Jump to content

McCain supports re-instituting the draft


Guest Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

At a campaign event on Wednesday, McCain agreed with a woman who argued that the military draft should be re-instituted. His position until now has been the opposite.

This is yet another major flip-flop on a key issue. Offshore drilling. Bush's tax cuts.

The dumbo who keeps posting anti-Obama topics is making stuff up. These are facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

John McCain said in an interview with Politico on Wednesday "that he was uncertain how many houses he and his wife, Cindy, own."

"I think -- I'll have my staff get to you," McCain said. "It's condominiums where -- I'll have them get to you."

The answer, according to the group Progressive Accountability, is an even 10 homes, ranches, condos, and lofts, together worth a combined estimated $13,823,269.

Ahh, just another man of the people. Trying to pass himself off as "Everyman" and downplaying the economic mess most Americans are experiencing. And to call Obama "elitist"? Are you kidding me? I know it worked for Karl Rove when he labeled Kerry with that in 2004. Are you telling me that most Americans are STUPID enough to fall for it again? When are people going to educate themselves so they can make an INTELLIGENT decision based on facts and not just let themselves be herded around like sheep without minds of their own? It's pitiful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John McCain said in an interview with Politico on Wednesday "that he was uncertain how many houses he and his wife, Cindy, own.""I think -- I'll have my staff get to you," McCain said. "It's condominiums where -- I'll have them get to you."The answer, according to the group Progressive Accountability, is an even 10 homes, ranches, condos, and lofts, together worth a combined estimated $13,823,269.Ahh, just another man of the people.  Trying to pass himself off as "Everyman" and downplaying the economic mess most Americans are experiencing.  And to call Obama "elitist"?  Are you kidding me?  I know it worked for Karl Rove when he labeled Kerry with that in 2004.  Are you telling me that most Americans are STUPID enough to fall for it again?  When are people going to educate themselves so they can make an INTELLIGENT decision based on facts and not just let themselves be herded around like sheep without minds of their own?  It's pitiful.
 So, it's OK if Obama thinks there is 57 states but it's not OK if McCain can't be sure if he owns 9 or 10 properties? Sounds like more Kool-Aid logic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John McCain said in an interview with Politico on Wednesday "that he was uncertain how many houses he and his wife, Cindy, own."

"I think -- I'll have my staff get to you," McCain said. "It's condominiums where -- I'll have them get to you."

The answer, according to the group Progressive Accountability, is an even 10 homes, ranches, condos, and lofts, together worth a combined estimated $13,823,269.

Ahh, just another man of the people. Trying to pass himself off as "Everyman" and downplaying the economic mess most Americans are experiencing. And to call Obama "elitist"? Are you kidding me? I know it worked for Karl Rove when he labeled Kerry with that in 2004. Are you telling me that most Americans are STUPID enough to fall for it again? When are people going to educate themselves so they can make an INTELLIGENT decision based on facts and not just let themselves be herded around like sheep without minds of their own? It's pitiful.

You're right. It is pitiful and large sections of the American population are stupid. They fall for the same old tricks from the same old right wingers who have been stealing them blind and keeping them in fear for decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 So, it's OK if Obama thinks there is 57 states but it's not OK if McCain can't be sure if he owns 9 or 10 properties? Sounds like more Kool-Aid logic.

There is a difference between a simple slip of the tongue (Obama meant to say 47, obviously, there are only two letters different between "forty" and "fifty"), and not knowing a fact about your own personal life!

Obama's 57 states comment is comparable to McCain's veto every beer comment. But not this. This is McCain showing just how out of touch he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John McCain said in an interview with Politico on Wednesday "that he was uncertain how many houses he and his wife, Cindy, own."

"I think -- I'll have my staff get to you," McCain said. "It's condominiums where -- I'll have them get to you."

The answer, according to the group Progressive Accountability, is an even 10 homes, ranches, condos, and lofts, together worth a combined estimated $13,823,269.

Ahh, just another man of the people. Trying to pass himself off as "Everyman" and downplaying the economic mess most Americans are experiencing. And to call Obama "elitist"? Are you kidding me? I know it worked for Karl Rove when he labeled Kerry with that in 2004. Are you telling me that most Americans are STUPID enough to fall for it again? When are people going to educate themselves so they can make an INTELLIGENT decision based on facts and not just let themselves be herded around like sheep without minds of their own? It's pitiful.

I know McCain is not "everyman" and he should stop playing the "elitist" game.

However, are you saying its bad to have a lot of money? If you're rich, you should be prevented from serving in office?

Like the Kennedy's. John Kennedy was rich because his family is. Does that mean we should not have elected our late Pres Kennedy because he may have been out of touch? Not a man of the people?

While we're at it, let us also get rid of Bloomberg and Corzine.

This whole debate on who has the most money or is most out of touch is infantile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, it's OK if Obama thinks there is 57 states but it's not OK if McCain can't be sure if he owns 9 or 10 properties? Sounds like more Kool-Aid logic.

Everyone makes a gaffe from time to time. This is why I never read any significance into Dan Quayle's embarrassing "potatoe" incident. I doubt there's anyone here who has never said something stupid out of tiredness, distraction, mishearing what someone said, or just random brain malfunction. It doesn't say anything about their intelligence. It's just part of being human.

But to believe that Barack Obama, graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, former president of the Harvard Law Review, former professor at the University of Chicago Law School, Illinois state Senator for 8 years and U.S. Senator for two, actually doesn't know how many states there are? That, my friend, is no mere brain fart, but genuine and profound stupidity. However, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you were just talking out of your ass and don't actually believe that.

The issue with McCain's uncertainty about the number of properties that he owns is not that he makes mistakes. Nor is it "rich is bad". It's just that it makes McCain's attempts to portray Obama as "elitist" or "out of touch" when McCain has led a life of relative privilege, while Obama, though very accomplished and moderately wealthy now, has seen life from a perspective closer to that of regular folk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone makes a gaffe from time to time. This is why I never read any significance into Dan Quayle's embarrassing "potatoe" incident. I doubt there's anyone here who has never said something stupid out of tiredness, distraction, mishearing what someone said, or just random brain malfunction. It doesn't say anything about their intelligence. It's just part of being human.

But to believe that Barack Obama, graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, former president of the Harvard Law Review, former professor at the University of Chicago Law School, Illinois state Senator for 8 years and U.S. Senator for two, actually doesn't know how many states there are? That, my friend, is no mere brain fart, but genuine and profound stupidity. However, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you were just talking out of your ass and don't actually believe that.

The issue with McCain's uncertainty about the number of properties that he owns is not that he makes mistakes. Nor is it "rich is bad". It's just that it makes McCain's attempts to portray Obama as "elitist" or "out of touch" when McCain has led a life of relative privilege, while Obama, though very accomplished and moderately wealthy now, has seen life from a perspective closer to that of regular folk.

Does that "relative privilege" include the 5 years he spent in the Hanoi Hilton ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know McCain is not "everyman" and he should stop playing the "elitist" game.

However, are you saying its bad to have a lot of money?

It's not how much money/properties you have. But if you are incapable of even keeping track of your OWN finances, how can you be expected to do a good job handling those of a COUNTRY?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But to believe that Barack Obama, graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, former president of the Harvard Law Review, former professor at the University of Chicago Law School, Illinois state Senator for 8 years and U.S. Senator for two, actually doesn't know how many states there are? That, my friend, is no mere brain fart, but genuine and profound stupidity. However, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you were just talking out of your ass and don't actually believe that.

Spare me the professor of Constitutional Law title. Its an insult to real professors, a joke, somewhat disingenuous. I wish the Obamites would stop bringing that up.

A very nice title even though he is really a Senior Lecturer, who has taught three courses. A bit aggrandizement that the University is party to. I guess its done for the politically connected and the powerful.

Obama has never done the academic work, research and gone through the credential process to earn the actual title of Professor.

As a Professor, Obama Enthralled Students and Puzzled Faculty By JODI KANTOR

CHICAGO — The young law professor stood apart in too many ways to count. At a school where economic analysis was all the rage, he taught rights, race and gender. Other junior faculty dreamed of tenured positions; he turned them down. While most colleagues published by the pound, he never completed a single work of legal scholarship.

. . .

The law school had almost no black faculty, a special embarrassment given its location on the South Side of Chicago. Its sleek, Eero Saarinen-designed halls bordered a neighborhood crumbling with poverty and neglect. In his 2000 congressional race, Rep. Bobby Rush, a former Black Panther running for re-election, used Mr. Obama’s ties to the school to label him an egghead and an elitist.

At the law school, Mr. Obama taught three courses, ascending from lecturer to senior lecturer . . .

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/us/polit...amp;oref=slogin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not how much money/properties you have. But if you are incapable of even keeping track of your OWN finances, how can you be expected to do a good job handling those of a COUNTRY?

The post I was responding to talked about McCain being rich and therefore out of touch. Which is what I addressed in my response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spare me the professor of Constitutional Law title. Its an insult to real professors, a joke, somewhat disingenuous. I wish the Obamites would stop bringing that up.

A very nice title even though he is really a Senior Lecturer, who has taught three courses. A bit aggrandizement that the University is party to. I guess its done for the politically connected and the powerful.

Obama has never done the academic work, research and gone through the credential process to earn the actual title of Professor.

You completely missed the point, which could have been made by just mentioning what school he graduated from. For someone to imply that a graduate of Harvard Law School honestly doesn't know how many U.S. states there are is beyond ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that "relative privilege" include the 5 years he spent in the Hanoi Hilton ?

What does that have to do with whether he understands what poor to middle class Americans go through? I don't discount his war experience. But experiencing one kind of hardship, even an extremely harsh one, does not make him experienced in any other kind.

Again, my point is not that McCain's current or prior wealth, in itself, says anything bad about him. It's just that it puts him in a poor position from which to paint Obama as an out of touch elitist. Between the two, it is obviously McCain who leads a life much further removed from that of regular folks. A fact that by itself would have little significance, but now has relevance to John McCain and his supporters' hypocritical finger wagging at Obama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spare me the professor of Constitutional Law title. Its an insult to real professors, a joke, somewhat disingenuous. I wish the Obamites would stop bringing that up.

A very nice title even though he is really a Senior Lecturer, who has taught three courses. A bit aggrandizement that the University is party to. I guess its done for the politically connected and the powerful.

Ok, then. Replace "Professor" with "Senior Lecturer", and add that it was only three courses (actually three courses per year for 8 years, but feel free to leave that part out since it doesn't suit your purposes). But tell me, does that make the claim that this Harvard Law JD, 8 year Senior Lecturer, 8-year Illinois Senator, 2-year U.S. Senator and Presidential candidate doesn't know how many states there are any less moronic? To believe that was anything more than a run-of-the-mill brain fart is idiocy.

Obama has never done the academic work, research and gone through the credential process to earn the actual title of Professor.

Some professors do research and publish. Some do not. But it is not now, nor has it ever been, a necessary part of the definition of "professor". Nor is there a "more than three courses" rule. You apply for the job, you meet the qualifications, you get hired, you're a professor. There's nothing dishonest or insulting about then saying that you're a professor. That's simply what it means.

This Obama-as-professor vs. Obama-as-Senior-Lecturer hubbub is not the great distinction and deception that you pretend it to be. Here's The University of Chicago Law School's official statement on the matter:

The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer."

From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers has high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.

Emphasis mine.

Source: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html

Rally, Bern. You accuse others of being disingenuous even as you try to float this "Obama wasn't a real professor" turd?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The post I was responding to talked about McCain being rich and therefore out of touch. Which is what I addressed in my response.

He could be dirt poor or filthy rich; that doesn't change the fact that he IS out of touch. His tax plan alone is proof positive of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spare me the professor of Constitutional Law title. Its an insult to real professors, a joke, somewhat disingenuous. I wish the Obamites would stop bringing that up.

A very nice title even though he is really a Senior Lecturer, who has taught three courses. A bit aggrandizement that the University is party to. I guess its done for the politically connected and the powerful.

Obama has never done the academic work, research and gone through the credential process to earn the actual title of Professor.

Bern, I know a little something about law school. What do you know?

Just what do you think a "real professor" does in a law school, as opposed to what a "Lecturer" does? Do you really think that just because someone decides not to make an entire career inside a law school, that he's less qualified to teach the class? Do you really think that just because someone has real world experience, in addition to having been the first black president of the Harvard Law Review(!), he's less qualified to know and teach the law? To suggest that such a person "has never done the academic work" to qualify him to teach in a law school, and be every bit as good as any full-time professor there, is just ludicrous. Quite simply, as someone who attended and was graduated from a top law school, I don't think you know what you're talking about.

Do you have some factual information on which to base your critique? Do you even understand what a law professor does, or what qualities are most important? Was there something amiss about or lacking in Obama's teaching? I doubt it.

For goodness sake, man (or woman), get a grip on yourself. You'd be much more persuasive as a critic of Obama, if that's what you want to be, if your biases weren't so utterly transparent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This Obama-as-professor vs. Obama-as-Senior-Lecturer hubbub is not the great distinction and deception that you pretend it to be. Here's The University of Chicago Law School's official statement on the matter:

Emphasis mine.

Source: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html

Rally, Bern. You accuse others of being disingenuous even as you try to float this "Obama wasn't a real professor" turd?

Thank you for that link, William. Just as I suspected, the only difference between a lecturer and a professor is the individual's interest in being essentially full-time at the law school. It's meaningless.

The University's statement also confirms something else I would have bet my house on: it would have been delighted to have Obama on staff full-time.

So when you boil this down, Obama was an exceptionally well-qualified teacher who was considered a professor but didn't carry the title because he chose not to make teaching law school his full-time work.

Bern is right about one thing. I am offended by what she/he has been writing - not because I'm a PC type, but because Bern is writing fact-free trash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, then. Replace "Professor" with "Senior Lecturer", and add that it was only three courses (actually three courses per year for 8 years, but feel free to leave that part out since it doesn't suit your purposes). But tell me, does that make the claim that this Harvard Law JD, 8 year Senior Lecturer, 8-year Illinois Senator, 2-year U.S. Senator and Presidential candidate doesn't know how many states there are any less moronic? To believe that was anything more than a run-of-the-mill brain fart is idiocy.

Some professors do research and publish. Some do not. But it is not now, nor has it ever been, a necessary part of the definition of "professor". Nor is there a "more than three courses" rule. You apply for the job, you meet the qualifications, you get hired, you're a professor. There's nothing dishonest or insulting about then saying that you're a professor. That's simply what it means.

This Obama-as-professor vs. Obama-as-Senior-Lecturer hubbub is not the great distinction and deception that you pretend it to be. Here's The University of Chicago Law School's official statement on the matter:

Emphasis mine.

Source: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html

Rally, Bern. You accuse others of being disingenuous even as you try to float this "Obama wasn't a real professor" turd?

Cut the crap. He's not a real professor. Goebbels disagrees but repeating a lie does not make it true.

You know and I know that the Professor title is constantly used by the Obamites to prop up Obama as a learned constitutional scholar, a Professor of Law. Which is why the likes of you don't use his real title, Senior Lecturer.

So, whenever Obama makes a statement that is questioned, the statement can always be followed up with the "fact" that he is a "Professor of Law" and therefore must know what he is doing. Propaganda for the simple.

His title is a joke. Maybe where you come from or hang out, his title is taken seriously. I and the faculty members I know, know it is a joke and frankly they are insulted that the title is denigrated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You completely missed the point, which could have been made by just mentioning what school he graduated from. For someone to imply that a graduate of Harvard Law School honestly doesn't know how many U.S. states there are is beyond ridiculous.

Yes, I know that.

My point is why do Obamites always have to put in he's a "Professor of Law."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know McCain is not "everyman" and he should stop playing the "elitist" game.

However, are you saying its bad to have a lot of money? If you're rich, you should be prevented from serving in office?

Like the Kennedy's. John Kennedy was rich because his family is. Does that mean we should not have elected our late Pres Kennedy because he may have been out of touch? Not a man of the people?

While we're at it, let us also get rid of Bloomberg and Corzine.

This whole debate on who has the most money or is most out of touch is infantile.

The argument isn't about a candidate's personal wealth. I thought that was obvious. The point is are the American people going to fall for the same old political tricks the RNC used during both of W's elections - personal attacks, lies, distortions, switftboating, etc.???????? To label Obama an "elitist" (presumably for enjoying arugula) while Mc Cain travels in his wife's private plane from home to home to home is pretty far fetched, don't you think? And how will they defend their wealth if and when Romney comes on board? Let's face it - they're the rich, white man ticket, and plenty of people are gullible enough to jump on board because they believe RICH and WHITE is the combination that will get the job done. Yeah, just like BUSH and CHENEY.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I know that.

My point is why do Obamites always have to put in he's a "Professor of Law."

It's synonymous, as was already pointed out to you:

"Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors"

Stop making a mountain out of a molehill. He's called a professor because he was one, simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I know that.

My point is why do Obamites always have to put in he's a "Professor of Law."

Oh, and on top of that, the school WANTED him to stay full-time, but he turned them down several times. Clearly he had what it took to be what you'd consider a "real" professor, but he was just too busy to take the job full-time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bern, I know a little something about law school. What do you know?

Just what do you think a "real professor" does in a law school, as opposed to what a "Lecturer" does? Do you really think that just because someone decides not to make an entire career inside a law school, that he's less qualified to teach the class? Do you really think that just because someone has real world experience, in addition to having been the first black president of the Harvard Law Review(!), he's less qualified to know and teach the law? To suggest that such a person "has never done the academic work" to qualify him to teach in a law school, and be every bit as good as any full-time professor there, is just ludicrous. Quite simply, as someone who attended and was graduated from a top law school, I don't think you know what you're talking about.

Do you have some factual information on which to base your critique? Do you even understand what a law professor does, or what qualities are most important? Was there something amiss about or lacking in Obama's teaching? I doubt it.

For goodness sake, man (or woman), get a grip on yourself. You'd be much more persuasive as a critic of Obama, if that's what you want to be, if your biases weren't so utterly transparent.

I admit I'm not an expert on Law Schools. My degrees are in education and pharmaceutical sciences.

Last week, I saw an acquaintance who is the president of a college. I brought up my feeling that the "Professor" title is overused and denigrated. I told her that in Obama's case the usage is to give him undeserved gravitas. She felt the same, being mildly disturbed that Professor titles are thrown about in a cavalier fashion. But then what does she know? She's only president of a medium size college which does not have a law school.

My friends and acquaintances at Columbia feel the same. But then again, the ones I deal with are from the Medical and Health schools, not the law school.

Have all these individuals have lost their grip on reality?

Having said that, most of them support Obama. They realize in politics aggrandizement is part of the game. Also, they don't directly blame Obama for the "overuse" of that title. I think they blame his supporters more, the ones who are not in education and don't realize the protocols and certifications needed for these titles. Academics take their titles very seriously. Are lawyers and judges different?

I guess this may be similar to some large banks where most exempt employees have the title of VP. They get the title on their business cards and wave them around, telling all their acquaintances they are VP's. But they have no one to supervise and are busy figuring out how to live well on their low salaries. The real VP's are the Managing Directors, Senior VP's and Executive VP's. Banks do that because "titles" keep salaries down. I once told a VP he's an ass (he screwed something up really bad, for no good reason) and the VP responded I'm in trouble for saying that to him, an employee and a VP. Unfortunately, for the VP, the MD walking by heard his response, whereupon the MD commented something like "Don't you know we piss on our VP's." Courageous, in this day and age of litigation and Human Resources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He could be dirt poor or filthy rich; that doesn't change the fact that he IS out of touch. His tax plan alone is proof positive of that.

Do you really, really know Obama's tax plan? Or have you been infected by Obama's campaign sound bites?

If you did, you would know that Obama's plan relies on the Bush type of fiscal policy. Smoke and mirrors. Does that make Bush's fiscal policy a fine policy?

Obama Tax Plan Would Balloon Deficit, Analysis Finds

Democrat's Promise to Cut Taxes Without Adding to Debt Relies on Bush Fiscal Policy

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8080901860.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I admit I'm not an expert on Law Schools. My degrees are in education and pharmaceutical sciences.

Last week, I saw an acquaintance who is the president of a college. I brought up my feeling that the "Professor" title is overused and denigrated. I told her that in Obama's case the usage is to give him undeserved gravitas. She felt the same, being mildly disturbed that Professor titles are thrown about in a cavalier fashion. But then what does she know? She's only president of a medium size college which does not have a law school.

My friends and acquaintances at Columbia feel the same. But then again, the ones I deal with are from the Medical and Health schools, not the law school.

Have all these individuals have lost their grip on reality?

Having said that, most of them support Obama. They realize in politics aggrandizement is part of the game. Also, they don't directly blame Obama for the "overuse" of that title. I think they blame his supporters more, the ones who are not in education and don't realize the protocols and certifications needed for these titles. Academics take their titles very seriously. Are lawyers and judges different?

I guess this may be similar to some large banks where most exempt employees have the title of VP. They get the title on their business cards and wave them around, telling all their acquaintances they are VP's. But they have no one to supervise and are busy figuring out how to live well on their low salaries. The real VP's are the Managing Directors, Senior VP's and Executive VP's. Banks do that because "titles" keep salaries down. I once told a VP he's an ass (he screwed something up really bad, for no good reason) and the VP responded I'm in trouble for saying that to him, an employee and a VP. Unfortunately, for the VP, the MD walking by heard his response, whereupon the MD commented something like "Don't you know we piss on our VP's." Courageous, in this day and age of litigation and Human Resources.

I know you don't understand law schools or law professors, but I do. If you would take a moment to read the University of Chicago link that was supplied on this topic, you would see this statement from the University: "From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School." To answer your question, there are two legitimate reasons why Democrats might point out that Obama was a law professor: (1) the term is more easily understood than "lecturer" and (2) it's accurate, as attested by the University itself.

As someone else has observed, you're making a mountain out of - not even a molehill. You're making a mountain out of nothing. The reason Obama wasn't formally denominated as a professor was that he did not want to spend his life as a law professor. It was his choice. He wasn't asked to step back. They wanted him full time, he had other plans. That doesn't mean he wasn't the best professor there.

I asked you some very specific questions about law schools and made some very specific points about Obama's teaching. Unless you can come up with answers to those, maybe the best course is to rethink your position - because obviously you cannot defend it.

And if Hitler and Stalin weren't enough, now you invoke Goebbels. Tell you what, Bern, I think you're just like Hitler because he also had two eyes and a nose. You're comparison is not germane. That's the point that everyone with common sense recognizes intuitively, and you're missing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...