Doth Protesting Too Much
by matt at 6:00 am on February 8th, 2006 in Podium Spin
I hadn’t originally planned to write about the passing of Coretta Scott King, not because it isn’t an important loss, but because I’m still mourning the void left behind by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. But the combination of the absurd reaction to a few of the speakers at her funeral and a memory from my childhood changed my mind.
I had the honor of meeting Mrs. King when I was maybe 10 years old. My family was flying to Florida on vacation and we had a connection in Atlanta. As we were making our way to the gate, a large entourage headed in our direction, clearly surrounding a VIP. But it wasn’t anyone I knew; in fact my father had to explain who it was. At that young an age, I had only a vague understanding of Dr. King, and even less of a clue as to why his wife warranted the attention shown to her by nearly everyone else in the terminal. But when I noticed my father’s reaction, it hit me: my father, not known for his enlightened stance on race or gender relations was awestruck by a black woman. I don’t remember much else about that day, but that feeling will be with me for the rest of my life. Some people are so special that they transcend prejudice, class and racial lines, and plain old bad habits. For continuing her late husband’s work long after his death, Mrs. King was certainly one of those people. Through hard work against an unrelenting tide of opposition, she, like Dr. King, left the world a better place than she found it.
At her funeral on Tuesday, 10,000 people packed an Atlanta-area church, including President George W. Bush and former Presidents Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton. Many distinguished leaders, both political and religious, gave speeches eulogizing Mrs. King. Clinton challenged us to “model her behavior” and Carter reminded us that both Dr. and Mrs. King “…changed America, [but] were not appreciated even at the highest level of government. It was difficult for them personally — with the civil liberties of both husband and wife violated as they became the target of secret government wiretapping, other surveillance…and as you know, harassment from the FBI.” But the speaker who drew as much applause as Clinton and more ire from Republicans was Reverend Joseph Lowery:
“We know now there were no weapons of mass destruction over there [standing ovation]…
But Coretta knew and we know that there are weapons of misdirection right down here.
Millions without health insurance. Poverty abounds.
For war billions more but no more for the poor.”
Not surprisingly, Lowery’s quote has the right in a frenzy. Apparently this is one of those times that they like to talk about on The Daily Show where the facts are biased. Setting aside the WMD comment which is true, but an obvious rhetorical device, on what grounds can any sitting Republican criticize or refute Lowery’s points on the treatment of poor Americans, the overwhelming percentage of whom are black? Do they deny their own data showing that the rates of those in poverty and lacking insurance are rising? Are they forgetting the foundation of their ruling majority, the racist “southern strategy,” that despite chatter to the contrary is still in full effect? Are we supposed to pretend that we didn’t hear their post-Katrina comments filled with discrimination, hate and condescension? And as long as we’re on the subject, would they rather we not ask why Bush used a recess appointment to put racist judge Charles Pickering on the federal appellate bench on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. day, 2004?
These are all things that Dr. and Mrs. King spent their lives fighting. Who could argue that these ideas didn’t belong at her funeral? Well, Rush Limbaugh, Kate O’Beirne, Glenn Reynolds, Michelle Malkin, Redstate and many more. I guess we’re just supposed to think these things rather than say them.
Remember, funerals for Republican politicians can be 14-day-long advertisements that result in sainthood, but should any Democrat dare speak a political word, look out.
It’s time for Republicans to get real on race. Pandering for votes and feigning outrage while supporting racist political strategies and allowing poverty to rise with each new year are incompatible.
Fernando wrote:
Nice analysis, Matt. When I read a write-up of the funeral off of the WaPo yesterday, I knew it was going to ignite a big shitstorm from the right. If Dubya’s handlers thought that critcisms like these weren’t going to come up, especially in the wake of Katrina, then they were kidding themselves. He was clearly prepped, however; every account I read said that he seemed to take it in stride, although Laura looks mightily peeved in that photo you have above.
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 6:23 am ¶
JimC wrote:
This *whole* deal is typical of the left, take cheap shots at inappropriate times. I would like to see a poll to find out how many Americans felt that was an appropriate thing to say at a such an event. But I’m sure that will not happen…
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 6:39 am ¶
matt wrote:
>I would like to see a poll
we’re polling funerals now? just because something is on television doesn’t mean that it is up for negotiation.
i notice that you took a pass on addressing the substance of what i wrote. telling.
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 6:42 am ¶
JimC wrote:
>i notice that you took a pass on addressing the substance of what i wrote. telling.
The old Republicans are racists game, is well, old…I’m sure you’ve already heard this but…Condi Rice is not *white*, eeek, neither is Gen. Powell, doh! In fact GW has more minorities in his admin than Clinton, NOOOO!!!! Racist, give me a break…only the drama seekers and those who wish to exploit the tragic events of the hurricanes are screaming racism to gain votes…pathetic.
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 6:51 am ¶
matt wrote:
so you’re taking a pass on the substance i see
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 6:55 am ¶
JimC wrote:
Whatever, apparently you need to explain it to me….I’m slow you know…
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 7:00 am ¶
sarabeth wrote:
More to the point, if the results don’t accord with what you want to see, you’ll dismiss it, like you have done every time we’ve seen that situation come up before.
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 7:32 am ¶
sarabeth wrote:
Take a break. Please. A long break.
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 7:36 am ¶
sarabeth wrote:
O father-figure Matt, forgive him, he knows not how easy it is to tell that he simply hasn’t read the post his comment is appended to.
Understandable, under the circumstances. He comes here only to sound off. To vent, not to read. So he saw the Lowery picture, assumed what the post must have said, and sailed straight through to comment.
He doesn’t have any idea that there was any discussion of the Repugnantican race strategy in the post other than in the context of Katrina.
Of course, since I’m talking about JimC I could have just shortened the previous para to “He doesn’t have any idea, period”.
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 7:48 am ¶
screwtape wrote:
I think Clinton nailed Laura after the whole thing was over. Notice in the photo where thay are all holding hands she is standing much closer to him than she is to her mouth-breathing husband. That explains the look on her face in the photo above it – anticipation of some REAL presidential lovin’. And we all know Bubba goes for those simple-minded southern women…
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 9:37 am ¶
JimC wrote:
I read thru the links and in summary, this appears to be someone’s “opinion” or conspiracy theory that Republicans have a racist agenda. Calling someone a racist does not make them so. If someone does not go to the NAACP annual meeting, does that make him a racist? Dunno, what if that meeting is typically hostile towards you and your party, then does that make you a racist, NO.
I find this whole line of “reporting” questionable. The southern Strategy from what I gasther from your posts is not a published republican stratgey unless I missed that somewhere, but more of an analysis of perceived behavior and from that it is merely opinion not fact. Again, I must point to GW’s most diverse racially administration as a counter to saying that he is racist.
At most this is unproven conspiracy….
Now, the most obvious question I have about these actual events, matt, sarabeth, all, was it appropriate to bring up politics at such a memorial service? Sure they had the right to say what they wanted, but was it appropriate….
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 9:44 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
the whole point of this post answers that question.
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 10:01 am ¶
matt wrote:
i’m not sure you did.
if you had bothered to read the links rather than sitting there hitting refresh like a chimp, you would have read about the chairman of your party acknowledging the southern strategy. he even mentions that it was racist and that republicans would have to do better. then came katrina and the quotes from prominent republicans chock full of racism. the conclusion and point of my post is certainly opinion, but the underlying informations is fact, mostly in the words of the very republicans who doth protest…
>Again, I must point to GW’s most diverse racially administration as a counter to saying that he is racist.
window dressing. kind of like faith without works
>was it appropriate to bring up politics at such a memorial service?
if you knew enough about what the kings stood for, you would know that the answer is obviously yes.
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 10:11 am ¶
Sarabeth Guthberg wrote:
(continuing from where Matt left off)
…and in case you don’t, their whole lives were dedicated to fighting the political fights necessary in order to win basic rights that no one should have needed to fight for, to encouraging people not only to stand up for their rights but actually exercise them.
So when you go “sure they had the right but…” you do indeed demonstrate (in upper case and in bold) that you just don’t get it.
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 10:42 am ¶
seamus wrote:
No, JimC is right. Bush only has a 2% approval rating among blacks because of propaganda from left-wing bloggers.
Bush LOVES black people! Look, he’s had Condi and Colin Powell working for him. Black people must be stupid not to realize this.
And some day soon, Congress may even have another black Republican. Any day now, just you wait.
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 1:23 pm ¶
Sarabeth Guthberg wrote:
Aw, give JimC credit where credit is due. He didn’t say that one black member in his cabinet at any given time proves Bush loves black people. It’s all them minorities in his cabinet (you know…the browns, and the sitting-down-pee-persons).
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 2:46 pm ¶
Sarabeth Guthberg wrote:
Question: How many JimC’s does it take to change a lightbulb?
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 2:47 pm ¶
Mark wrote:
Matt provides a link that provides a quote from the Chairman of the Republican party who admitted that the right tried to benefit politically from racial polarization and get the white vote during segregation, and JimC calls it an “unproven conspiracy.”
Damn … just … wow …
(On a side note, my work blocked this site … yet left Instacracker, Michelle “I Hate Brown People” Malkin and RedState unblocked. Good to see nothing’s changed in my absence.)
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 7:04 pm ¶
Fernando wrote:
Why do I always miss the good trolling? :(
I love that the party of Dick “F- you” Cheney is still this pissed off about how “impolite” the comments at the funeral were.
Posted 08 Feb 2006 at 9:51 pm ¶
marc wrote:
It’s a trick question. The fact that the lightbulb needs to be changed at all is a left-wing conspiracy.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 5:16 am ¶
sarabeth wrote:
Well, my official answer was supposed to be:
An unknown number, greater than one.
(As evidenced by the fact that his went out a long time ago, and he shows no signs of changing it any time soon.)
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 5:23 am ¶
Myself wrote:
Actually, You all are wrong!!!!
Condi and Colin are white. They got drafted by the white race in the race draft!! I saw it Live on the Chappelle show! :0)
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 6:18 am ¶
JimC wrote:
Condi and Gen, Powell, I’m sure they would be interested to hear your case as to how racist GW is….I’d love to hear that conversation…
Man it must just suck for you guys, having this racists moron who keeps getting his way in charge, I feel for you, truly…
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 6:31 am ¶
JimC wrote:
So, I can assume by your claim of racism by the opinion of the chairman, that I can characterize what the Democrats are by what Howard Dean says and does….fair enough…
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 6:36 am ¶
matt wrote:
is this what passes for an argument? google shows 159,000 hits for “southern strategy”
look at the facts, realize you’re in a deep hole, and stop digging. your party is racist to the core, and further they have no place criticizing what happened at someone’s funeral. do you hear the king sons/daughters complaining about what carter/lowery said? didn’t think so. in fact, no one is even disputing the substance of what they said. the best you all can do is “IT WAS INAPPROPRIATE”
boo-hoo
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 6:47 am ¶
JimC wrote:
Well, I’m glad you feel that way, please keep it up, this is why middle America came out and reelected W for a second term and why the democrats keep getting their butts handed to them at every turn. Its this attitude that fires up the base, so keep it up…please…
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 6:56 am ¶
JimC wrote:
>your party is racist to the core
Really? That’s news to me, but I thought Robert Byrd was a Democrat?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 6:59 am ¶
JimC wrote:
Furthermore, how freakin’ arrogant and elitist do you have to be to call Dr. Condi Rice and Gen. Powell token minorities and to discount their living proof of this Administration’s diversity. Such snobbish attitudes, I love it actually, like I said, this is why you guys keep loosing the battles…
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:03 am ¶
matt wrote:
yeah, that’s why. inappropriate funerals.
typical. things that happened 50 years ago = things that are happening right now. see byrd’s voting record on civil rights lately? of course not because that would involve doing research, and those damn facts are biased, aren’t they?
who cares what color they are when they participate and co-sign on the racist policies of their party? is it a coincidence that bush’s minority approval rate is a joke even with precious condi and general faithful?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:11 am ¶
JimC wrote:
I’m sure the people who care are the ones who you discount. The approval rating is as such because the left has consistantly lied to the blacks and kept them enslaved to their domestic policies.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:15 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
Okay, we’re losers. You rule. Now go away and stop kicking us while we’re down, Captain Awesome.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:17 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
Read: Black people are too stupid to see the truth.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:19 am ¶
matt wrote:
so the left can’t do ANYTHING right except fool black people into hating the president?
enslaved. and there we have it.
again, there are legitimate arguments that could be made here, and you are too ignorant/lazy to make them. you’re a parody.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:21 am ¶
screwtape wrote:
As pertains to the southern strategy he is stating a (an?) historic fact. It makes sense that you would deny this or write it off as opinion. In your crazy world nothing is a “hard fact” unless it supports one of your beliefs. Science, history, nothing. Everything you disagree with is just an opinion or theory.
I think it had more to do with the weekly elevated terror threat levels. Has anyone heard about those since the election, by the way?
Apparently as elite as us. So he hired two black people. What’s he done for the rest of them? He gave them Heckuvajob Brownie in NO.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:21 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
I know it’s already been said, but this is the weakest excuse for an argument I’ve ever seen. First you say the southern strategy is made up, then when faced with a brick wall, you say Ken Mehlman has no credibility in the party.
If not the chairman of the party, who is allowed to speak for the GOP? Can I get a list of names? Also, among those who do actually, really, truly, totally represent the GOP, who has made a statement about the Southern Strategy recently?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:25 am ¶
JimC wrote:
Did you watch the news last ngiht, there was a big chemical agent scare in DC…but that’s probably another ploy to get the focus off the NSA stuff…
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:39 am ¶
matt wrote:
do you, by chance, think we don’t notice when you duck direct questions? in most circles, that counts for tacit admission
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:41 am ¶
tom wrote:
i heard george bush smells like poop.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:47 am ¶
JimC wrote:
Racism isn’t the sole dominion of the Republican party, it exists outside of political parties, there are racists democrats and racistis republicans and racists indemependants…to claim racism based on a perceived strategy or based on one man’s comments or based on the opinion of a group does not prove racism as a republican strategy. I’m sure there is a strategy to around every voting block out there, but this is not racism, democrats do the same thing.
You can claim republicans are racists, it is fine with me, it is those who you discount (11% of the black vote in 2004 went to Bush) that should stand up and tell you where to go…but I’m not black therefore I can’t speak for them.
The argument that the Katrina response was race driven is just stupid garbage, I bet you believe that the government *blew up the levees* on purpose….whatever…
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 7:58 am ¶
matt wrote:
where exactly did i say that it was? but just because non-republicans are racist doesn’t change the fact that the republican party uses a thoroughly racist strategy to win elections.
maybe, maybe not. that’s why i did a google search for your lazy ignorant ass.
159,000 results don’t lie.
lest anyone think you just made that up out of thin air, protect your credibility with some kind of explanation. i’d hate for anyone to get the wrong idea
haha. this is something to be proud of? 89% voted for the other guy! yay! what is your argument here? 9 out of 10 black people didn’t like your candidate then and 98 or of 100 don’t like him now? which side are you even arguing?
because we’ve written about katrina how many times and not made that accusation? again, that shit isn’t going to work here. it’s quite clear that you’re aiming to get thrown out of here, and for the record, idiotic slanders like that are the best way to go about it.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 8:07 am ¶
screwtape wrote:
I did not watch the news. I do not have tv. But I did listen to the liberal elite news on PBS radio this morning.
Faulty equipment set off an alarm. Or was that just their opinion?
Not quite the same thing as Generalisimo Jefe coming out and saying we are now at Defcon Orange and that there is credible but not specific intel saying an attack is about to happen.
Really Jim, you aren’t even trying today.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 8:28 am ¶
JimC wrote:
Perhaps you should tell these Black conservatives that they are supporting a racists party…
http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21Index.html
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 8:34 am ¶
matt wrote:
either way, they’re still part of the 2%
perhaps you should look down and realize that you ran off the cliff a while back. discretion is the better part of valor…
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 8:36 am ¶
JimC wrote:
Google search on “elvis lives”. 135,000 hits,
does Elvis live?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 8:38 am ¶
matt wrote:
possibly in whatever mental plane you occupy. did you read anything about the southern strategy, or are you still on “it’s a myth”?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 8:41 am ¶
JimC wrote:
This is stupid, two white guys arguing about racism against blacks….I reject your claim outright that I or the party I support is racists, nothing you can do or any poll you cite is going to change my view and nothign I say will change yours, so, good day, I said good day!
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 8:43 am ¶
JimC wrote:
I’ll do independant research on Southern Strats…
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 8:44 am ¶
matt wrote:
so seriously, go away. the same could be said for anything we argue about here. the facts will always support what we choose to write about, and you will always ignore them in favor of faith and nonsense. stop wasting everyone’s time.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 8:45 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
So when the American Conservative Union comes out against the wiretapping program, they’re an insignificant minority. But when 2% of Blacks support bush, they prove the GOP isn’t racist?
Do I have that right, Jim?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 8:47 am ¶
JimC wrote:
>But when 2% of Blacks support bush, they prove the GOP isn’t racist?
First you have to prove that they are….your opinion that the GOP is racists doesn’t cut it…
I’m done with this argumetn, calling hte GOP racists is pure politics and opinion. I think it is racists to keep minorities strung along with campaign promises from ddemocrats only later to not deliver, or to fight for government welfare programs that keep them dependant on the government rather than provide a path to independence, but hey that’s just me….
This argument won’t be solved here and I am not, nor are you, qualified to make it unless perhaps you’re black…
Here are some other prime examples of racism
Dean Backer Calls GOP Candidate ‘House Mexican’
And here, no racism here…
More about racism against Michael Steele from the left…
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 9:40 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
So blacks are qualified to make the argument? Then I guess it’s good you linked to Steve Gilliard. Dude’s black.
Also, stop calling the Southern Strategy an opinion. The Southern Strategy is real, and nothing you can say will change that. This, on the other hand, is some motherfucking opinion:
And why do you say you’re done with the argument, right before you continue fighting it? How many Jim’s are in that little noggin of yours?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 9:49 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
PS I intentionally ignored your Fox News links. Shove them up your ass.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 9:51 am ¶
marc wrote:
They were the same race. That’s like me calling you a cracker.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 9:59 am ¶
sarabeth wrote:
This I don’t believe. You don’t even know how to throw a tantrum?
After you go “so, good day, I said good day!” you are required by international law to stomp offstage and sulk for a good long while (the rest of the day at least), not be back within one minute.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 10:04 am ¶
sarabeth wrote:
Didn’t stop you from making it though, did it?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 10:08 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
So blacks are the only ones allowed to argue about racism? Are the 98% that disapprove of Bush allowed to argue too, or just that 2%?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 10:17 am ¶
Ken wrote:
The Washington Post recently reported on a paper presented at this year’ annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology which showed that “supporters of President Bush and other conservatives had stronger self-admitted and implicit biases against blacks than liberals did.”
Of course, this could mean a lot of things (e.g., Dems are more in denial about race), but the study offers evidence that Republicans (and Bush supporters) *themselves* acknowledge their own racial bias.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 10:19 am ¶
screwtape wrote:
Man, I can hardly believe the beating Jim is taking today. He is really getting thrashed. It’s like Jimmy Walker against Mike Tyson. And Jimmy Walker is blindfolded with his hands tied behind his back.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 10:39 am ¶
JimC wrote:
P.S. You can fidn your own link to the story elsewhere. The racism still exists
WASHINGTON — In a variation on an old theme, a Hispanic supporter of Howard Dean called a Latina Republican Senate candidate a “house Mexican” who is not being true to her race.
And by the way, Mathew Tobey, I’ve concluded you must be about 12 years old or have Tourettes Syndrome, which is it?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 10:53 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
12? Tourettes? But, I thought I was an elitist. Which is it? You know, I live in Detroit, not far from Ohio. Let me know if you want to get together sometime and you can diagnose me in person. Nullus.
Do you find it peculiar that the only cases of alleged racism you were able to dig up are about hispanic comments abou hispanics and black comments about blacks? I do.
Also, I thought you were done with this argument.
Also, I thought only black people could argue about racism.
Also, Tourettes Syndrome is a real affliction that real people are struggling with every day. You know, kind of the way you struggle with classlessness.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 11:04 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
Jim doesn’t believe in studies and polls, except, of course, for the times when he does.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 11:05 am ¶
marc wrote:
That is an example of name-calling, not racism. Racism is not directed towards your own race.
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 11:06 am ¶
sarabeth wrote:
Jimmy, when people feel the need to start spelling out for you that 2+2 makes 4, that’s a bad sign.
BTW, does “2+2=4″ fall in the category of science you believe in or science that you don’t believe in?
How about “e=mc squared”?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 12:10 pm ¶
rob wrote:
i have called every place possible, from the detroit free press news desk (i too hail from the motored city) all the way up to the Barbara Bush Foundation in DC and no one can tell me why BBush wasn’t in the house for the services.
has anyone found the answer to this yet?
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 12:24 pm ¶
Nick in Beantown wrote:
Crackah, pleez!!
(sorry, I couldn’t help myself)
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 12:26 pm ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
That’s just a theory! Get it out of the schools!
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 12:30 pm ¶
JimC wrote:
Oh well, I guess Me and my racists pals will just sit over here watching you elitists dangle the carrot in front of the very poor you proclaim to champion….over and out
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 10:06 pm ¶
JimC wrote:
>I live in Detroit, not far from Ohio. Let me know if you want to get together sometime and you can diagnose me in person.
I’m only about 2 hours south of you, if you’re feeling spunky, matter of fact I was just there in Detroit a few months ago for the Microsoft Launch of Visual Studio 2005, we should have met then…darn the bad luck, I’m always in the mood for looking down on twerps…
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 10:11 pm ¶
matt wrote:
your mouth is writing checks your body can’t cash
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 10:14 pm ¶
JimC wrote:
>your mouth is writing checks your body can’t cash
Whatever….
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 10:15 pm ¶
JimC wrote:
No ma’am, 10 + 10 = 4….
Posted 09 Feb 2006 at 10:27 pm ¶
JimC wrote:
>No ma’am, 10 + 10 = 4….
I thought for sure someone would ask about this….oh well
Posted 10 Feb 2006 at 9:21 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
we don’t like binary jokes, nerd
Posted 10 Feb 2006 at 9:29 am ¶