Michael Moore Pays A Visit To The Constitution

April 2, 2009

Millionaire Socialist Michael Moore is a big fan of Mr. Obama’s recent firing of the head of General Motors.

In the link above, he describes a vignette where he went to see The Constitution at the National Archive.

What he doesn’t mention is what part of the Constitution gives the President the authority to fire the CEO of a private business. The powers enumerated to the Executive Branch are quite limited, so I’ll include them below:

Article II – The Executive Branch Note

Section 1 – The President Note1 Note2

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

(The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two-thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice-President.) (This clause in parentheses was superseded by the 12th Amendment.)

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

(In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.) (This clause in parentheses has been modified by the 20th and 25th Amendments.)

The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Section 2 – Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Section 3 – State of the Union, Convening Congress

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

Section 4 – Disqualification

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

I missed the part where the firing was constitutional.

But remember, folks–Michael Moore has earned every penny of his bloated…savings account. Why, it would be wrong to cap how much money HE can make. He’s an ARTIST, for Pete’s sake. He’d grab his Big Mac and a torch and pitchfork were the executive branch to ever attempt to cap his salary. He’d be screaming about tyranny if Bush had ever fired, say, the head of Air America (or perhaps, more aptly, the head of National Public Radio, since they take taxpayer money).

Funny how that works….

If something is wrong, it’s wrong regardless of whether it was done by someone you like, Mr. Moore. It just goes to show, if you give this kind of power to the government, you cannot be surprised when they wield it against you. The government that has the power to give you everthing can take everything away.

I was not in favor of bailouts for anyone, regardless of whether it was President Bush or Mr. Obama doing the bailing. I don’t believe in “too big to fail” and I was convinced from the outset that GM was doomed. Regardless of all that, Mr. Obama had no authority to fire Mr. Wagoner.

Glenn Beck made the point today that what we’re seeing isn’t so much Socialism as Fascism–not the Fascism that ends in concentration camps and guys calling themselves Il Duce, but an unhealthy alliance of business and government, and increasingly onerous rules put on the people for “the national good.” I’ll need to think on that for a while. Mr. Obama is the child of two Socialists, was mentored by Socialist Frank Marshall Davis growing up, wrote in his books about how he identified with the Socialists in college, became a community organizer, got his start in Chicago politics with the socialist New Party, worked with Socialists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, and was rated a more liberal Senator than the Senate’s one avowed Socialist. That’s a lot of evidence for Socialism rather than fascism. I think Mr. Obama’s meddling in business is a means to an end, not an end in itself. It’s an interesting theory, though, and there’s obviously a continuum there.

N.B. This is NOT saying “Obama is Hitler” or “Obama is Mussolini.” Obviously, this tendency has been growing in government for some time, under both parties. The rot is going deeper, that’s for sure, but it can’t be placed solely at Mr. Obama’s feet.

Advertisements

9 Responses to “Michael Moore Pays A Visit To The Constitution”

  1. Kaleokualoha said

    What makes you think Obama was mentored by Davis? The Obama campaign rejected that claim in its response to the Corsi book. Are you buying into AIM’s disinformation campaign?

  2. John Galt said

    Corsi’s a 9/11 Truther, which makes anything he says immediately suspect. You’re right to reject him.

    However, Mr. Obama writes extensively in “Dreams from My Father” about Frank Marshall Davis as an influence in his life. http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1088074,CST-NWS-ment03.article

    It may be time to have a debate in this country about whether Socialism is right or wrong. Obviously, I have my own opinions, but at least 52% of the population doesn’t agree with me. I welcome that debate on the merits of the philosophy. However, I simply don’t understand how Mr. Obama, in his autobiographies, can mention his Socialist underpinnings again and again, yet act surprised when he is asked whether he is a Socialist. He was raised with it, he explored it in college, and he used it to get started in politics. If he is no longer attracted to the philosophy, it’s an honest question to ask when that change occurred. I can tell you when _I_ stopped being a Socialist–it’s when I walked the streets of Dublin, where all my friends told me about how great all the social benefits were, and yet I saw beggars and homeless Roma everywhere. If it was such a great place for the worker, why the misery? That’s when I started to reconsider. When did Mr. Obama do so?

  3. Obama’s book indicates Davis gave him advice on ethnic issues. There is no evidence that Davis indoctrinated Obama in any socialist theory, according to Davis’s biographer, Professor Edgar Tidwell.

    Although Obama’s book reflects his curiousity regarding socialism, there is no evidence that he ever internalized collectivist values. Once his intellectual curiousity was satisfied, he was able to move to other issues. Hence, no reconsideration was necessary.

    BTW: Aren’t there homeless Roma throughout Europe?

  4. John Galt said

    I would say that Mr. Marshall’s racial theory during the time he knew Mr. Obama was probably partly informed by his Socialism. I’m not saying he sat Barack down with a copy of Das Kapital, but Mr. Obama himself calls him an influence.

    Fair enough. In which of his autobiographies does he lay forth his political ideology and its underpinnings? This, by the way, is a question the media should have asked during the campaign. Was there really no need to reconsider when the socialist New Party gave Mr. Obama his start in Chicago politics? There’s a lot of smoke there for there not to be any fire.

    Yes, homeless Roma throughout Socialist Europe, where everyone supposedly has this great life of free education, free health care, subsidized housing, and a generous “safety net.” If it worked so well, why did it seem so soul-deadening to me? This is my complaint about St. Louis, my hometown, as well. We’ve had one-party rule for more than half a century. No evil conservatives to upset the plan. So, when does St. Louis become a crime-free, racially harmonious, prosperous workers’ community? We’ve been waiting a long time….

  5. Although Frank Marshall Davis may have joined the CPUSA, he was never a socialist in the Marxist sense. He never internalized collectivist values, so at most he could be considered a European-style Social Democrat.

    Edgar Tidwell, whom AIM’s Cliff Kincaid cites as “an expert on the life and writings of Davis,” dismisses misrepresentation of Davis’s influence in one simple paragraph:

    “Although my research indicates that Davis joined the CPUSA as a “closet member” during World War II, there is no evidence that he was a Stalinist, or even a Party member before WWII. Further, to those attempting to make the specious stand for the concrete, there is no evidence that he instructed Barack Obama in communist ideology. Frank Marshall Davis did NOT believe in overthrowing the USA. He was committed to what the nation professed to be. For him, communism was primarily an intellectual vehicle to achieve a political end-a possible tool for gaining the constitutional freedoms of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for ALL Americans” (see http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/Kaleokualoha ).

    The AIM disinformation campaign consists of a series of small lies fabricated to support the big lie that “His values, passed on to Obama, were those of a communist agent who pledged allegiance to Stalin” (see http://www.aim.org/aim-column/media-excuse-obamas-false-advertising ). A painstakingly documented analysis of Kincaid’s falsehoods is posted as “specific misrepresentation” at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxdvX .

    I invite any person of integrity to refute my evidence against AIM’s body of lies. If AIM had authentic evidence of Davis’s radical influence, they would not need to fabricate such evidence.

  6. John Galt said

    Hi Kaleokualoha,

    First of all, I don’t know how your comment got put into my “pending” queue, but as soon as I saw it tonight I posted it.

    We’re going to have to agree to disagree. If one’s enough of a true believer to join the _Communist_ Party of the United States, that’s about all the evidence of Socialism I need. “No evidence of Stalinism” is a pretty thin thread on which to hang one’s free-market credibility.

    I read your blog last night, and note that you’re related to Mr. Davis. I do not mean to impugn him. A lot of Socialists are very nice people. Paul Robeson was a Communist, but a great artist. Helen Keller was a Socialist. Our President seems like a nice guy. All nice people, with incorrect ideas.

    There’s a cliche out there, of limited utility: conservatives think liberals have bad ideas, and liberals think conservatives are bad people. That cliche can only be extended so far. Still, I will stop talking about Mr. Davis if it offends.

    However, I’m not crazy about the inference that I dutifully get my talking points from Accuracy in Media. I read about Mr. Obama’s relationship to Frank in Dreams From My Father. Wikipedia mentions it. The Chicago Sun-Times mentioned it.

    If I were to line out my mention of Mr. Davis in the post above, it’s still strong evidence of an attraction to the Socialist philosophy, which Mr. Obama has never articulated a renunciation of. Again, it may be time to have a debate on whether Socialism is a good or bad thing, but it’s disingenuous of Mr. Obama to act surprised when people ask him if he’s a Socialist when he himself, in his books, provides so much evidence of his belief in that philosophy. That’s _before_ “spread the wealth around” and other issues that popped up during the campaign.

  7. YOU WROTE: “We’re going to have to agree to disagree. If one’s enough of a true believer to join the _Communist_ Party of the United States, that’s about all the evidence of Socialism I need. “No evidence of Stalinism” is a pretty thin thread on which to hang one’s free-market credibility.”

    RESPONSE: is reasonable to assume that organization members assume their organization’s values, but it is important to distinguish between the organization’s original core values and their subsequent perversion by others. Have members internalized the original values, perverted values, or neither?

    Only when presented with mitigating circumstances can such memberships be reassessed. For example, many teenagers in Hawaii joined YMCA clubs for the social opportunities, although these teenagers were not Christian. Throughout history people joined churches because it was expected of them, even if they rejected church values.

    One could argue that the core value of Marxism is collectivism. When members articulate these values, it provides compelling evidence. When their behavior suggests otherwise, it creates reasonable doubt.

    Frank Marshall Davis rejected collectivism. He was a capitalist. He owned two paper companies, and sold advertising specialties, in Hawaii. He joined the CPUSA because of the professional and social opportunities it presented. Frank Marshall Davis joined the CPUSA during WWII, just as the United States joined the Soviet Union during WWII, not because they shared the delusion of a communist utopia. Each was a marriage of convenience. Davis joined the CPUSA because membership had its privileges, such as professional and social opportunities. He considered membership in the CPUSA as a “vehicle and tool” because, according to “The New Red Negro” (cited by AIM’s Cliff Kincaid as a source):

    “ONLY the Communist left had any significant institutional impact on African-American writing during the 1930s and 1940s. This support was crucial as the institutions that had maintained the New Negro Renaissance faded. And for better or for worse, the leading CPUSA functionaries involved in “Negro work” took a direct interest in African-American cultural production in a manner that was unusual, if not unique.

    Vilifying a writer for continuing to publish in CPUSA-supported publications, when they provided his only available institutional support, is completely unfair. Langston Hughes, Richard Wright, and Frank Marshall Davis all took advantage of this institutional support.

    Further, as The New Red Negro makes clear, there was no monolithic Stalinist doctrine within the CPUSA: “This is not to say that the impact of the Communist Left on African-American writers in the 1930’s and 1940’s flowed from absolute unity of ideology and practical application of that ideology. As mentioned before, the CPUSA itself, despite the claims of both the party leadership and its most ardent detractors, contained various, often conflicting tendencies. This conflicts appeared within top leadership, where Earl Browder and William Z. Foster and their supporters were frequently at odds. They also surfaced in the regional leadership of important districts that were occasionally, and in the case of southern California frequently, in opposition to the national leadership. Finally, at the rank-and-file level, when leadership debates broke out into the open (as they did in 1929, 1956-1946, and 1956), the were replayed in almost every CPUSA unit, often serving as the vehicle for the expression of a wide range of “unorthodox” political beliefs (ranging from social democratic to anarcho-syndicalist.”

    “A huge proportion of African-American poets (and writers and intellectuals generally) remained engaged with the Communist Left and cultural institutions from at least the early 1930’s until at least the early 1950’s. With the partial exception of the period from the German invasion of the Soviet Union to the end of the Second World War, the CPUSA placed the issue of race and the fight against Jim Crow near the center of all its work.”

    The bottom line is that communist ties were the NORM for African American poets and civil right activists during that period. Such ties did not mean that they internalized Marxist values, much less Stalinist values, even if they were aware of the distinction. To them, the CPUSA provided safe harbor from the ravages of Jim Crow America.

    Some could argue that Stalinism perverted the core values of Marxism, just as the Spanish Inquisition and pedophile priests perverted the core values of Christianity. On the other hand, few people are truly incorrigible. Just as most people can be saved in Christianity, people can be converted from destructive value systems including racism and communism. The steadily decreasing number of Americans who object to interracial dating, which is perhaps the most sensitive barometer of racial prejudice, attests to our progress.

    YOU WROTE: I read your blog last night, and note that you’re related to Mr. Davis. I do not mean to impugn him. A lot of Socialists are very nice people. Paul Robeson was a Communist, but a great artist. Helen Keller was a Socialist. Our President seems like a nice guy. All nice people, with incorrect ideas. However, I’m not crazy about the inference that I dutifully get my talking points from Accuracy in Media. I read about Mr. Obama’s relationship to Frank in Dreams From My Father. Wikipedia mentions it. The Chicago Sun-Times mentioned it.

    RESPONSE: Frank Marshall Davis was my father. Your blog contains one of the least inflammatory posts that buys into the mentorship meme. I commend you for not demonizing him as many others have done based on AIM’s disinformation, and appreciate your willingness to discuss this issue so cordially.

    AIM’s “Obama’s Communist Mentor” post has proven to be the source of the vast majority of such critical posts in the blogosphere. Although a “New Zeal” post first claimed mentorship, AIM propagated this meme so widely that virtually all such roads lead back to AIM. Many bloggers relayed this meme to others, who may not be aware of the point of origin. Other media mentioned the Davis-Obama connection without the mentorship meme, which almost serves as a DNA marker for the point of origin.

    Few people are truly incorrigible. Mikhail Gorbachev eventually rejected the core values of communism, and set his nation free. Just as most people can be saved in Christianity, people can be converted from destructive value systems including communism and racism. The steadily decreasing number of Americans who object to interracial dating, which is perhaps the most sensitive barometer of racial prejudice, attests to our progress.

    Once again, thank you for your willingness to objectively evaluate this issue. Sir, you are a gentleman.

  8. CORRECTED POST inserts “It” into first sentence of response (What? No preview function?):

    YOU WROTE: “We’re going to have to agree to disagree. If one’s enough of a true believer to join the _Communist_ Party of the United States, that’s about all the evidence of Socialism I need. “No evidence of Stalinism” is a pretty thin thread on which to hang one’s free-market credibility.”

    RESPONSE: It is reasonable to assume that organization members assume their organization’s values, but it is important to distinguish between the organization’s original core values and their subsequent perversion by others. Have members internalized the original values, perverted values, or neither?

    Only when presented with mitigating circumstances can such memberships be reassessed. For example, many teenagers in Hawaii joined YMCA clubs for the social opportunities, although these teenagers were not Christian. Throughout history people joined churches because it was expected of them, even if they rejected church values.

    One could argue that the core value of Marxism is collectivism. When members articulate these values, it provides compelling evidence. When their behavior suggests otherwise, it creates reasonable doubt.

    Frank Marshall Davis rejected collectivism. He was a capitalist. He owned two paper companies, and sold advertising specialties, in Hawaii. He joined the CPUSA because of the professional and social opportunities it presented. Frank Marshall Davis joined the CPUSA during WWII, just as the United States joined the Soviet Union during WWII, not because they shared the delusion of a communist utopia. Each was a marriage of convenience. Davis joined the CPUSA because membership had its privileges, such as professional and social opportunities. He considered membership in the CPUSA as a “vehicle and tool” because, according to “The New Red Negro” (cited by AIM’s Cliff Kincaid as a source):

    “ONLY the Communist left had any significant institutional impact on African-American writing during the 1930s and 1940s. This support was crucial as the institutions that had maintained the New Negro Renaissance faded. And for better or for worse, the leading CPUSA functionaries involved in “Negro work” took a direct interest in African-American cultural production in a manner that was unusual, if not unique.

    Vilifying a writer for continuing to publish in CPUSA-supported publications, when they provided his only available institutional support, is completely unfair. Langston Hughes, Richard Wright, and Frank Marshall Davis all took advantage of this institutional support.

    Further, as The New Red Negro makes clear, there was no monolithic Stalinist doctrine within the CPUSA: “This is not to say that the impact of the Communist Left on African-American writers in the 1930’s and 1940’s flowed from absolute unity of ideology and practical application of that ideology. As mentioned before, the CPUSA itself, despite the claims of both the party leadership and its most ardent detractors, contained various, often conflicting tendencies. This conflicts appeared within top leadership, where Earl Browder and William Z. Foster and their supporters were frequently at odds. They also surfaced in the regional leadership of important districts that were occasionally, and in the case of southern California frequently, in opposition to the national leadership. Finally, at the rank-and-file level, when leadership debates broke out into the open (as they did in 1929, 1956-1946, and 1956), the were replayed in almost every CPUSA unit, often serving as the vehicle for the expression of a wide range of “unorthodox” political beliefs (ranging from social democratic to anarcho-syndicalist.”

    “A huge proportion of African-American poets (and writers and intellectuals generally) remained engaged with the Communist Left and cultural institutions from at least the early 1930’s until at least the early 1950’s. With the partial exception of the period from the German invasion of the Soviet Union to the end of the Second World War, the CPUSA placed the issue of race and the fight against Jim Crow near the center of all its work.”

    The bottom line is that communist ties were the NORM for African American poets and civil right activists during that period. Such ties did not mean that they internalized Marxist values, much less Stalinist values, even if they were aware of the distinction. To them, the CPUSA provided safe harbor from the ravages of Jim Crow America.

    Some could argue that Stalinism perverted the core values of Marxism, just as the Spanish Inquisition and pedophile priests perverted the core values of Christianity. On the other hand, few people are truly incorrigible. Just as most people can be saved in Christianity, people can be converted from destructive value systems including racism and communism. The steadily decreasing number of Americans who object to interracial dating, which is perhaps the most sensitive barometer of racial prejudice, attests to our progress.

    YOU WROTE: I read your blog last night, and note that you’re related to Mr. Davis. I do not mean to impugn him. A lot of Socialists are very nice people. Paul Robeson was a Communist, but a great artist. Helen Keller was a Socialist. Our President seems like a nice guy. All nice people, with incorrect ideas. However, I’m not crazy about the inference that I dutifully get my talking points from Accuracy in Media. I read about Mr. Obama’s relationship to Frank in Dreams From My Father. Wikipedia mentions it. The Chicago Sun-Times mentioned it.

    RESPONSE: Frank Marshall Davis was my father. Your blog contains one of the least inflammatory posts that buys into the mentorship meme. I commend you for not demonizing him as many others have done based on AIM’s disinformation, and appreciate your willingness to discuss this issue so cordially.

    AIM’s “Obama’s Communist Mentor” post has proven to be the source of the vast majority of such critical posts in the blogosphere. Although a “New Zeal” post first claimed mentorship, AIM propagated this meme so widely that virtually all such roads lead back to AIM. Many bloggers relayed this meme to others, who may not be aware of the point of origin. Other media mentioned the Davis-Obama connection without the mentorship meme, which almost serves as a DNA marker for the point of origin.

    Few people are truly incorrigible. Mikhail Gorbachev eventually rejected the core values of communism, and set his nation free. Just as most people can be saved in Christianity, people can be converted from destructive value systems including communism and racism. The steadily decreasing number of Americans who object to interracial dating, which is perhaps the most sensitive barometer of racial prejudice, attests to our progress.

    Once again, thank you for your willingness to objectively evaluate this issue. Sir, you are a gentleman.

  9. John Galt said

    Thank you for coming by. Regardless of Mr. Davis’s political philosophy (and again, I’m coming from a viewpoint of an ex-idealist who believed passionately in Socialism in my college days and now see it as the soul-killing philosophy that killed 100 million people in the past century), I’m willing to leave that off. I’m not sure how much anyone can tell a teenage kid that would stick, anyway. “Mentor” may be too strong a word. I imagine the African-American community in Hawaii is small enough that many had a nodding relationship with one another.

    A poet can believe anything he pleases, as can any free person. I worry about what the _President_ believes. You can’t pick your parents, so the fact that his mother was a Socialist and his father a Communist tells us little. I’m more interested in Mr. Obama’s writings about his attraction to Socialism in college. I’m VERY interested in his getting his political start thanks to the socialist New Party. Again, people change (Lord knows I did), but I haven’t read anything from him where he mentions if or when he stopped believing these things. Was he using the New Party and ACORN and the like for political advancement, or is he a true believer? I suppose only time will tell.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: