Money is Ruthless. Money is Cruel.

Some thoughts about last night’s Arkleyfest 2013.  I was only inside the meeting for the first half to 2/3rds of the meeting so some of my stats may be off.

1)  Times ‘Constitution’ was mentioned inside = 0.  Times ‘Constitution’ was mentioned outside = 1483 ( ± 1200)

2)  ‘Jesus’: inside = 0;  Outside = at least once on a sign described by the Times-Standard.

3)  Both the Times-Standard  and North Coast Journal have a good write up on this.  Daniel Mintz was in the house and I expect a good write up from him in the MackTown Press too.  Good comments in LoCO and they have supplied the audio – Thank You!

4)  Do conservatives intentionally hold meetings on Wednesdays so it will be too late for the North Coast Journal to do a write-up in print?  Tin foil or reality? (A: probably tin foil)

5)  Kudos and deep respect to the protesters out there yesterday.  I wish there were more of you/us (myself included).

6)  If Rob Arkley, Rocky, and Jill Macdonald (et. al.) really want to address the homeless populations (yes ‘homeless’ not ‘transient’) they need to first address what we are going to do about this chart on wealth inequality.  Next they need to address where exactly the homeless are supposed to go, etc.

7)  Here is a great quote from the Times-Standard.  I was pretty shocked about this too.  In conservo-world not only governmental, but non-profit homeless services are seen as a bad thing worthy of shrinking so small they can be drowned in a bathtub.  It’s is part of the huge disconnect between parties – at least rhetorically.  Democrats – we DO need to work on this too!

He said he thinks “our desire to do right has become wrong,” saying a bevy of government services and nonprofit groups have made the area an “absolute magnet for the homeless unlike other communities.” While Arkley said it’s tempting to point a finger at local nonprofit groups that provide services to the homeless, Arkley said they are “beyond our control” and instead pointed his finger at the Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services, which he said employs about half the county workforce and takes up about half the county’s budget.

8)  To those conservatives like Michael Medved or Arthur Brooks of AEI who contend that the conservative plan is for religious institutions and private entities to take care of the homeless and destitute.  Wrong.  The conservative position is to make sure as few services are available as possible and use strict ordinances to make sure they are out of sight so business can be conducted without being hindered.  Out of sight, out of mind.

9)  To Rob’s plan.  I don’t disagree in principle.  Progressives get active in this.  Join the committees and help them figure out what to do about the homeless problem.  Maybe we can help convince them that this isn’t a local issue as much as it is a state and federal issue and we need policies like more progressive taxation for a start, trade policies designed to protect local jobs, and we need to come to some consensus about where the homeless are to live.  We can’t just kick them from the curb.

10)  Finally, according to the TS, 3 of the Supervisors were in attendance.  Supervisors Bass, Bohn and Fennell.  Surprise?  No.  My point would be this.  Supervisor Fennell needs to address plainly her implicit support of the marijuana trade by minimizing government enforcement, regulation and planning while also speaking out loudly against homeless issues.  To me this seems to be a huge disconnect and somehow many of her supporters allow it.

11)  Actually make that ‘Jesus’ Outside – 2, Inside -0.  (Again, I was inside for only about the first half so I could be wrong)  But where are our local religious organizations on this BTW?  I’m sure they do good work, but they weren’t there for the politics today.  Most of the time, I would like to separate church from politics, for the benefit of both.  But on this issue, given they along with other non-profits and government act as the safety net, I think they should have a strong voice.

UPDATE:  thanks to LoCO’s great coverage, I was mistaken.  A great speaker (43:40 min) simply read Jesus’ words of Matthew 25:31.  So the updated score.  Outside 2 (at least), Inside 1 (at least).  Also, nice touch, when Jesus’ was mentioned, there were audible groans from the audience.

722cbee0213e11e3812422000aeb0bcd_7

Advertisements

34 thoughts on “Money is Ruthless. Money is Cruel.

  1. Jane says:

    How much more credibility there would be to this issue if it was a call to arms against the rising inequality, the mental health issues which push people out of the job market, the double-standard of drugs are profit but bad for communities because people use them, and that kind of stuff. Not to mention that the choice between living in a dumpster at minimum wage and living in the forest in a sleeping bag is a mere flip of the coin. Living on one minimum wage income without family support is growing increasingly impossible. And it isn’t like any local business is going to hire someone whose been on the streets. So this is kind of like kicking a dying dog–just plain cruel and self-serving. Grants for education are limited to those who never made it through school to begin with because of social issues, poverty, or ADHD. Even retraining is out of reach. So is good medical care. Dental care is way beyond reach. And we want these people to do what? Move to another town? Go live in the forest permanently? Just disappear so we all don’t have be reminded that our consumption choices have created this problem? That’s like putting a band-aid on a cancer mole and pretending the cancer has gone away because we can’t see it. It is like hiding toxic industry waste for decades–what we can’t see we can’t be reminded that we produced it.

    Rant done.

  2. monmon@yesindeed.com says:

    This has to be about the crossbow killing. From Wikipedia: In the law of torts, the attractive nuisance doctrine states that a landowner may be held liable for injuries to children trespassing on the land if the injury is caused by a hazardous object or condition on the land that is likely to attract children who are unable to appreciate the risk posed by the object or condition. The doctrine has been applied to hold landowners liable for injuries caused by abandoned cars, piles of lumber or sand, trampolines, and swimming pools. However, it can be applied to virtually anything on the property of the landowner.

    1. Interesting. I have no idea. That would be a question for Eric Kirk among others, but I do know the crossbow murder was used as fodder during the public comments. It’s one of those shock and awe moments that get people’s attention and can be used to motivate people against the homeless in general.

      To be clear, that act was criminal, reprehensible and sick, but it shouldn’t be used when contemplating policies and solutions for our homeless problems.

      1. Jane says:

        I think the point of people bringing up that issue is that Mr. Arkley may need to convince a civil court of law that he indeed is an active landlord and very concerned over these issues. A very cynical view of course that it would basically be a public relations ploy in advance of any potential litigation. But that is my opinion. I am not an attorney. I just have some background with other things Arkley related.

  3. hardworker, self supporting tax payer says:

    we have a liberal president, and live in a liberal controlled state. so how do you blame the conservatives???? This is what happens when the liberals fuel the fire but have controll of all and have done nothing about the problems you talk about. Blame reagan for something 20 years ago but democratic clinton nor obama have done anything to address such problems. if you look at the population of the transients a big percentage could work but choose not to. as we see the unemployment stats they have dropped hughly and the president tell us how good the economy is. so why are they not working?? there are bathrooms in oldtown but they still deficate in the doorways. So when the liberals start blaming others to deflect away from there failed policies, thats shows who is the real problem. You can tout that obamacare is going to fix it, but the president has let all big business off from paying for it through exemption so who is going to pay for it now. You are not part of the solution, you my friend are part of the problem. why dont you tell us your solution to the problem because you have plenty to say about whats wrong with others. Come on lay out how you would fix it. You say it is a mental health issue. so are you suggesting we lock them all up in a mental hospital? Are you suggesting we give them meds so they will get better. what is your solution. Liberals always are first to blame but never have a solution. i look forward to hear from you what we should do. where we should house them and how much we should raise taxes to pay for it. this will tell if you are a solution person or a hate provoker. im sure alot of people will be waiting for your reply, and your reply will surely be used to rate your credibility. thank you

    1. Good challenge. I will take you up on that. Solutions are not going to come from one person, but I will think on it. I think I’ve addressed some of the larger issues such as a progressive tax system more reminiscent of JFK’s era and effective trade policies to help keep manufacturing jobs at home. And yes, I think we need to have human solutions that may include state-sponsored institutionalization – it should be rare and extremely high quality possibly voluntary only, but it should be on the table IMHO. More later because this issue will be on the table probably our entire lifetimes.

      Also, I think my opinion should count much less than experts in the field. That is where we should seek guidance on this; not a blogger nor local businesspeople.

    2. Jane says:

      The homeless put out more physical energy to stay alive on any given day than 95% of the people who are employed. This concept that “work” means either exploiting other people’s labor for gain or being exploited by someone else for gain is a fairly modern notion. So the fundamental belief that the homeless don’t work and choose an easy life is just about as sound as the entire conservative philosophy that if we just didn’t have any regulation at all businesses would flourish, the flowers would bloom, and corporations would take care of everyone. Life is about survival. It is not about work. We do work as a method to survive. The Homeless, largely, are not acceptable to employers. It is pretty hard to take a fixed job when one doesn’t have transportation, a shower, the appropriate clothes, and need more than minimum wage to survive anyhow. The conservative mantra works for those at the top of the heap. The idea that someone surviving without skills, without anything to sell to a society which values money beyond integrity, without looks, good teeth, and pretty hair to make them marriage material has failed as a human being is a very small narrow minded and selfish viewpoint. Survival is success. Survival with gold trinkets is not a necessity of human body but of human ego and arrogance.

      Conservative ideology worked a lot better when there were fewer people. Because that meant there were fewer people to compete with for jobs and there were fewer people we didn’t like suffering at the bottom of society. I get the idealism behind conservatism. I just don’t think it works. There aren’t any perfect solutions from any ideology. The idea is to do less harm than hurt. Conservatism doesn’t even keep a scorecard on hurt. It just perpetuates it on any one without political power… and doesn’t look back. Works really well as long as you are on the top looking down at the bottom of the heap.

      1. Jane says:

        How many homeless people are going to go into a meeting calling for a conversation on their issues? How many have the capacity and ability to express their opinion in a way acceptable to society. This is my frustration with this whole lynch mob mentality. The very poor, the homeless, those with illness, have no representation. What they have is a very rich man standing up and saying he is sick of their impact and something needs to be done. And the lynch mob follows the rich man. There is no real discussion because the most important party of all isn’t participating. It is school yard politics and, my opinion, Mr Arkley is the crass popular bully on the yard. There are few issues which draw my ire to the extent I’ve posted on this topic. But that is why… this is absolutely flying in the face of a participative democratic governance.

        1. Yes, and lynch mob is an appropriate description of the feeling in that room, btw.
          (can I say this? if it’s in parenthesis maybe it won’t be noticed. It makes me proud to have you making these comments in this tiny corner of the internets. Thank you Jane.)

  4. Cookie says:

    Hi DJon: I think the idea of having a camping area/like a hostel might have possibilities. A very secure one, that has security. You would have to apply, like you do for any rental, and if you can pay a stipend, then do, and maybe this could be a stepping up for people who want to. You have to have an address to get a job, or a rental house. Some people are so far gone from drug abuse and other things, that institutionalizing them would be safer for them. But maybe not. Don’t know. But there is a real big difference between a truly homeless person, and the travelers that are passing through. And I wonder is it they who are passing through are the biggest problems? It is a tough situation. I personally have seen such gross things that it makes it hard to separate the two, and have compassion for those that truly need and deserve it.

  5. Jane says:

    From Robert Reich’s blog. “By this view, if some people aren’t paid enough to live on, the market has determined they aren’t worth enough. If others rake in billions, they must be worth it. If millions of Americans remain unemployed or their paychecks are shrinking or they work two or three part-time jobs with no idea what they’ll earn next month or next week, that’s too bad; it’s just the outcome of the market.

    According to this logic, government shouldn’t intrude through minimum wages, high taxes on top earners, public spending to get people back to work, regulations on business, or anything else, because the “free market” knows best.

    In reality, the “free market” is a bunch of rules about (1) what can be owned and traded (the genome? slaves? nuclear materials? babies? votes?); (2) on what terms (equal access to the internet? the right to organize unions? corporate monopolies? the length of patent protections? ); (3) under what conditions (poisonous drugs? unsafe foods? deceptive Ponzi schemes? uninsured derivatives? dangerous workplaces?) (4) what’s private and what’s public (police? roads? clean air and clean water? healthcare? good schools? parks and playgrounds?); (5) how to pay for what (taxes, user fees, individual pricing?). And so on.

    These rules don’t exist in nature; they are human creations. Governments don’t “intrude” on free markets; governments organize and maintain them. Markets aren’t “free” of rules; the rules define them.

    The interesting question is what the rules should seek to achieve. They can be designed to maximize efficiency (given the current distribution of resources), or growth (depending on what we’re willing to sacrifice to obtain that growth), or fairness (depending on our ideas about a decent society). Or some combination of all three – which aren’t necessarily in competition with one another. Evidence suggests, for example, that if prosperity were more widely shared, we’d have faster growth.

    The rules can even be designed to entrench and enhance the wealth of a few at the top, and keep almost everyone else comparatively poor and economically insecure.”

  6. Jane says:

    In Europe they have built single person sleeping/shower chambers which operate like a paid toilet does. The person puts in a few cents and goes inside for the night. They are sterile environments which can be pressured washed down. Set up an exchange with local employers where people can sweep walkways for do other small odd jobs in exchange for a swipe card that will get them into the sleeping chamber.

    1. Thanks Jane. I love the photo at the beginning of that link. Yes, the economy is not helping, and there is a certain party, who will go unnamed, who is doing everything it can to stop democratic job stimulus. They have to have things their way even if the voters asked for another way. But that is politics, and is only indirectly related to the homeless. Thanks for the note and thought. I haven’t figured out how to publish my email yet, I should just set up a blog email. I’ll put that on my tdl. If you happen to have ever caught Eric’s, he has mine. I’d like to get yours on the list too, we have a bunch of work to do and it’s going to take team work.

  7. veryhumbleharold says:

    This is Progressive stupidity at its irrational height now, coming to the defense of homeless people just because one targeted Republican member of the community wants to do something about the problem as do probably 98% of Humboldt County’s population. We’re all just sick and tired of being abused by homeless people. Yes, abused. Our community people are being exploited and in too many instances per day, per week, intimidated, threatened by aggressive homeless people and why are we
    taking this lying down and in too many Progressive cases, actually promoting homelessness in Humboldt County, e.g. Jane’s posts.

    That you Proggies are now looking to exploit this issue, Progs for homelessness vs. Arkley and 98% of the community, only shows how out of touch with local people’s concerns Progs from out of town coming here to make their political careers are. Exploitation isn’t limited to capitalists but is a prominent characteristic of radical activist carpetbaggers who like to pour gasoline on local problems in order to fan the flames of local community political warfare so that they can then ride the resulting social war into higher political status or even jobs, e.g. Mark Lovelace, former radical exploiter of the Maxxam owned Pacific Lumber Co. era and now “liberal” Progressive’s man in the Supervisor’s office keeping the social war going there because he’s making big bucks doing so. Is that your political climber’s model, D-Jon? Plaster your name around now to get attention by joining in the Arkley Attack Team with some of the same people who formerly composed the Hurlwitz Attack Team that Lovelace used to climb to Supe position? Locals want to know your game plan, D-Jon, in order to put up a defense for real democracy that actually looks at our local community in a Democratic way, i.e. People of Humboldt County. And last time I looked, “people” meant everyone and not divided into political camps or singled out as targets for lynch mob mentality exploiters seeking to promote community conflict in order to rise in social, political and financial higher status without contributing one iota of community problem solving.

    1. Jane says:

      Sticks and stones and banking collapses may hurt me but labels never do. Nice try though.

      Your outrage should be saved for the tabloids. If you were duly outraged at the damage done to the community by people of little means then why not be outraged at the damage done by people of means. Assembling people based on their superstitions, misinformation, hate, and fears and then bowing out to avoid the conflict birthed by that cocktail is pathetic regardless of who leads the pulpit. Of all the problems in this area to pick to find a cure for… well homeless is not a bad one to pick. But it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that killing a disease by killing or maiming the host of the disease is about as stupid as it gets. You have Cancer therefore I want to cure your Cancer by ensuring your death and destruction. Or minimally put you somewhere I can’t see you so I can pretend the problem has gone away… is not only unreasonable it is an insult to every person capable of actual thought. It is preying on people less fortunate than you are, less educated, and just plain immoral in my book.

      I’m sorry people make you uncomfortable. Live with it. If they break the laws then make them accountable. Making you uncomfortable is not breaking any law. Making businesses less economically viable is not breaking a law either. Collapsing the entire world economy and blowing up entire countries isn’t against the law either.

      Find something worthy to do with your time. It really isn’t attractive to be a bully.

    2. Mitch says:

      VH Harold,

      It is an awful thing to be threatened with harm, whether by a homeless person or a person living in a mansion. If you feel it has happened to you, check out the legal definition of assault — you’ll see that you can call upon our police service because you’ve been the victim of a crime.

      As for your attacks on D-Jon, careful, you are giving him legitimacy! He’ll be the new person for the crazy fringe to attack! Be careful what you do!

      Personally, I agree with Mr. Arkley that homelessness is a terrible problem. I’m not sure he’s correct that Eureka has become a haven for homeless people because of excessive generosity, but I hope his committee can accumulate some facts so that we can all work from a common base of facts.

      One thing I wonder about is what happens if we ship all our homeless people to Mendocino but then Mendocino ships all theirs to Humboldt? And what if San Francisco also chooses to solve their problem by shipping their homeless people to Humboldt? Would we just have to ship people out faster? How can we do that when places like San Francisco have more homeless AND more buses? Not only will we have more homeless people, but they’ll all be asking for directions!

  8. Thank you stephen, or do you prefer harold, for being civil. Seriously. I have blinders on right now for the GPU meeting on the 23rd, otherwise I might respond more completely.

    My game plan is to work with and unify people fighting for democratic principles like smart government, smart growth, smart communities, and a smart electorate and do all this as transparently as possible.

    People have been divided into political camps since before our country was founded. It is a great way to move our country forward. If they are not divided by politics, (ie if people join the Democratic Party who are essentially Republican -lites) our political process breaks down and the public is no longer privy to the issues or motivations driving policies. I am a big fan of political camps. Not everyone agrees and political camps are a good way to join together to advocate for the issues which are most important to you.

    That’s my plan to highlight issues that are being subsumed by our messed-up local politics.

  9. veryhumbleharold says:

    VeryHumboldtHarold is your Word Press’s doing, not mine, D-Jon. i am happy to post as myself but your Word Press screening didn’t think so.

    No, D-Jon, that’s not your game plan at all as you join the Proggie community attack squad wasting everyone’s time with their character assassination campaigns going on-you now one of the gangsters ganging up as a Prog mob to trash the reputations of two Humboldt County citizens both doing far more community service than you or any Prog who attacks them. The “smart” stuff you mention is only cover and I have yet to see any Prog “smart” growth plan that isn’t another political attack plan aimed at Republican businessmen. Community cooperation is foreign to your political ideology which is why I don’t want you ever representing me and our local Democratic Party now totally compromised with Green moles in control of the HCDCC making it lose contact with the majority of Humboldt County Democrats while propelling a highly organized and vocal minority coming from the failed Green Party to take control of the Democratic Party here. I want my Democratic Party represented and you can’t do it. You’re too far gone as a Prog gangster now to know what’s right to do.

    Jane, you go round up some homeless people and take them into your home and on your property. That may stop your trying to foist homeless people coming into our County for one primary reason: plentiful drugs and political activists like you willing to use them for more political attacking of local community office holders struggling to deal with the many problems generated by the pot and drug magnet of Humboldt County attracting homeless young people especially to come and exploit the scene–and leave a mess because they don’t care. And neither do you, Jane, not care about community members being harassed everyday by homeless bums many of whom because of being young and far from disabled once they stop being druggies are quite able to work but won’t because why when free handouts and party time is the Scene, man, to go to in Humboldt County. When you’ve taken into your home and onto your property, Jane, do come back and tell us what we should do with the homeless invaders..

    1. Jane says:

      Stephen… be careful. People who wear blinders walk off the edge of cliffs and never break stride.

      I have lived next door to an encampment of homeless during my college years. I am still here and better for the knowledge and understanding I gained from the experience. I have taken in and sheltered homeless people in my home. In fact, one very capable gentleman, in his fifties, with adult ADHD, spent three months last winter in my extra room. In return he reconstructed my backyard. The man loved classic literature and was better read than I. He was messy and unorganized (most ADHD people have this issue). I stipulated the boundaries I would tolerate and that everything had to be cleaned once a month. He complied. He went back to his truck for a while afterwards but I understand he has found a caretaker’s role somewhere partially because I vouched for him and explained the ADHD situation to the person who took him in.

      Stephen when you start to categorize people into “Them” and “These” and “Those” I would posit that you, yourself, have become a liability to society. Because this separation of yourself from your fellow human beings leads to the fostering of hate, wars, fear, and a lot of elements costly to society. So my answer is to you is how would you have yourself treated now that you have less worth or destructive worth to society. That would be my answer to what you should do to the homeless.

  10. Common, join the fun stephen. 2nd Wednesday of every month. We are a big tent, we have Republican Democrats, Proggie Democrats (using your language), Weed Democrats (using my language), Elite Democrats, Union Democrats, all sorts. How would you describe yourself?

    This is how democracy works. You get involve and you too can have a say. It is still a democracy though and in a democracy, majority does win. That’s why I’m here. I want someone to speak for the Prog narrative. Heraldo used to be here, and Eric Kirk and Mitch among others like Jane, and Janelle are doing a bang up job, but I want to add another voice to the left. We don’t always sing from the same hymnal, but that is part of the reason politics is interesting and consternation.

    Sounds like we will be pulling the democrats in different directions, but you better get involved if you want to have more of a say. That’s how you do it – get involved. You can whine and cry, but that isn’t as effective.

    Again, let me know specifically where I have been unfair at all to Mr. Johnson. I still contend I have a right to complain about an elected officials actions in Dan Johnson’s case and a convening of a public meeting by a very prominent private citizen. I will retract anything that I’ve written that you can convince me isn’t fair.

    “Smart growth” has nothing to do about any personal vendetta against the poor ole local businessmen. It has to do with, well smart growth. A great proponent of this is a guy at strongtowns.org. He is no progressive. In fact he is quite libertarian in some ways. Many of the “smart growth” strategies will not fall into ideological camps. For one, zoning requirements and regulations may have to be completely revisited. The only reason businesses are aligning against smart growth is they want to have all, or at the very least most of the control. Forget government and forget the democratic process.

  11. veryhumbleharold says:

    It isn’t fair at all, D-Jon and I will hold you to your word that you will retract your attacks on Dan Johnson when your fellow Progs like Richard Salzman who cheated voters with his false identities and also Paul Gallegos got nailed for his plagerism and yet you don’t say anything about them, like hypocrites that you are, also not saying anything about the fact that a minority political gang, Progs, have commandeered my Democratic Party. You want me to join, well, D-Jon, I once tried to join my supposed HCDCC that represents me as a Democrat but guess what? I was evicted from the meeting because the people leading it, all Progs, were not going to let me or another Democrat complain about lack of representation in the HCDCC of liberal working class Democrats whose political agenda does not include the Progs political war against Humboldt workers and poor. So your “big tent” is bullshit. It’s a rigged deal and has been ever since Progs seized control of the HCDCC. And this makes you guys into a political gangster outfit and dangerous to real democracy because you abuse it to create community social warfare.

  12. democratic Jon says:

    Everybody wants to be a Democrat right now stephen. Sorry you had a bad experience. I do not consider it my responsibility to write your narrative for you. I try to have integrity and cosistancy, but I am partisan and an advocate for progressive ideas. I also happen to believe that everyone would be if they a) had a heart, b) paid attention to reality, c) had a modicum of education ( especially civics), and d) approached politics thoughtfully.

    I’m not here to protect any one, but I’ll admit that this will not be the go-to source for cutting edge criticisms of District Attourney Gallegos. You’ll have to head over to republicanHumboldt for that. No one will get a free ride, myself included, I will try to be fair, but my criticism of Supervisor Lovelace may not have the same edge as my criticism of Supervisor Fennell.

    Having said that I most definitely do not believe in any way that there are two sides of every story or narrative. I happen to strongly believe that the narratives I weave are, well, right. That’s why I tell them.

    And, the big tent is not bs. It is reality. Matthew Owen, to take an extreme example, and I are both Democrats right now. I am doing my best to make his stay in our tent uncomfortable, while also setting up a nice table for him in the Republican tent, but my hands are tied as long as he follows the by-laws. And there are by-laws.

    So Stephen, I would like the big tent to be less true than it is, but right now we are a huuuuuuge tent. Let me tell you.

  13. veryhumbleharold says:

    If you’re in it, it’s only a public circus tent with clowns and wild animals trained to entertain but certainly not to be leaders of the community.

  14. This petition is for Humboldt County citizens that see the danger in Mr. Arkley and his supporters deciding what public services are available – and not available – for the poor.

    https://www.change.org/petitions/humboldt-county-board-of-supervisors-protect-health-and-human-services-programs-for-homeless-families-and-individuals-don-t-take-policy-directives-from-one-of-the-wealthiest-citizens-with-an-anti-government-and-anti-poor-agenda#
    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s