity pony when you're black. Race has defined American politics since the country's founding, in many ways it still defines American politics. He's a bit too optimistic on that front, sure. But seriously: Congress!

    Oh, I'm FAR more upset with the children in congress and their idiotic honor systems and current desire to just see how much they can fuck up the system in order to prove it can be fucked up.

    I was just being on topic for the thread. The worst thing I can really say about the president is the unity pony shit just isn't going to happen, no matter how much he wishes it would. Beyond that? I pretty much got what I voted for, he's a pretty driven centrist who is willing to push some seriously good things through when he can get the political capital to do so(what the ACA wound up as), or find a loophole to maul it (Hi DOMA)

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    People obsess too much about the President. If the median member of Congress was as liberal as the President is, policy would be fucking awesome right now.

    Yeah, I think the biggest problem is Obama is the wrong candidate for the current political climate.

  • LionLion Registered User regular
    It's a little morbidly funny that the DLC has died yet Obama is considered a centrist and, even, a master of triangulation according to an article I read the other day. I had to make sure Mark Penn wasn't the author.

    PSN: WingedLion | XBL: Winged Lion
  • zerg rushzerg rush Registered User regular
    edited July 2011
    Man, fuck Obama.


    He's better than what the other people put up, but warrantless wiretapping and state secrets? And the right to assassinate American citizens outside of a battlefield without even trial in absentia? Fuck you Mr President. If I'd wanted the office of the president to make power grabs and shit all over the constitution again, I'd have voted R.

    zerg rush on
  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    zerg rush wrote:
    Man, fuck Obama.


    He's better than what the other people put up, but warrantless wiretapping and state secrets? And the right to assassinate American citizens outside of a battlefield without even trial in absentia? Fuck you Mr President. If I'd wanted the office of the president to make power grabs and shit all over the constitution again, I'd have voted R.

    one-ring.jpg

    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    LOL given his first executive order I find that really amusing.

    If I was kidnapped, woke up in a lab, told they were going to replace my vocal cords with those of Tony Jay, and lock me in a sound booth until the day I die I would look those bastards right in the eye and say "Alright you sons of bitches lets do this. This one is for the children."
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited July 2011
    zerg rush wrote:
    Man, fuck Obama.


    He's better than what the other people put up, but warrantless wiretapping and state secrets? And the right to assassinate American citizens outside of a battlefield without even trial in absentia? Fuck you Mr President. If I'd wanted the office of the president to make power grabs and shit all over the constitution again, I'd have voted R.
    Federal executive authority has, to my knowledge, never taken a backstep in this country.

    Which is why we should be really goddamn careful about what authority we allow them to have, because once they get it it's never going away.

    But we're such a bunch of sissies that we freak out and hand the President all sorts of powers everytime there's a minor crisis, and then we wonder why our civil liberties are eroding.

    Because we fucking handed them over, that's why. And once they're gone, we're never getting them back because a strong majority of the electorate (on a bipartisan basis) wants a Monarch, not a President. They just want to make sure it's their guy/girl so they can throw extra powers at them, and then bitch up a storm when the position changes hands and now the other team has gobs and gobs of power because they were incredibly shortsighted.

    Churchill was right; the best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Big thing I didn't like about him for a long time was his inability to "lead". Punting DADT to Congress, for example. Now I can understand why he does it, and forcing the House and Senate to take the lead on issues really exposes the amount of pointless political theater that happens.

    I still really dislike the guy, but he's done things I approve. Sadly, he's kept a pretty tight grip on plenty of Bush and Bush like initiatives. For a socialist, the guy sure is a very Nixonian Republican.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • AtomikaAtomika not a robot. does not eat bugs!Registered User regular
    Sheep wrote:
    For a socialist, the guy sure is a very Nixonian Republican.

    In the future (i.e., when the elderly holy-rollers and bigots die off), I can see Obama's politics defining the new Right Wing.

    Obama is the quintessential 1960s Republican, outside of the whole being a Black democrat thing.

  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    It's unrealistic to expect a sitting president to ever roll back the power of the executive. So while it's disappointing when we don't exactly get the presidential version of mr smith goes to washington, it's not like it we should've expected it anyway.

    What is disappointing is that obama's (apparently) willing to use his office to continue bush-esque security policy, but not to end DADT or bring this debt extension fight to an end or manage economic policy in a way that makes sense.

    NREqxl5.jpg
    do you lack faith, brother?
    or do you believe?
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    People obsess too much about the President. If the median member of Congress was as liberal as the President is, policy would be fucking awesome right now.

    I'm sorry, but this is just a load of crap. Barack Obama is not, in any sense, a liberal - and in every sense, an abysmal right-winger who is simply killing your country at a slower pace than the lunatics on the fascist side of the aisle would.

    Who was, until he finally had to leave because he couldn't be kept from beaking-off at the people who got Obama elected in the first place, Obama's staunchly defended chief of staff? Rahm Emanuel. Who's his treasury secretary? Timothy Geitner. Who was hand-picked as the director for Obama's National Economic Council? Larry Summers. Who did Obama re-appoint as the head of the Federal Reserve? Ben Bernanke. Who has he retained as the head of the DEA? Michele Leonhart. Who has he brought-in as the head of the CIA (replacing Stephen Kappes)? Michael Morell. Who has he retained as the director of the FBI? Robert Mueller.

    I name these particulars because they can't just be waved-off as the result of senate dickery - they were his decisions and, in many cases, they were made in a very proactive manner. So, how can you justify these appointments, ebum? If he's such a liberal, why are his appointees all right-wing fanatics and demagogues? Why are his economic advisors & policy makers somehow all coincidentally Friedmanites who staunchly believe in the Invisible Hand of the free market and it's ability to sculpt paradise?

    Iraq's Green Zone remains as insane as ever, Guantanamo Bay (which illegally sits on the soil of a foreign country) still retains it's unlawfully held 'guests' of the state, the domestic surveillance programs continue unabated, Obama seems to agree with the notion that Julian Assange and his collaborators are somehow 'terrorists' because they dared to bring the public information on what the government that they pay for is doing... what was there to like about any of his policies, again?

    I guess I can agree with the No Fly Zone being imposed over Libya in order to support the rebels, but that wasn't Obama's plan, so he can hardly take credit for it.

    With Love and Courage
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    Eh, he's not as liberal as I'd like on some things, and he's been about as awful as Bush on stuff involvingexecutive power, and he seems way too accommodating and/or prone to caving to the right. That said, considering the hate and lock-step obstruction he's received from the right, he's gotten a lot done,

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • AtomikaAtomika not a robot. does not eat bugs!Registered User regular
    Obama is about as functionally "liberal" as a Democrat can get while still accomplishing anything meaningful in Congress.

    Your progressiveness is only as functional as the people you compromise with. Obama just happens to be stuck with an incredibly obstinate Congress that would rather set themselves on fire than make rational concessions to advance a mutual goal.

  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    wwtMask wrote:
    Eh, he's not as liberal as I'd like on some things, and he's been about as awful as Bush on stuff involvingexecutive power, and he seems way too accommodating and/or prone to caving to the right. That said, considering the hate and lock-step obstruction he's received from the right, he's gotten a lot done,

    Can you name those things? The 'lot of things' (presumably positive things) he's accomplished?

    With Love and Courage
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2011
    There's that "What has Obama Done for Me" website, but it's painfully outdated and, worse, outright incorrect due to Obama's own legislation. First one that popped up for me was "Closed Guantanamo". The second was "Ended harsh interrogation methods". Well, he may have, and he certainly didn't think they were crimes. "Increased minorities access to capital" doesn't even make any fucking sense considering the past year or so of legislation. "Credit Card Bill of Rights" that congress recently watered down tremendously. And finally, before I closed the page in disgust, "Lifted restrictions on Cuban families". Yeah. By otherwise continuing the embargo? Uh, okay.

    Sheep on
    QlBGc.jpg
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    Guys, he's center left. He's pragmatic to the point of caving sometimes (especially in the name of compromise and unity and whatnot), but he's not conservative. It's clear that he knows the difference between what he wants, and what he can do. And I guess that's part of the problem. When you start from the position of "I know I can't get everything I want", then there is the implicit acknowledgement that the other side will get concessions.

    torchlight-sig-80.jpg
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited July 2011
    Obama is left wing for this country. He has always portrayed himself as a liberal centrist so I can't complain about the shit he tries being fairly centrist.

    Most of the problems aren't going to be fixed by a mere change in power and would require reforms to the political system. For example, turnout is resulting in many more extremist members of Congress due to the crazies voting in droves compared to the ordinary poor people and moderates. The possible solution of mandatory voting like in many other countries would be immediately killed by Republicans because it would harm them.
    outright incorrect due to Obama's own legislation. First one that popped up for me was "Closed Guantanamo".
    That was due to COngress preventing him from having the funds to do so, wasn't it?

    Couscous on
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2011
    Guys, he's center left.

    He's a state capitalist. Nothing Left about him.
    That was due to COngress preventing him from having the funds to do so, wasn't it?

    It's still open so I don't know how to give the guy credit for closing it.

    Sheep on
    QlBGc.jpg
  • DigitalDDigitalD Registered User
    Obama was always a centrist and never a progressive, people just projected what they wanted him to be onto him and then got let down. If you want liberal legislation in 2012 changing congress won't be enough, you need a new president, or at least a primary challenge strong enough to give him pause for thought.

    This is one area the Tea Party has been extremely effective. They've flat out put on notice that any Republican who doesn't shift to the right is going to get their ass primary'd no matter the cost or the risk, and as such they are getting what they want.

  • azith28azith28 Registered User regular
    When he first was elected, I was willing to give him a chance...mostly because i was curious how a genuinely unexperienced person would do in the job.

    He quickly demonstrated that he thinks hes on a reality show. Hes the Paris Hilton of presidents (Sometimes Parez Hilton). Half the stuff he says is just to get attention cause hes a total attention whore. The first two years of his presidency i was more worried about congress then him because he seemed to just be enjoying the spotlight and signing whatever congress did. When the Dems got kicked from the house and lost supermajority he started taking center stage but most of his decisions have been downright stupid politically. (Trying to save that pedophile/child killer from execution in texas, ignoring the debt problem until the last minutes, Keeping Guantamino open etc).

    Granted his policies have been heavily liberal, a stance im generally against anyway so im still curious how someone with a conservative background would act in these times...but generally he certainly hasnt given me a whole lot of hope that we could one day stop making 'political dynasties' and go back to people who did actual work before choosing to work for the government as a service.

    Stercus, Stercus, Stercus, Morituri Sum
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2011
    I agree with you about the Tea Party's effectiveness. The fact that they've almost reached a level of support that almost makes them a legitimate third party is impressive, and good for the nation in itself, not necessarily their POV.

    However, it's not the public's fault that the perception of Obama was "progressive". Let's not forget that huge HUGE PR campaign painting him as "different". Hope and Change. Remember? We were a country that was governed from center and center right positions. What was the "change" supposed to be, then?

    I don't understand how his policies were really any more "Liberal". He increased funding for lots of federal programs. That's about it. He still opposes gay marriage. He's publicly said so. That doesn't help the national debate on DOMA much. As mentioned above, he's been more than happy to crack the whip at the DEA and reinstate it's draconian laws, despite publicly saying otherwise. He's deported more illegal immigrants that Bush. He's shut down online poker.

    That's not liberal in the slightest.

    Sheep on
    QlBGc.jpg
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    Congress wouldn't appropriate any money to move guantanamo detainees to U.S. soil, because apparently federal supermaxes aren't secure enough.

    Guantanamo's going to be a hideous mess to resolve and nobody wants to deal with it. Closing it means figuring out what to do with the detainees, which means either trying them or outright releasing them. Trying them in any reasonable court is going to result in an awful lot of acquittals, and just sending them back wherever they came from (to the extent we even know) looks even worse.

    NREqxl5.jpg
    do you lack faith, brother?
    or do you believe?
  • Modern ManModern Man Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote:
    I'm sorry, but this is just a load of crap. Barack Obama is not, in any sense, a liberal - and in every sense, an abysmal right-winger who is simply killing your country at a slower pace than the lunatics on the fascist side of the aisle would.
    You've derailed if you think Obama is a right-winger, by any standard. He's about as left-wing in his policies as the political climate and the status of Congress allow him to be.

    The Democrats and Obama are coming off of a disastrous mid-term election. Did you expect him to make a hard left turn after what happened last November?

    Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
    Rigorous Scholarship

  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Made a center governing president move further to the right.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • DigitalDDigitalD Registered User
    Sheep wrote:
    I agree with you about the Tea Party's effectiveness. The fact that they've almost reached a level of support that almost makes them a legitimate third party is impressive, and good for the nation in itself, not necessarily their POV.

    However, it's not the public's fault that the perception of Obama was "progressive". Let's not forget that huge HUGE PR campaign painting him as "different". Hope and Change. Remember? We were a country that was governed from center and center right positions. What was the "change" supposed to be, then?

    I don't understand how his policies were really any more "Liberal". He increased funding for lots of federal programs. That's about it. He still opposes gay marriage. He's publicly said so. That doesn't help the national debate on DOMA much. As mentioned above, he's been more than happy to crack the whip at the DEA and reinstate it's draconian laws, despite publicly saying otherwise. He's deported more illegal immigrants that Bush. He's shut down online poker.

    That's not liberal in the slightest.

    Change was not supposed to be a move to the left. I didn't read it as that ever. I read the change as in stopping the gridlock and the arguing between left and right and the partisanship. Which is what he campaigned on.

    He didn't campaign on progressive squat all. He gave a good speech, great way to permanently lock up the black vote, didn't have the stench of the war on him, wasn't a Clinton thus creating another dynasty, and was a change from Bush.

    But he never really said "change means we change to progressives" ever. KOS and other liberal blogs claimed that, and that he'd turn progressive in office, but those guys are all morons. He turned out to be exactly what he ran on, a centrist that was going to try to end partisanship and bring people together.

    He hasn't done a good job of that either, and it's not entirely his fault.

  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    This idea that Obama's liberalism is just being restrained by congress doesn't really agree with reality.

    I mean I get that when we come to actual legislation, Congress bears most of the responsibility. I don't blame Obama for not getting the perfect health care bill through congress, for example.

    But not everything the president does has to be approved by congress, and the executive's policymaking apparatus hasn't exactly been a font of liberalism under obama either.

    NREqxl5.jpg
    do you lack faith, brother?
    or do you believe?
  • Bionic MonkeyBionic Monkey Registered User, ClubPA
    azith28 wrote:
    When he first was elected, I was willing to give him a chance...mostly because i was curious how a genuinely unexperienced person would do in the job.

    He quickly demonstrated that he thinks hes on a reality show. Hes the Paris Hilton of presidents (Sometimes Parez Hilton). Half the stuff he says is just to get attention cause hes a total attention whore. The first two years of his presidency i was more worried about congress then him because he seemed to just be enjoying the spotlight and signing whatever congress did. When the Dems got kicked from the house and lost supermajority he started taking center stage but most of his decisions have been downright stupid politically. (Trying to save that pedophile/child killer from execution in texas, ignoring the debt problem until the last minutes, Keeping Guantamino open etc).

    Whut? He's taken incredible steps to stay out of the spot light for his entire administration. Frustratingly so, when simply stepping up and throwing his weight around a little bit would accomplish what a dead locked Congress could not.
    Granted his policies have been heavily liberal, a stance im generally against anyway so im still curious how someone with a conservative background would act in these times...but generally he certainly hasnt given me a whole lot of hope that we could one day stop making 'political dynasties' and go back to people who did actual work before choosing to work for the government as a service.

    Oh, I see. Another conservative that claims to have voted for him, and now regrets the decision. It's amazing how many of you are coming out of the woodwork.

    sig_megas_armed.jpg
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    I like how he framed public sector work as not really work.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • Dignified PauperDignified Pauper Registered User regular
    Barack the Senator was much more liberal thinking than Barack the President. Somehow, his centrism hasn't been centrist at all, it's been moderate right. This is because, as Paul Krugman wrote, that the cult of centrism isn't centrist at all, but rather being pulled so far right to accommodate crazy silly goose Republican Tea Partiers that have no sense at all.

    PSN: DignifiedPauper
    3DSFF: 5026-4429-6577
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Exactly. Republicans like to crow about how this is a "center right" country. That's only been true for the past 30 or so years, and only after 50 or so years of awe inspiring PR from America's right wing.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • BagginsesBagginses __BANNED USERS regular
    DigitalD wrote:
    Sheep wrote:
    I agree with you about the Tea Party's effectiveness. The fact that they've almost reached a level of support that almost makes them a legitimate third party is impressive, and good for the nation in itself, not necessarily their POV.

    However, it's not the public's fault that the perception of Obama was "progressive". Let's not forget that huge HUGE PR campaign painting him as "different". Hope and Change. Remember? We were a country that was governed from center and center right positions. What was the "change" supposed to be, then?

    I don't understand how his policies were really any more "Liberal". He increased funding for lots of federal programs. That's about it. He still opposes gay marriage. He's publicly said so. That doesn't help the national debate on DOMA much. As mentioned above, he's been more than happy to crack the whip at the DEA and reinstate it's draconian laws, despite publicly saying otherwise. He's deported more illegal immigrants that Bush. He's shut down online poker.

    That's not liberal in the slightest.

    Change was not supposed to be a move to the left. I didn't read it as that ever. I read the change as in stopping the gridlock and the arguing between left and right and the partisanship. Which is what he campaigned on.

    He didn't campaign on progressive squat all. He gave a good speech, great way to permanently lock up the black vote, didn't have the stench of the war on him, wasn't a Clinton thus creating another dynasty, and was a change from Bush.

    But he never really said "change means we change to progressives" ever. KOS and other liberal blogs claimed that, and that he'd turn progressive in office, but those guys are all morons. He turned out to be exactly what he ran on, a centrist that was going to try to end partisanship and bring people together.

    He hasn't done a good job of that either, and it's not entirely his fault.

    Yeah, you'd have to be an idiot not to realize that he meant the the change was from the bullshit practices of "the decider."

  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited July 2011
    Change meant whatever you thought it meant. The Obama campaign did a brilliant job of being all things to all people, so to speak.

    Plenty of people during the campaign said Obama was less of a liberal/progressive than he was getting credit for. Most of them (including me) just underestimated the extent of his less-liberalness.

    ed: also saying that he didn't campaign on progressive issues is a bit of a stretch. His signature issue positions in the campaign were 1) a more government-oriented health care bill than clinton was proposing and 2) ending the iraq war.

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    do you lack faith, brother?
    or do you believe?
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    Sheep wrote:
    Exactly. Republicans like to crow about how this is a "center right" country. That's only been true for the past 30 or so years, and only after 50 or so years of awe inspiring PR from America's right wing.

    It isn't even true now, really. Americans are just as statist as any other western country, and in a lot of ways we're more socially permissive. But that doesn't align with our mythos about ourselves so we mostly ignore it.

    NREqxl5.jpg
    do you lack faith, brother?
    or do you believe?
«1345
Sign In or Register to comment.