McCain’s Bogeyman Politics: The last refuge of a scoundrel

with 5 comments

It’s a bird! It’s a plane! A terrorist plane! An Arab! A Muslim! An Islamic extremist! A scary black man! A rock star! The anti-Christ! A commie! A socialist! A traitor! A treasonist! It’s un-American! It’s… it’s….

It’s election year.

And the McCain campaign, ever-desperate for something to run on besides their shoddily repackaged version of the Bush Administration, is grabbing at straws. As such, they’ve amassed the most reprehensible stump tactics in political history and repackaged them into a plank, of sorts: bogeyman politics. A scary mix of race-baiting, red-baiting and kitchen-sink demagoguery, bogeyman politics can turn a garden-variety politician into a scarecrow. By the same token, it can transform a great man into the very embodiment of terror: the bogeyman. History bears this out. The McCain-Palin bogeyman platform pays great tribute to the architects of fearmongering: Karl Rove, Lee Atwater, Westwood Pegler, Paul Joseph Goebbels, Joseph McCarthy and George Wallace.

And to anyone who would accuse Rep. John Lewis (GA) of going ‘over the line’ by mentioning George Wallace in his recent rebuke of McCain-Palin for “sowing the seeds of hatred and division” I would ask you to tell me: What are McCain, Palin, their surrogates and supporters doing — in both words and foulness of spirit — that is so different from what we saw during George Wallaces’s campaigns?  

Barack Obama is not even worthy to shine the shoes of John McCain. — PAC member, Deborah Johns, speaking from the pro-McCain-Palin “Stop Obama Tour” October 17, 2008


I’m a proponent of the “we must remember history, lest we repeat it” school of thought. Apparently, there are many in this country who have either forgotten, or they’re too young to own a visceral perspective of those bleak lessons that history has so painfully taught us over the past 60 years. Else, how could our media so easily disregard the McCain-Palin campaign’s flirtation with McCarthyism? And how could any American, except die-hard racists, embrace a platform that engages in the scary black man/scary Muslim race-baiting rhetoric (an amalgam of 1950s era racism and 21st century Muslim terrorist fearmongering)? How could anyone embrace a campaign that soils the character of a good man, based solely on the color of his skin and the unfortunate coincidence of his middle name?  

The history books will one day record the McCain-Palin campaign as being every bit as flagrantly ridiculous and dangerous as it truly is. The shame is that that we don’t recognize these destructive campaigns in their time. It is only in retrospect, years after the damage has been done. The demagogues of Nazi Germany, the McCarthy era and White Supremacy did not seize power overnight. That power had to be cultivated — word by word, fear by fear — conjuring forth the darkest elements of human nature to do war against imaginary evils. 

History tells the tale: good men and women can be drawn to do dark deeds, given the incentive of fear. While human beings may never lose their fear of the bogeyman — that amorphous being that hides in the shadows, in closets, under the bed at night and flies planes into buildings — we can choose to become more wise. Great leaders, like Obama, shed light into the dark places. Fools, like McCain/Palin, draw us further into the darkness. Wise men know the difference between the two camps. 


Billboards showing Dr. King and Rosa Parks attending an integrated event at the Highlander Folk School in 1957 are erected across the South. To the white power structure, integration is a "communist plot" against the "Southern way of life." Therefore, anyone attending an integrated event was — by definition — a "communist."

Billboards, such as the one above, showing Dr. King and Rosa Parks attending an integrated event at the Highlander Folk School in 1957 were erected across the South. To the white power structure, integration was a “communist plot” against the “Southern way of life.” Therefore, anyone attending an integrated event was — by definition — a “communist.”



by Mantis Katz for the canarypapers  



Quotes and other foodstuffs for thought:

George Wallace was fond of red-baiting. In his 1963 inaugural speech, he compared fascist Germany to the Civil Rights movement, and he blamed desegregation and the Civil Rights movement on communism: 

This is the great freedom of our American founding fathers, but if we amalgamate [desegragate] into the one unit as advocated by the communist philosophers, then the enrichment of our lives, the freedom for our development, is gone forever….And may we take note of one other fact…. There are not enough native communists in the South to fill up a telephone booth. — George Wallace


They’re building a bridge over the Potomac for all the white liberals fleeing to Virginia. – George Wallace, 1968

I’ve lived here for at least 10 years and before that, about every third duty I was in either Arlington or Alexandria, up in communist country. —  John McCain’s brother, Joe, speaking about two Democratic-leaning areas in Northern Virginia, October 4, 2008

His voting record is more to the left than the announced socialist in the United States Senate, Bernie Sanders of Vermont. — John McCain, when asked if Obama is an extremist, July 17, 2008

I don’t know. All I know is his voting record, and that’s what people usually judge their elected representatives by.– John McCain (same interview) when asked if he thinks Obama is a socialist, July 17, 2008

His answer actually scared me even more… It’s kind of a socialist viewpoint. I don’t want to share my money with other people. That’s not the American dream. — Joe “the plumber” Wurzelbacher, reacting to his discussion on taxes with Barack Obama, October 14, 2008

Then the radical Islamists, the al Qaeda, the radical Islamists and their supporters, will be dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they did on Sept. 11 because they will declare victory in this War on Terror. – Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) describing in March 2008 what would happen if Obama won the presidency

I’m going to tell you something: That boy’s finger does not need to be on the button. — Kentucky Rep. Geoff Davis (R) said of Obama, April 2008

Just from what little I’ve seen of her and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they’re a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they’re uppity. — Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, in comparing Michelle Obama to Sarah Palin, Sept 4, 2008

A few years later, he ran for the U.S. Senate. He won and has spent most of his time as a “celebrity senator.” No leadership or major legislation to speak of. His rise is remarkable in its own right – it’s the kind of thing that could happen only in America. — Rudy Giuliani, in his Sept. 2008 RNC convention speech, makes a subtle nod to Affirmative Action as the conduit to Obama’s rise in politics. 

He worked as a community organizer. — Rudy Giuliani on Barack Obama, Sept. 2008 RNC

This world of threats and dangers is not just a community, and it doesn’t just need an organizer. — Sarah Palin, Sept. 2008

I think God’s will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that.Sarah Palin, June 2008

Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God. — Sarah Palin, June 2008

As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice. — Aldolf Hitler

What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he’s done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. Terrorist states are seeking nuclear weapons without delay. He wants to meet them without preconditions. Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America. He’s worried that someone won’t read them their rights? – Sarah Palin on Obama, Sept. 2008

A writer observed: “We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty, sincerity, and dignity.” I know just the kind of people that writer had in mind…. They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America … They love their country, in good times and bad, and they’re always proud of America.  – Sarah Palin at the Republican convention, Sept. 2008, quoting Westbrook Pegler, the racist, fascist, pro-Nazi, anti-semitic, pseudo-populist journalist/writer who openly wished for the assassinations of Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Robert Kennedy.

We believe that the best of America is not all in Washington, D.C. We believe…. We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard working very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation. This is where we find the kindness and the goodness and the courage of everyday Americans. Those who are running our factories and teaching our kids and growing our food and are fighting our wars for us. Those who are protecting us in uniform. Those who are protecting the virtues of freedom. — Sarah Palin, explaining an early comment regardings areas of the country that are “pro-America” vs. those parts of America that are not. — Oct. 16, 2008

We believe also that there is a reason we all get teared-up when we hear Lee Greenwood sing about America, because we love America and we are always proud of being Americans. And we don’t apologize for being Americans. — Sarah Palin, October 16, 2008

McCarthyism is Americanism with its sleeves rolled. — Joseph McCarthy during the McCarthy era

I think it should be a states issue not a federal government, mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue. I’m in that sense a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. – Sarah Palin, October 2008

This nation was never meant to be a unit of one… This is the exact reason our freedom loving forefathers established the states, so as to divide the rights and powers among the states, insuring that no central power could gain master government control. — George Wallace, 1963 [EDITOR’S NOTE: The mention of ‘state’s rights’ has long been code for being anti-Civil Rights/white supremacy. This was a prominent component of George Wallace’s rhetoric, as he tried to assert the state’s right to preserve prejudice as in institution. The above is but one example, from one of his more famous speeches, delivered from the schoolhouse steps, as he physically blocked the door to bar black students from entering]

You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Nigger, nigger, nigger.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘nigger’ — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, ‘We want to cut this,’ is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Nigger, nigger.’ — Lee Atwater, explaining the evolution of the GOP’s Southern strategy, 1981

This is not a man who sees America as you see it and how I see America. We see America as the greatest force for good in this world. – Sarah Palin on Obama,  October 2008 

Our opponent is someone who sees America it seems as being so imperfect that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.  — Sarah Palin, October 2008

My opponent’s touchiness every time he is questioned about his record should make us only more concerned. For a guy who’s already authored two memoirs, he’s not exactly an open book. It’s as if somehow the usual rules don’t apply, and where other candidates have to explain themselves and their records, Senator Obama seems to think he is above all that…. In short: Who is the real Barack Obama? — John McCain, Oct. 2008 [In short, McCain would like us ask ourselves, “Is Barack Hussein Obama a *real* American? Just who is this dark stranger? And what is this scary, black, Muslim-y terrorist-like guy going to do with our country if we elect him?”] 

I play to win. I do whatever it takes to win. If I have to fuck my opponent to win I’ll do it. If I have to destroy my opponent I won’t give it a second thought. — John McCain, spoken before a gathering of GOP operatives at the National Republican Senatorial Committee where McCain outlined his campaign strategy in his senate race.

 It is not truth that matters, but victory. — Adolf HItler

“Barack Obama’s friend tried to kill my family.” — from a McCain campaign press release, October 2008

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State. — Paul Joseph Goebbels on the power of propaganda

“Sit down, boy.” — Shouted at an African American media soundman by a Sarah Palin supporter during a rally  

“Kill him!” — shouted by a McCain-Palin supporter at a Palin rally, Oct. 2008

“Treason!” — shouted by a McCain-Palin supporter at a Palin rally, Oct. 2008

“Traitor!” — shouted by a McCain-Palin supporter at a Palin rally, Oct. 2008

“Off with his head!” — shouted by a McCain-Palin supporter at a Palin rally, Oct. 2008

“He’s an Arab!” — said by a McCain-Palin supporter at a McCain town hall meeting, Oct. 2008

“Commie faggot!” — shouted by a McCain-Palin supporter at a Palin rally, Oct. 2008

The great strength of the totalitarian state is that it forces those who fear it to imitate it. — Adolf Hitler

In the wake of their ongoing, indendiary rhetoric — along with the unchecked, ugly responses from the McCain-Palin rally audiences — Rep. John Lewis of Georgia issued a statement to the McCain campaign, adding his voice to the many, many others (colleagues, media figures and journalists, etc.) rebuking the campaign’s negative tactics. In Lewis’ statement, he reminded McCain of the historical precedence for violent repurcussions in the wake of such dangerous rhetoric. McCain took umbrage at this and chose to turn Rep. Lewis’ reprimand into an attack on Obama: 

Congressman John Lewis’ comments represent a character attack against Governor Sarah Palin and me that is shocking and beyond the pale. The notion that legitimate criticism of Senator Obama’s record and positions could be compared to Governor George Wallace, his segregationist policies and the violence he provoked is unacceptable and has no place in this campaign. I am saddened that John Lewis, a man I’ve always admired, would make such a brazen and baseless attack on my character and the character of the thousands of hardworking Americans who come to our events to cheer for the kind of reform that will put America on the right track. I call on Senator Obama to immediately and personally repudiate these outrageous and divisive comments that are so clearly designed to shut down debate 24 days before the election. Our country must return to the important debate about the path forward for America. — John McCain, Oct. 2008


Perhaps, one day, John McCain will experience one of those death-bed conversions, similar to the one experienced by George Wallace, similar to the one Lee Atwater experienced while dying with a brain tumor. I’ve been around this world long enough to know that there are few burdens too heavy to bear. A heavy conscience is one of them 

I don’t know who will lead us through the ’90s, but they must be made to speak to this spiritual vacuum at the heart of American society, this tumor of the soul. It took a deadly illness to put me eye to eye with that truth, but it is a truth that the country, caught up in its ruthless ambitions and moral decay, can learn on my dime.

Mostly I am sorry for the way I thought of other people. Like a good general, I had treated everyone who wasn’t with me as against me…..My illness has taught me something about the nature of humanity, love, brotherhood and relationships that I never understood, and probably never would have. So, from that standpoint, there is some truth and good in everything. — Lee Atwater, 1990


5 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Mr. Katz:

    Being doomed to repeat history works both ways. Why hasn’t America surged to McCain when he uses the tactics of the 50s and 60s? Why haven’t the racist tactics worked–and I mean really worked, not just riling up the base, whose only pleasure *is* to be riled up, like fighting dogs in cages you have to jab with pundit-sticks every few minutes just to keep ’em mean.

    The problem McCain and Palin and their bad speechwriters face is that the civil rights movement, though always ongoing, has taken successful root all over the country. The infrastructure for race hate hasn’t been maintained well enough to exploit it on a national scale for the election. Calling Obama a “socialist” is pretty weak tea compared to the communist accusations of yore, and even “terrorist” at this point fails to send shivers up the spine–because, unlike with the cold war, when every day brought us closer to dramatic doom–the global war on terror turned out to be one of those shows that goes on far past its ratings heights, no matter how they shuffled the characters and introduced new plots. “This Season: We’ll discover yet another Al-Qaeda-In-Iraq Second-In-Command–and EVERYTHING WILL CHANGE!” Propaganda needs a well-maintained infrastructure, too. There will always be the hard-core fans, but they’re just not enough.

    Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe there’s enough south in a southern strategy (or should I say “pro-America” strategy?) to pack Obama off with his 40 acres and a mule. But I don’t think so. Not that we’ve grown oh-so-kind as a people, just that people are lazy, and it takes a lot of work cultivating *any* mass-outlook, even one that seems as low-overhead as racism.


    October 18, 2008 at 8:49 am

  2. Greetings cp,

    I wish I could agree with you, but I’m seeing a more dangerous climate growing in this country. Just last night, my head nearly exploded, watching Hardball with Chris Matthews, as I witnessed an interview with Minnesota Rep. Michelle Bachmann, who was calling for an investigation to determine who on Capitol Hill is PRO-American and who is ANTI–American.

    Scary stuff. (See the 1st video link below, followed by a 2nd video link to the response by Katrina Vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation:

    Fortunately, I see in this morning’s news that there is strong public outrage, including a call for censure. (SIGN PETITION HERE:

    There’s more on this story at the Huffington Post.

    I am seeing that this instance is just the tip of the iceberg, not a “random occurrence” as the McCain-Palin campaign and the media keep insisting.

    I’ll write more in this response later. Gotta run.

    — Mantis


    October 18, 2008 at 10:48 am

  3. “…I am seeing that this instance is just the tip of the iceberg…”

    I wonder if it’s less the tip of the iceberg than some guy swimming around with a fake dorsal fin strapped to his back. Wait, did that make any sense?

    What I mean is, if you’re going to try to run a government on pure image, separate from the reality of the worker’s life, it takes a lot of work. Reality is always trying to get in. Reality reminds you that the rich are getting richer, the poor poorer, no matter how many terrorists or anti-American congressmen or black people are out there. The government and media have put a lot of work into separating image from reality, and feeding us nothing but image…but suddenly it’s not working quite as well. They’re still trying, covering us with complexity, liquidity freezes or credit crunches, so that we’ll have to listen to the experts who are the only ones who know how to save us all; the problem is, it’s not working. The lack of a good scapegoat is hurting them. Every narrative needs a villain, and it’s very hard to portray the poor financiers as unwilling victims of the evil underpaid homeowner, when those underpaid homeowners are the very people you’re trying to delude onto your side. I feel like they’re trying out as many different villains as they can, now it’s unamericans with their unamerican activities, but that’s not working either, in part because, although repetition is essential in creating and maintaining an image, it’s got to be an interesting, eye-catching image, not the really, really, really obvious (and pretty dull) repetition of talking points. She might as well be sitting in an interview talking about how much she and her friends like Trident. It’s not convincing except to people who are already convinced. They haven’t managed to give us poor folks any stake in this drama of unamericanism.

    Now, if they could find another speculative bubble *and* start a war before the election….


    October 18, 2008 at 11:38 am

  4. Again, CP, (and as much as I love your fake-dorsal-fin analogy and hate that I find myself in a position to defend the idea that our country could succumb, seemingly overnight, into a Titanic-like sinking)I have to disagree. I believe that the *right* catalyst could coalese the collective misery (economic despair + the fear of losing the basics: food, shelter and unlimited credit to buy multiple SUVs and other trinkets) of the masses into a cause, of sorts. Just what that catalyst could be, I don’t know

    I lack the diabolical imagination of the neocon gang, but I do own the historical perspective of their agenda, via the trial of living in America over the past 8 years.

    Painting in broad brushstrokes, I’ll tell you a few recent events that cause me concern:


    1. I was not the only one who found it odd this past August, when (according to this NYT article ) President Bush tucked a provision into a propsal, in which he wanted Congress to make the war on terror permanent. Truly, this is odd, when you consider that legislation passed by Congress in the wake of the 9/11 attacks — the Authorization for Use of Military Force ( ),passed on September 14, 2001 — has never been repealed, and states, unequivocally, that “the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.” ( )This is the same legislation that launched the power-grab that is the main legacy of the “War on Terror” for the executive branch of the United States: the open-ended declaration of war that enabled the President and his advisers to start two wars, undermine the US Constitution, shred the Geneva Conventions, spurn habeas corpus, tear up the Bill of Rights, discard the Army Field Manual, create a system of show trials for terrorists out of thin air, spy on American citizens with impunity, and pour scorn on the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. So why, in August 2008, would the Bush Administration feel the need to essentially (once again) twist the arms of Congress behind their backs, forcing them to say “uncle sam” or risk being seen as aiding and abetting terrorists? What MORE does the Bush Administration want that they don’t aleady have?

    2. During 2002, the Bush-Cheney Administration neatly divided the globe into 6 or 7 “commands” (USSOUTHCOM, USEUCOM, USAFRICOM and so on). As I wrote in an earlier post ( , which I’ll probably never finish, because it was too damned depressing), the Bush Administration has fanned out forces all over Africa (aka AFRICOM) as part of their global war on terror — their troop concentrations being in oil-strategic areas, rather than in terrorist hot-beds, but that’s a different topic. My point is this: For purposes of the global war on terror, you and I live in USNORTHCOM.

    3. On October 1, 2008, George Bush did something unprecedented. Or, at least it was something that hadn’t been done since the Civil War. He ordered a brigade of troops to to begin patrolling U.S soil, as part of USNORTHCOM’s “global war on terror.” Bush dispatched the brigade in case our country needs help with ”civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE attack.” I wrote about this, too, in an earlier post: .

    4. Lastly, and this is an important distinction — it’s what separates the chicken-little-tin-foil-hat crowd from, say, Congress: What the Bush Administraton owns, at this moment, due to all of the above-mentioned factors (and then some) is the ability to do the unthinkable, whatever that may be. The question is not WILL they do the unthinkable, or even WOULD they do the unthinkable, but *COULD* they do the unthinkable? This argument has been posed in various Congressional hearings, none quite so disturbing as this one:


    Today, I reflect on pre-9-11 climate in America. Most Americans were doing well, the economy was stable, the climate fairly peaceable. Within just a few months, these same Americans bitterly hated Muslims, all Muslims. These same Americans were wildly waving their flags in violent, nationalistic patriotism. These same Americans gladly surrendered the very foundations of our democracy, as they gave the Bush Administration implicit permission to do “whatever it takes” to keep us safe — up to, and including, dismantling our Constitution and Bill of Rights, and erasing those liberties that used to separate the U.S from the very countries we’ve spent the past 232 years protecting ourselves from. I remember the fervent patriotism in the months and years immediately after 9-11. You were either “with us, or against us,” and this extended throughout the world stage. Remember freedom fries? The strange thing is that members of our own Congress were intimidated to the extent that they voted for laws they were intellectually and morally opposed to. I can guarantee you that, if I’d taken to the street protesting ANYTHING about the Bush Administration, especially in the early days, I’d have been lynched on the spot.

    Again, this is all in broad brushstrokes, but for the purposes of making this point: When I look at the climate of our country today vs. the pre-9-11 climate of our country, I see a much more dangerous climate — one that, given the right catalyst, could explode into something really, really horrible. When you hear prominent, respected media figures thoughout the country (e.g. the editor of The Nation) and members of Congress (e.g. John Lewis of Georgia) echoing these same fears/warnings, I think it’s not only reasonable, but wise, to heed their warnings.

    While I cannot imagine just what that catalyst might be, I can imagine, by viewing current events through the lens of history, the potential. It scares the hell out of me. I have little doubt that, given the right incentive, Americans (the stupid ones, anyway) *COULD* coalese against a common villian, a scapegoat, and that the Bush Administration *COULD* create and/or exploit that catalyst to put into a row all the ducks they’ve spent the past 8 years amassing. The scapegoat/villian does not need to be so well-defined as a bin Laden figure, or even a singular villian, although, were some anonymous bogeyman to commit some violent “anti-American” act right now, he or she *could* instantaneously incite this country to same mix of rage, fear and irrationality that led to the radical transformation of our democracy, our national temperament and, yes, our moral compass (on both an individual and a national scale) during the post-9-11 era.

    The McCain-Palin vitriol has cultivated a deadly dangerous climate. In yet one more example, in the wake of McCain’s statement earlier this week, in which he claimed that ACORN “may be perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy,” ACORN received some powerful responses: (see here: ). Reading these responses, I’d be hard-pressed to argue that, in the eyes of many Americans, the “villian” or “scapegoat” responsible for America’s economic woes hasn’t already arrived or, in fact, that it ever really left.

    Oh…. Colin Powell’s making an eloquent speech on Meet the Press right now, which is pertinent to this topic. Hope. On that note, I very much appreciate and respect your perspective, but I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree, even as I hope you are right, and I am wrong — or, at least that I’ll never be proven right.

    Best regards,


    October 19, 2008 at 9:12 am

  5. […] the birthers, he just subsumes the race issue with red-baiting. It’s a page right out of the right-wing race-politics playbook. Beck enables this subtle racism of his audience and deflects the whole thing to Valerie […]

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: