New Climate Change Poll Proves People Have Short Attention Spans

In the wake of the recent heat wave, more people in the U.S. now believe in “climate change” according to a recent poll. Numbers had dropped to fifty-two percent in the winter of 2010 because of record snowfall. In fact, snowfall and cold temperatures had hounded global warming conferences (known as the “Gore Effect”), so the high priests of the global environmental apocalypse changed their nomenclature from “global warming” to the more nebulous “climate change.” Apparently their linguistic sleight of hand  (coupled with a few dog days of summer) is starting to produce some results.

But all this really proves is that most people have incredibly short attention spans, and this makes their opinions readily susceptible to manipulation. Should we really be basing our global conclusions on four months of personal, individual experience? Ever heard of the Little Ice Age? It was a period of time in the mid seventeenth and early eighteenth century when global temperatures dropped so significantly that populations in Europe and North America thought it was the end of the world. It coincided with the Maunder Minimum, a period of time when the sun had almost no sunspots. The sun grows hotter when it has a lot of sunspots because it overcompensates for rifts in its magnetic field. It is colder overall when it has few sunspots. Sunspots are generated by the regular cycles of the sun’s magnetic field. Every minimum in history (like the Dalton Minimum and the Spörer Minimum) has coincided with lower than average global temperatures. And every maximum has, you guessed it, coincided with a period of higher than average global temperatures. And, you guessed it again, we are in the midst of a maximum right now.

So how does our carbon footprint affect the sun’s magnetic cycle? It doesn’t. At all. The point is that charlatans have been tying macro-events to your micro-actions for millennia in order to get you to believe, and do, whatever they want. Picture some Egyptian priests using astronomy to predict an eclipse. They tell the pharaoh of the coming P.R. opportunity (no separation of church and state there). When the time for the eclipse approaches, the pharaoh tells the gathered people that he will blot out the sun forever if they do not sacrifice a small business owner in front of the Sphinx and acquire at least two shrubberies for his garden. And we’ve been falling for the same tactic ever since. The problem isn’t our ignorance per se. It is our ignorance of our ignorance. It is the illusion of being well-informed that makes us ripe for manipulation.

How could we be well-informed though? We are human. We live for maybe eighty years if we avoid fatty foods and bath-salt-zombies. How much can we really know in that time? How much can we really see? And most of us don’t even augment our small knowledge with the vicarious experience that accurate history can provide. So can we really make sweeping generalizations on a global scale based on a gap-filled soundbyte constellation of myopic factoids? They’re building a new subdivision down the street, ergo the housing market is recovering. Gas prices are down this week, ergo this president is really getting a handle on Middle Eastern relations. We haven’t had a major terrorist attack in a decade, ergo the Patriot Act was really necessary. It’s really hot out today, ergo the globe is warming. An acorn hit my head, ergo the sky is falling.

We fall for this all the time. We talk about “the economy” as if it were an object rather than a complex of relationships. We think “the economy” is directly related to the President’s present policies, for better or worse. They tell us it’s hot because we don’t carpool enough and because corporations are evil. And so we sacrifice when Pharaoh blots out the sun.

I am not arguing that we should ignore the information that is available to us. I’m just pleading for a longer attention span and a greater premium on intellectual modesty. Hold out for a bit. Let it simmer. We’re like a driver that constantly overreacts and consequently spends more time in the ditches than on the road itself. We’ve been swerving left and right every two, four, and eight years now. And yet we still find ourselves spinning our wheels in the mud. Perhaps the best sweeping generalization we can draw from all this is: We don’t know very much. There was a time when we trusted in the One who does. But that was all priestcraft and superstition, right? We’re so beyond all that now.

0 responses

    • If you were talking about DIRECT knowing, I would agree with you. However, let’s step back and take stock of just how much one human being, by their own efforts, can learn verses how much is “taken on faith”.

      A person can observe the skies and determine, within a margin of error, how likely it is that it will rain — this is direct information, personally acquired knowledge. However, ask them how likely it is to rain a hundred miles away, and most people turn to the weather channel — indirect information from a second hand source. The first is knowledge, the second is faith; you can be fairly sure (higher psychology aside) that your eyes aren’t lying to you when you look at the clouds, but the weatherman can say whatever he wants and most people simply shrug and accept it without personally verifying. This is because, as we tell ourselves, we can’t fact-check EVERYTHING in our lives — we haven’t the time, the expertise, or the energy to do so. And so we take it on faith and accept the words of experts. We *believe* them.

      This is not *necessarily* wrong or bad; in fact without it, society could not get along. It is the transmission of second-hand and third-hand information that makes our Information Age what it is. So to say ‘beliefs are nothing’ is to say that every person must be intellectually self-sufficient — throw out the Internet, computers, books, schools, and trust nothing anyone else says until you’ve tested it for yourself. Babies, touch the stove to learn you shouldn’t and stick your tiny fingers into that wall outlet to learn why electricity is dangerous — ‘there is no substitute for knowing’.

      Should we check the veracity of second-hand and -third-hand sources that seem suspect? Yes. Should we investigate dissenting opinions and other viewpoints? Absolutely! But to disregard ‘belief’ entirely is madness — one person can never ‘know’ first-hand everything they need to get along in life, at least modern life. Belief, whether secular or religious, mundane or grandiose, cannot be entirely dispensed with for the simple fact that we just *can’t* know everything. Sooner or later, everyone takes *something* on faith, whether it’s the weatherman, scientists, the whispered vows of a lover, or a book claiming to tell us who God is. Belief is as inescapable as the desire to learn — we simply take the quicker route most of the time on our path to “knowing”.

      Ex Libris Veritas.

  1. If you say it enough people will believe anything. Back in the 70s we were heading into an ice age. Its all about getting more funding for your pet project. During the Roman times it was a lot hotter than it is now. Mother nature is a very strong woman.

    • …..and, according to history, the Equator ran through the center of where Illinois is now. It is a natural cycle of the ratation, axis, magnetic pull from the sun and planets, etc.. It’s way over my head, but I understand the bottom line…….there is NOTHING that humans can do about it, other than adapt to the situation.
      The Government, on the other hand, tries to make us believe it is caused by humans with their “carbon footprints” and want to tax us even more so than we are now! The old adage, “Insanity Rules”, is certainly true with the current U.S. Administration and the U.N..

  2. Not only that, but we have two generations of science teachers who have been improperly taught. The facts are very simple.

    CO2 is a “trace gas” in air, insignificant by definition, 1/7th the absorber of IR, heat energy, from sunlight as water vapor which has 80 times as many molecules captures 560 times as much heat making 99.8% of all “global warming.” CO2 does only 0.2% of it.

    Carbon combustion generates 80% of our energy. Control and taxing of carbon would give the elected ruling class more power and money than anything since the Magna Carta of 1215 AD.

    The Two Minute Conservative at http://tiny.cc/ahrlhw for political analysis, science and humor. Daily on Kindle.

  3. now lets see. teh moon is moving away from earth 1-1/2 inch per year. in my lifetime that s over 9 feet. less gravity pull of the moon, less efect on tides, less pull on earth. tides effect weather. next, earth wobbles and the tilt does a full wobble about every 26,000 years. and we are about the end of one wobble. the earth has gone through a few ice ages and warm periods, earth was WARMER in roman times. when will the climit nut jobs look at past history and learn weather does change and it is a normal for earth to go through weather cycles?

  4. There has been climate change since the beginning of time. That is why there are no dinosaurs anymore. And there were no cars then to pollute things. I can’t understand why people don’t realize that. is a bunch of stuff that is used to manipulate us. I agree with the author.

  5. Reminds me of Tow Mater in Cars (The first movie) when he says “Tractors are so duuumb” Same thing goes for Sheeple…

  6. When I was a teen-aager in Ark. the ’50’s, it was hotter during the summer than it is today. We had ice storms in winter and snow and sleet storms. There were tornadoes in the spring and summer. Massive snowmelt would cause the Missouri and Mississippi rivers to overflow their banks and flood millions of acres of farmland destroying homes and livelihoods. In other words we had weather all the time. No matter where on this planet you go there is the weather. Every day there is weather. When are we the people going to round up these thieves and liars who promote this big lie called (now) climate change and tar and feather them and run them out of the country on a rail. They just want your money and power over your lives. They are like all tin pot dictators (just like Obama) and should be dealt with accordingly. We called climate change Spring, Summer, Fall, and Winter. Environmentalist should be treated like the lunatics they are.

  7. Well written and on the mark as far as perception of climate change is concerned.

    One additional fact from the solar variability/climate field: total solar irradiance (the total solar energy input to the Earth’s climate system) peaked in the late 20th century and has been decreasing, along with solar magnetic activity (and sunspots) since. Recent analysis of solar and climate cycles indicates that we are heading into a little ice age like the Dalton period that should continue to the middle of the 21st century.

    Another interesting fact on the subject: the sun puts more energy into the Earth’s climate system in 10 minutes than humans produce and use in a year. We are just not significant players in the ‘climate game’ – mother nature is and always has been in control.

  8. I suppose when some genius figures out that the sun has a tremendous effect on the earth’s climate, the ACLU will file a lawsuit against the orb, and the EPA will slap a fine on it.

  9. As the saying goes ” Ignorance is bliss”. These are the same people who fell for the
    ” change” statement by hussien. Most do not even know about the 11 year sun cycle, and we are currently at its zenith. Go figure.

  10. Somebody finally using science to make the point that global warming is nothing more than the natural climate cycle. We need more of this reasoning. I believe the people pushing global climate change are nothing more than scam artists looking for opportunities to make money as Gore did.

  11. Global warming / climate control … call it what you want. It’s all about the government inserting themselves and levying taxes to increase revenue. I can’t believe that people fall for this crap. People are STUPID. All Cap (crap) and Trade will do for you is … well, it’ll double your electric bill. Would that please most people?
    Reminds me of my favorite George carlin quote … “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”

  12. Conservatives have been brought up to look for the truth. Liberals are told what to believe.
    http://junkscience.com/ All the Junk That’s Fit to Debunk
    http://www.nipccreport.org/about/about.html An international panel of nongovernment scientists and scholars who have come together to understand the causes and consequences of climate change.
    http://carbon-sense.com The Carbon Sense Coalition is a voluntary group of people concerned about the extent to which carbon is wrongly vilified in Western societies, particularly in government, the media, and in business circles.

  13. The Ten Planks That Are Destroying Our Country – COMMUNIST MANIFESTO.

    1. Abolition of private property: The foundation of this nation was ownership of property. The settlers came here to insure private ownership of land and our Founding Fathers made it unlawful for government to own land except for the ten square miles of Washington D.C. and such as may be needed for erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, Dockyards and other needful buildings. Today you don’t OWN your home, car, farm or most property. You are just allowed to use it as long as you pay your property taxes, buy a car license, pay for building permits and get permission from the zoning commission. Individual OWNERSHIP is only by virtue of government. To use property we must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the powers of government.

    2. Heavy Progressive Income Tax: I believe all Americans understand the IRS. What most of them don’t realize is that we didn’t have an Income Tax until 1913. Before that year Income Taxes were considered unconstitutional.

    3. Abolition of all rights of Inheritance: We now have Estate Taxes, Inheritance Taxes, also called the Death Tax. Many a farm and small business could not be passed on to the next generation, but had to be sold in order to pay the estate taxes. Many times the IRS forces the sale, as it did in the case of the Roy Rogers Museum sale.
    L. wants to add,,,
    4. Confiscation of property of all emigrants and rebels: Government seizures, tax liens, private land under Eminent Domain, the IRS taking property without due process and even taking “suspected” drug money from anyone carrying large amounts of cash is nothing but government confiscation of private property

    5. Central Bank: The Constitution called for Congress to “coin Money and regulate the Value thereof,” but since 1913 the Federal Reserve Bank has taken over that duty. The Federal Reserve is a “private” bank that sets interest rates and creates money out of thin air.

    6. Government control of Communications & Transportation: Today we have the Federal Communications Commission, Department of Transportation, Interstate Commerce Commission and the Federal Aviation Administration. You are not allowed to drive your car without a license.

    7. Government control of factories and agriculture: Our government has gained control of the banking industry, finance, automobile production, energy and health care. Department of Commerce, Department of Interior and the Bureau of Land Management, Department of Agriculture; all of which control land use.

    8. Government control of Labor: The Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the minimum wage law control all aspects of American businesses.

    9. Corporate Farms, Regional Planning: Corporate Agriculture now controls markets and prices of farm production. We now have Planning and Reorganization and zoning all across the nation.

    10. Government control of Education: State and Federal Departments of Education, National Education Association, Outcome Based Education, No Child Left Behind; all paid for with tax dollars.

    Karl Marx stated that these ten planks in the Communist Manifesto would be the test whether a country had become communist or not. Is America a Communist nation? Study the manifesto and the laws that have been passed by our Republican and Democrat politicians, and “you determine” if we are becoming a Communist nation…

  14. Reference
    Idso, S.B., Kimball, B.A., Pettit III, G.R., Garner, L.C., Pettit, G.R. and Backhaus, R.A. 2000. Effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on the growth and development of Hymenocallis littoralis (Amaryllidaceae) and the concentrations of several antineoplastic and antiviral constituents of its bulbs. American Journal of Botany 87: 769-773.
    At the turn of the last millennium, S.B. Idso and five colleagues (Idso et al., 2000) grew common spider lily (Hymenocallis littoralis) plants out-of-doors at the U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory in Phoenix, Arizona. This they did for two consecutive two-year cycles, within clear-plastic-wall open-top chambers that had their atmospheric CO2 concentrations continuously maintained at either the normal concentration, which at their urban site was about 400 ppm, or at an enriched level of 700 ppm. Then, at the ends of each of the two-year periods, they harvested the bulbs produced by the plants and measured their biomass, along with the concentrations of several substances they contained that had previously been proven to be effective in fighting various human maladies.

    In doing so, they found that the 75% increase in the air’s CO2 concentration resulted in a 48% increase in aboveground plant biomass and a 56% increase in belowground bulb biomass. In addition, the extra CO2 also increased the concentrations of five bulb constituents that possessed anti-cancer and anti-viral properties. These substances are listed in table below, along with the percentage increases they each exhibited, which when considered in their totality yield a mean increase of 12%. And combined with the 56% increase in bulb biomass, the net result was a mean active-ingredient increase of 75% due to the 75% increase in the air’s CO2 concentration.

    Table 1. Percentage increases in the concentrations of cancer-fighting substances found in the bulbs of common spider lilies in response to a 75% increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration.
    Substance
    Percent Increase
    One to one mixture of 7-deoxynarciclasine and 7-deoxy-trans-dihydronarciclasine
    6%
    Pancratistatin
    8%
    Trans-dihydronarciclasine
    8%
    Narciclasine
    28%

    What is especially exciting about these findings is that the substances the six scientists studied have been demonstrated to be effective in fighting a number of debilitating human diseases, including leukemia, ovary sarcoma, melanoma, brain cancer, colon cancer, lung cancer, renal cancer, Japanese encephalitis, yellow fever, dengue fever, Punta Tora fever and Rift Valley fever, as reported (with pertinent supporting citations) in their paper. Furthermore, there is reason to believe that many other such substances in other medicinal plants may also be benefited by atmospheric CO2 enrichment. See, for example, Health Effects (CO2 – Health-Promoting Substances: [http://www.co2science.org/subject/h/co2healthmedicinal.php] Medicinal Plants in our Subject Index. This larger body of work also points to the tantalizing possibility that there may be a number of still other health-promoting substances in the tissues of the foods we regularly eat that may additionally have their concentrations enhanced by the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 concentration. And indeed there are, as may readily be seen by perusing the items archived under Health Effects of CO2 (Health-Promoting Substances) in our Topical Archive.

    So here’s to our health … and the health of our children’s children … courtesy (in part) of the atmosphere’s steadily rising carbon dioxide concentration; for if the world’s climate alarmists can attribute nearly everything bad that happens nowadays, to the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content, surely a possible benefit or two can be pointed out. And the potential benefit described here is a huge one.

  15. Biofuels or Bust
    Reference
    Jaeger, W.K. and Egelkraut, T.M. 2011. Biofuel economics in a setting of multiple objectives and unintended consequences. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15: 4320-4333.
    In an important paper published in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Jaeger and Egelkraut (2011) note that renewable energy promotion, and especially that of biofuels, “has become a policy priority in many countries,” but they remark that “only recently has attention been drawn to some of the effects of biofuels on food prices, energy use, land-use change and carbon emissions.” Thus, in an effort to “illuminate this information in ways that will inform good policy decisions,” they proceed to examine biofuels from an economic perspective that “evaluates the merits of promoting biofuel production in the context of the policies’ multiple objectives, life-cycle implications, pecuniary externalities, and other unintended consequences.” And they do this by seeking answers to two key questions: (1) “How do the costs of biofuels compare to other options?” and (2) “Can biofuels be made available on a large enough scale to make significant progress toward those goals?”

    When all is said and done (and there is a lot of saying and doing to get there), the two academics from Oregon State University’s Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics state that their analysis “raises doubts about biofuels in relation to the specific objectives for which they have been promoted,” noting that “as a means of reducing fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions, domestic production of biofuels in the United States is found to be 14-31 times as costly as alternatives like a gas tax increase or promoting energy efficiency improvements.” In addition, they find that “the scale of biofuels’ potential contribution toward U.S. energy and climate policy goals is extremely small,” stating that the contributions of the mandates of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to the underlying goals of reduced fossil fuel use and reduced greenhouse gas emissions “are negligible.”

    But the “most striking result,” as they continue “may be the lack of evidence that biofuel policies can be expected to achieve significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, and that they may actually increase emissions.” Summing things up, therefore, they conclude that “judged on the basis of reducing fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions,” their results suggest that U.S. biofuel policies “have been ineffective and highly costly, producing negligible reductions in fossil fuel use and significant increases, rather than decreases, in greenhouse gas emissions.”

    Isn’t it amazing what a feel-good (but irrational) belief in an unverified climatic hypothesis can lead a supposedly enlightened populace (and their elected governmental representatives) to do.

    Archived 30 May 2012

  16. There has never been “climate” change……..this is a man made myth to make money for the left.. the climate change scientist have been caught changing their on findings and still there are “stupid” people that believe any non-sense.

  17. It is similar to politics. You want to convince people to believes your way so that you can tell them how to respond and support you. It is all about people who want to control you and tell you what to do. Like I said, just like politics.

  18. I have to admire such a well written artical, unfortunately those with any degree of liberal infection loose their ability to understand anything that smells the slighest bit conservative. Their eyesight, and hearing go next, and they are unable to see or hear ‘truth’, when it is right in front of them.

  19. And how about the West Coast, where the weather has been unseasonablyn cold all this year? global Warming? Climate change? Huh?

  20. The problem is, by the time we with short attention spans realize that it really is global warming, it will be too late to do anything to abate it. Then it really is bye bye humans and every other species on the plant, probably for 500,000 years….

  21. I know a thirty-year-old woman who had NEVER held a job. She convinced her hardworking dad to send her to a VERY EXPENSIVE liberal university so she could attain a Masters Degree in Environmental Science. One year later she graduated — and rather than find a job, she volunteered at no pay to support Barack Obama’s campaign, while her poor Republican Dad continued to support her! This ‘environmental’ stuff is QUITE an industry!!

  22. I remember not having such a thing as air conditioned or central heated homes. We survived quite well. I believe the earth is a constant changing place. We go through times of extreme heat and other times extreme cold. Sometimes we have drought and others heavy rainfall. Many times just normal weather in winter and summer. It seems to go in cycles. Most people do not remember that. There are weather phenoms called El Nino and La Nina that control a lot of our weather. Meteorologists seem so surprised that in July it is HOT and in January it is COLD.

  23. Scripture says, “As long as earth shall endure there will be summer, winter, springtime and harvest, heat and cold.” It may take a PH.D. to make something like global warming out of that, but fortunately, the most simple-minded can accept it as fact, because there is not one single thing he can do to change it.

  24. I wonder how many prehistoric creatures deaths were required to produce one days worth of oil to supply todays current use!

  25. Just supposin’: What if the couple of thousand scientists who have signed on to “Climate Change” turn out to be correct and not just after grant money. At what point do we pass the line into irreversibility and suffer who knows what bad consequences? This is the first time in history populations have been so large and emissions equally so large. This is the first time the human kind has been into anything with 7,000,000,000 or so souls involved and THEIR emissions factored in. This time doesn’t compare with any previous time. It’s that simple.
    Economies have been known to recover in a matter of years, but climate reversal with the current world population involved?
    Erring on the side of caution seems prudent to me. What about to you?

    • There are so many good reasons to pursue independence from fossil fuels, but climate change just doesn’t happen to be one of them. If you want to talk about the environment? Why not talk about water pollution? Now that’s an obvious environmental problem that is also very obviously man-made. But it isn’t apocalyptic enough to fear people into getting in line, I guess. Street preachers have known it for centuries: “It’s the end of the world!” has always been a surefire way to get people to believe your religion, whether it be Pentecostalism or Environmentalism.

    • Way back when I was in grammar school in the 1960’s, our teacher told us that we were “between ice ages” and could expect winters to get colder and summers to get shorter within our lifetime. I think her source was Scientific American, or some such authority.

      Global warming may or may not be true, and the fact that they renamed it climate change makes me suspect it is not behaving the way they expected it to. After all, these are the same government scientists who regularly try to panic us with bird flu, swine flu, mad cow disease and the immanent collapse of civilization if some tiny fish in a remote jungle stream goes extinct.

  26. I have a friend that had family living in New York when the little Ice age hit America and she sent me some pictures.1911

    Mother had a cousin living in Niagara
    Falls that year.

    She told the family that she and her neighbors woke up in
    the night feeling something was wrong. It took a while but they finally
    realized that it was the lack of noise.

    They had all become so used to the roar of the falls that
    the silence was unusual enough to alert their senses. Of
    course at that time nearly all the houses were near the falls.

    Amazing pictures !!! Almost 100 years
    old.

    Can you imagine walking on Niagara falls ???

    1911 Photos of Niagara Falls …

  27. Think about it….how does one explain sheeple voting for an unknown socialist bigot based on nothing more than “hope and change”? Now just look at the damage this idiot has and is causing.

    • Name-calling is not an effective way to persuade someone to listen to you. If you want to have a rational dialogue, you might want to rethink that “sheeple” bit?

      • The use of the word was not intended to “name call” or offend; rather it was an attempt to describe, possibly reflect, the images of the “Yes we Can (change America)” crowds during the “victory” celebrations that were filmed after the election result was announced. If you prefer the word “misguided” feel free to substitute.

  28. God is in the weather, liberals, and you know it! Weather kills unsuspecting liberals all the time…without warning…..you could be next! FEAR THE WEATHER LIBERALS AND DEMOCRATS EVERYWHERE! FEAR IT!!!!!

  29. Hey Climate Change Fools, wake up it’s a money making HOAX. NASA scientific staellites have proved it. Temperature changes are Natural and cyclical! Why isn’t Al Bore giving away some of his $150Million to cure supposed climate change? It’s about the $$$! He could give a sh*t about the climate, it’s about the $$$$-YOUR MONEY!

  30. The idea of Man-Caused global warming reminds me of the story I heard of a flea with an erection lying on its back on a leaf floating down a river shouting, “RAISE THE DRAWBRIDGE!!!”

  31. So far, the honesl scientists have claimed that this
    drought is the worst in the last half century of this country,I although I saw stories claiming
    it’s the worst in U.S. history (they seem to have forgotten about the Dust
    Bowl.) So what does this really say about climate change? I’m no scientist, but
    I have the ask the following common sense question:
    If more than fifty years
    ago the U.S. experienced a similar event, how can the environmentalists blame
    global warming on humans and the percentage of carbons we’re emitting today?
    Obviously, 50 years ago there were a great deal fewer cars, airplanes, and
    trains on the road burning carbons, and a population nowhere near the size of
    todays. Perhaps back then there were more cows passing gas . . . and carbons. That’s one theory I’ve heard. If true, that would mean
    that humans weren’t the main source of carbon emissions either back then or now.
    See how absolutely
    absurd this whole argument is? Although we’ve managed to throw a big cloud over
    this whole global warming theory, the liberals won’t hesitate to continue the
    debate using weather situations that appear to be extreme . . . no matter if
    the temperatures are hot or cold.

  32. Sometime it’s hot and sometime it’s cold; sometime it rains and sometime it snows….and that’s the way it is…and will always be.

  33. You can find yourself a more suitable climate if you have free access to a free world.
    A good reason to defeat Mr.0 iin November.

Leave a Reply