On The Brink

Earth Day Re-Visited: A Tale Of Two Administrations

mlblogsanybetter — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 20:48:34 +0000

The contrast in environmental and energy policy from Bush to Obama couldn’t be more stark.

The objectives of the Bush/Cheney administration in the realm of energy policy was a secretive cabal of corporate interests determined to carve up the world amongst themselves right out of the gate– procuring thousands of domestic drilling permits during the Bush years for the Lee Raymond‘s of the world along the way, that to this day, many go undeveloped, stagnating in a sort purposefully hoarded limbo, or environmental purgatory.

It started early in the Bush administration, with Dick Cheney’s Energy Task Force assembled at the White House in January 2001. What followed was massive energy shortages and blackouts in California on the backs of Enron market manipulation followed by the Northeast blackout of 2003.

Moving forward, into the bombing and invasion of Iraq, Bush warned Iraqis in the pre-dawn Shock and Awe public address to the American people on March 17, 2003, in ominous baritone nonetheless, proceeded to say: “And all Iraqi military and civilian personnel should listen carefully to this warning: In any conflict, your fate will depend on your actions. Do not destroy oil wells, a source of wealth that belongs to the Iraqi people.“

Ha. Yeah, sure it did. When Judicial Watch sued for documents under the Freedom Of Information Act in 2001 in regard to Dick Cheney’s Energy Task Force meetings, what they received in 2003 depicted a Bush/Cheney administration that was laser-focused on Iraqi oil fields and the eventual corporate divvying up, even listing “potential suitors” to the bounty of il-gotten gains of Iraqi sovereignty, with the privatization of Iraq’s natural resources achieved, saying nothing of the cultural genocide and WMD’s Bush dropped on millions of people in the process. Iraq’s constitution is based on blood for oil and the document drafters made sure to include what to do with the oil in Article 108 and 109.

So, they got what they wanted from their Iraq adventure.

Former Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, finally said what many of us had claimed all along in the Fall of 2007 in his Memoir he said plainly– “Everyone knows: The Iraq war is largely about oil”

Thanks for the honesty, Alan Greenspan.

$1.49 per gallon to $3.25 by the time the party was over.

Dick Cheney was formerly accused of suppressing and manipulating climate science data, while the administration’s solutions to all of this involved some lip-service and pruning around the edges, like halting supplies to the U.S. Strategic reserve, but basically fell back on policies of even less environmental regulation, some slight adjustments in auto-fuel standards, and complained about not drilling in ANWR. He also told us that “America is addicted to oil” and when asked in 2008 what he thought about gas prices reaching $4.00 a gallon, he replied, “that’s interesting. I hadn’t heard that.”

Oil companies like Exxon Mobil raked in record profits, historic profits, actually. As in, never-before-achieved annual profits by a U.S.-based corporation. Bush hailed the profit-making as a result of the marketplace. Exxon Mobil paid no Federal Income Tax in 2009.

But you knew that wasn’t enough, right?

In 2008, The Bush administration’s Department of the Interior, more specifically, top officials at the department of The Mineral’s Management Service, was discovered by the department’s Inspector General, Earl E. Devaney, to have been engaging in “coke parties and orgies” with industry lobbyists and various energy representatives. Mr. Devaney called it “a culture of ethical failure.” According to reporting by The New York Times, two other investigative reports focused on “a culture of substance abuse and promiscuity” in the department’s Royalty-In-Kind program– a part of the agency responsible for collecting about “$4 billion a year in oil and gas, rather than cash.”

That’s some legacy.

George W. Bush did get to keep Saddam’s pistol for the sacrifices the American people have made. It’s proudly displayed in his $300 million dollar Legacy Library.

But let’s take a look at the here and now, shall we?

At the EPA, there’s Lisa P. Jackson.

At the Department of the Interior, there’s Ken Salazar.

At the Department Of Energy, we have Secretary Dr. Steven Chu– distinguished scientist and co-winner of the Nobel Prize for physics(1997).

We do things differently now.

And in case you didn’t know, Vice President Biden is, thankfully, no Dick Cheney.

I’ll let the Vice President tell you about some of the more detailed changes we’ve made as a country, and where we’re headed, under the leadership of President Barack Obama.

Meanwhile, The Republican Party has made a mockery of 21st century energy and environmental policy and simply demanded, Drill, Baby, Drill!!!

It’s a little more complicated than that, kids.

Public Schools and Parents

mlblogsanybetter — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:28:12 +0000

Public Schools have been vilified, mocked, and targeted, as the cause for most of America’s shortcomings as a convenient whipping boy for all of society’s problems.

“It’s the schools! It starts with the schools!”

“Just another victim of the public school system…”

I’ve always considered public schools to be supplemental, or a fail safe education, for over-worked and under-educated, or just un-involved parents for the benefit of their children. The cooperative guarantee between citizen and state of a basic foundation for knowledge as a minimal insurance policy for a better society.

It’s the parents’ responsibility to expound and expand a child’s learning. To reinforce, with proper context, the teachings of public schools. To implement your own knowledge and experiences to better cultivate well-rounded individuals of the world community.

It’s one thing to blame the schools for a lack of an educated populace, but when do parents take responsibility? Simply paying your taxes doesn’t excuse you from being an uninvolved parent.

When are the parents held accountable for their lack of education, or their responsibility to their community and schools, to work with public schooling to broaden the child’s education?

It’s easy to blame the schools and the government.

It’s difficult to look yourselves in the mirror and find actionable fault. To do so would be an admittance of culpability in your child’s lack of education, or understanding.

Dropping your kid off at school and telling the school and the community, “here, my child is in your hands”– is lazy and irresponsible.

It really does take a village. Due diligence and constant reinforcement.

That means cooperation. Public schools are an affirmation, and sometimes, a cruel reminder of who you are as a parent. If you think public schools are the primary source for the “dumbing down” of the country, you’re part of the false-narrative, and not as smart as you think you are, perhaps.

There’s more to providing an education for your children than to just drop them off, pick them up, and do it all over again the next day, and blame the school when a child falls behind, acting as gravity for society’s knee-jerk condemnation of the rights to basic education the government established.

It’s not easy to be a good parent. But it’s easy to place the blame elsewhere.

Happy 90th Birthday, Justice Stevens!

mlblogsanybetter — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:52:45 +0000

Today is Justice John Paul Stevens’ 90th birthday!

My favorite Justice.

Holy Cow!

C’mon home, Justice Stevens.

The beer is cold, sir.

Stevens throws out the first pitch at Wrigley Field before a Chicago Cubs game against the Cincinnati Reds in September 2005.Photo by AP Photos/Jeff Robertson

Jon Stewart, Your Mets Give Us Nothing!

mlblogsanybetter — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 17:51:56 +0000

Jon Stewart seen here not doing his best to lose to the Cubs.

Alright, Stewart.

This is go time!

Cubs @ Mets. Tonight!

This past weekend, your NY Mets(4-8), flopped two out of three against the Central division-leading St. Louis Cardinals(8-4, no thanks to your Mets) falling three and a half games out in the East and negating a chance for my futile Cubs to not lose a game in the Central Division standings after our dismal showing against the lost and confused Houston Astros(3-9: you’re welcome, Houston).

So, it’s go time, Stewart! and by “Stewart,” I mean, Stewart!

Nothing outside of a World Series appearance for my Cubs would give me more satisfaction than helping out your NY Mets on their inevitable journey to Washington Nationals’ whipping-boy status this year.

And don’t just think that just because I wasn’t even born in 1969, that I have forgotten baseball’s biggest overlooked scandal– this side of my worthless Pete Rose autographed baseball– that your Mets fiendishly co-opted the Muhammad Ali rope-a-dope and deployed a poor, defenseless, black cat to the Cubs’ on-deck circle to cement your Mets’ historically self-evident cheating ways( I really have no evidence to back this up) sneaking their way into a National League Pennant, besting my Cubs in the last weeks of the season– denying us yet again, a shot at glory. Glory that has eluded us while we’ve been forced to observe, in excruciatingly, teeth-gnashing, shockingly horrific development– the Chicago White Sox surging to a World Series title and the ensuing World Series ring fight they partook in after the fallout had seemingly, and mercifully, subsided. I know a guy that knows a guy who knows a guy that knows on a hunch that the grounds-keeper and his distant cousins all received World Series rings.

I will be watching re-runs of Glenn Beck to see if his chalkboard connects the dots between the 1919 ‘Black Sox’, the 2005 Chicago White Sox World Series, and your 69′ Mets.

Scared, yet?

So, I know it’s early, yet. There’s about a hundred and fifty of these days to go.

But the road to ruin begins Tonight-eh!

Bundle up because it’s going to be a chilly week at El Estadio De Los Mets.

The Cubs are coming, you hear that?! The Cubs are coming…

and hell-freezing-over is coming with them!

So, Stanley Kubrick Had A Lot Of Boxes

Thorsten — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 05:03:03 +0000

–STANLEY KUBRICK’S BOXES–

The Description reads:

A documentary made by Jon Ronson (author of “Them” and “The men who stare at goats”. After Stanley Kubrick’s death, Ronson is invited to examine thousands of boxes in which Stanley Kubrick stored everything. [about 48 minutes all 5 parts]

The key word here is, “everything.”

Dr. Strangelove - 64′

2001: A Space Odyssey - 68′

A Clockwork Orange - 71′

The Shining - 80′

Full Metal Jacket - 87′

From Wikipedia: In 1999–four days after screening a final cut of Eyes Wide Shut , 70-year-old Kubrick died of a heart attack in his sleep. He was buried next to his favorite tree in Childwickbury Manor, Hertfordshire, England, U.K.

Stanley Kubrick‘s family tends to his legacy of thousands of neatly categorized, filed, and purposefully stacked boxes– Archived and preserved like an informal Library Of Kubrick.

I app
reciate all of Stanley Kubrick’s movies. I hope it isn’t considered provocative to say I liked Eyes Wide Shut.

In an oddly revealing dialog in the September 1968 issue of Playboy magazine, Kubrick pulled back the scalp and showed some beautiful Carl Sagan brain when asked about the “philosophical interpretation” of 2001: A Space Odyssey and “whether or not it was a profoundly religious film,
” Kubrick got trippy-deep :

STANLEY KUBRICK: I will say that the God concept is at the heart of 2001–but not any traditional, anthropomorphic image of God. I don’t believe in any of earth’s monotheistic religions, but I do believe that one can construct an intriguing scientific definition of God, once you accept the fact that there are approximately 100 billion stars in our galaxy alone, that each star is a life-giving sun and that there are approximately 100 billion galaxies in just the visible universe. Given a planet in a stable orbit, not too hot and not too cold, and given a few billion years of chance chemical reactions created by the interaction of a sun’s energy on the planet’s chemicals, it’s fairly certain that life in one form or another will eventually emerge. It’s reasonable to assume that there must be, in fact, countless
billions of such planets where biological life has arisen, and the odds of some proportion of such life developing intelligence are high. Now, the sun is by no means an old star, and its planets are mere children in cosmic age, so it seems likely that there are billions of planets in the universe not only where intelligent life is on a lower scale than man but other billions where it is approximately equal and others still where it is hundreds of thousands of millions of years in advance of us. When you think of the giant technological strides that man has made in a few millennia–less than a microsecond in the chronology of the universe–can you imagine the evolutionary development that much older life forms have taken? They may have progressed from biological species, which are fragile shells for the mind at best, into immortal machine entities–and then, over innumerable eons, they could emerge from the chrysalis of matter transformed into beings of pure energy and spirit. Their potentialities would be limitless and their intelligence ungraspable by humans.

PLAYBOY: Even assuming the cosmic evolutionary path you suggest, what has this to do with the nature of God?

STANLEY KUBRICK: Everything–because these beings would be gods to the billions of less advanced races in the universe, just as man would appear a god to an ant that somehow comprehended man’s existence. They would possess the twin attributes of all deities–omniscience and omnipotence. These entities might be in telepathic communication throughout the cosmos and thus be aware of everything that occurs, tapping every intelligent mind as effortlessly as we switch on the radio; they might not be limited by the speed of light and their presence could penetrate to the farthest corners of the universe; they might possess complete mastery over matter and energy; and in their final evolutionary stage, they might develop into an integrated collective immortal consciousness. They would be incomprehensible to us except as gods; and if the tendrils of their consciousness ever brushed men’s minds, it is only the hand of God we could grasp as an explanation.

PLAYBOY: If such creatures do exist, why should they be interested in man?

STANLEY KUBRICK: They may not be. But why should man be interested in microbes? The motives of such beings would be as alien to us as their intelligence.

Awesome!

Kubrick then answers one of the last questions:

PLAYBOY:
If life is so purposeless, do you feel that it’s worth living?

Great question with a thoughtful answer if you care to read it.

But getting back to Kubrick’s Boxes. In an article written by the director, Jon Ronson, says of Kubrick’s macro-meticulous obsession with his film making approach:

But this attention to detail becomes so amazingly evident and seemingly all-consuming in the later boxes, I begin to wonder whether it was worth it. In one portable cabin, for example, there are hundreds and hundreds of boxes related to Eyes Wide Shut, marked EWS – Portman Square, EWS – Kensington & Chelsea, etc, etc. I choose the one marked EWS – Islington because that’s where I live. Inside are hundreds of photographs of doorways. The doorway of my local video shop, Century Video, is here, as is the doorway of my dry cleaner’s, Spots Suede Services on Upper Street. Then, as I continue to flick through the photographs, I find, to my astonishment, pictures of the doorways of the houses in my own street. Handwritten at the top of these photographs are the words, “Hooker doorway?”

*Special thanks to Mystery Man on Film

I know Stephen King didn’t like Kubrick’s version/vision of King’s The Shining because alcoholism didn’t play a big enough part in the lead character– I think he’s absolutely wrong about the end result– but from one genius to another SK said of Kubrick:

“a man who thinks too much and feels too little.”

Despite how much truth this may carry, Stanley Kubrick made some really good movies. The music that set the tone from A Clockwork Orange, The Shining, and Eyes Wide Shut is etched on my conscience forever.

I’ll bet there’s plenty of neatly itemized references, photos of doors and streets, note cards, dated and initialed entries and rough drafts with perfectionist comments in the margins hiding deep within Stanley Kubrick’s castle of boxes– that just might know exactly why that music makes me feel the way I do, or why his thousands of boxes of stuff makes me feel a little uncomfortable in an “all work and no play makes Stanley a dull boy” sort of way.

Three Cheers For Taxpayers!

mlblogsanybetter — Fri, 16 Apr 2010 06:18:01 +0000

Taxes are in the Constitution.

Where else are you going to get such bang for your buck?

The greatest nation in the history of the world, or as we know it, wouldn’t be possible without tax-paying Americans.

It’s worth celebrating if you think about it.

Good job taxpayers!

Keep up the good work!

You make it all possible.

Three cheers for taxpayers!

#42

mlblogsanybetter — Fri, 16 Apr 2010 01:44:51 +0000

So, it was Jackie Robinson day.

Everybody was wearing #42 jerseys.

Seeing #42 gives me a little sentimental chill when I see it in play, plainly displayed on a baseball uniform.

Like a game-long moment of silence making it’s presence felt through the noise of the crowd, the calls, and competitive chatter of the in-game familiarities.

Jackie Robinson is here. Sitting on the bench. Manicuring his bat and taking notes on the match ups. Who’s on the mound?

OBP, OPS, ERA, K’s, E’s, SLG, HR’s, CG’s, and my favorite, HBP’s.

Lots of numbers involved with those letters– Historical and contemporary facts and figures. Legendary accolades and quiet obscurity. Magnitudes of victorious grandeur and tearful disappointment.

Hot shot Wallstreet pit traders with their yelling and numbers and hand signaling at each other– don’t have anything on the baseball score and record keeper.

I’m actually surprised Wall Streeters haven’t figured out complex financial schemes to capitalize on ERA’s and AVG’s derivatives.

Sidebar: We use hand signals, too! Study them and mimic like monkeys. As… a way of catching the suicide squeeze bunt sign coming from the third base coach, hit and run, or the straight steal from vets like Dusty Baker, or Mike Scioscia, just to maybe, possibly, although highly unlikely and naive maybe– in the slimmest of chances– in a game of inches and human error, that “those bums over there are tipping their hands!” — just to gain any advantage, imaginary or otherwise, over our bitterest rivals and inter-league strangers.

Baseball encourages you to be mindful of the numbers and visibly woven patterns of geometrical relativity, recollecting the precise statistic to be referenced like a social security number.

Lifetimes measured in averages standing up to their historical value in echoes of layered spit-ball context.

When I see the #42 on the field, it’s naturally, instinctively, to a baseball fan, a different kind of day, for me at least.

Numerically, statistically, and emotionally.

That’s part of the reason why it seems like a different day, a little out of sorts, when 42 is introduced and applied to the mathematical tapestry of say, a day game at Wrigley.

I wonder if it has an effect on players.

Like, do lots of players put it on trying, with determined tongue-wagging-concentration-faces, to live up to the legend…?

Do players who carry typical superstitions, or JOBU freak outs– have a rough day if they’re not wearing their own number?

Or more to wonder, if there are racist players in the league, or even racist fans, do they feel reluctant and weird, or resentful and hostile– seeing and wearing Jackie Robinson’s #42?

The numbers don’t always speak for themselves, and the number isn’t just a number, and so it seems with the number forty-two.

A Radical Right Wing Court: Caperton v. Massey Re-Visited

mlblogsanybetter — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:18:48 +0000

With the timing of Justice John Paul Stevens‘s announced retirement coinciding with the Massey coal mine disaster, i’m surprised we’re not hearing more about the “Originalist” view of something so “mundane” as Due Process whilst the Tea Party, er, Republican party– demands! that President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee must not be a “radical” and needs to be adequately “mainstreamy” — for their very apple pie conservatism and not-at-all-unmainstream world view that everybody knows is mystical and prudent and Jesus and Reagan.

Consider– Caperton V. Massey for further evidence that the prototypical conservatives on the court, Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts are the very definition of radical and activist; all the while conservatives continue asserting their ideas of a minimalist approach to the constitution is thee “mainstream.”

That couldn’t really be further from the objective truth.

Chief Justice Roberts said in his confirmation hearings, and in several interviews, that his job is simply to call “balls and strikes” as an “originalist minimalist,” or some such parallel variation of judicial philosophy.

Read Justice Robert’s dissenting opinion in Massey v. Caperton.

Roberts begins: “I, of course, share the majority’s sincere concerns about the need to maintain a fair, independent, and impartial judiciary–and one that appears to be such. But I fear that the Court’s decision will undermine rather than promote these values.”

He begins in bad faith with what can only be described as judicial snark, but deeply-rooted and well-documented character flaws aside, according to the Chief Justice, Due Process, Supreme Court precedent, the unambiguous appearance of the probability of bias, state laws for recusal, and just basic ethical standards– were too flimsy for the Conservative 4 to rule with the majority.

His opinion hinges on vague unforeseen cases in the future– using strawman arguments bordering on clairvoyant jurisprudence.

In Roberts’s words, he proceeds to ask 40 questions, in what again qualifies as snark in judicial vernacular, all 40 are similarly fundamental in nature.

Chief Justice Roberts’s words:

But there are other fundamental questions as well.With little help from the majority, courts will now have to determine:

1. How much money is too much money? What level of contribution or expenditure gives rise to a “probabilityof bias”?

2. How do we determine whether a given expenditure is”disproportionate”? Disproportionate to what?

3. Are independent, non-coordinated expenditures treated the same as direct contributions to a candidate’s campaign? What about contributions to independent out side groups supporting a candidate?

4. Does it matter whether the litigant has contributed toother candidates or made large expenditures in connection with other elections?

5. Does the amount at issue in the case matter? What if this case were an employment dispute with only$10,000 at stake? What if the plaintiffs only sought non-monetary relief such as an injunction or declaratory judgment?

6. Does the analysis change depending on whether the judge whose disqualification is sought sits on a trial court, appeals court, or state supreme court?

It goes on and on like that in all it’s overly-unimaginative intellectual dishonesty with Roberts adding, ”These are only a few uncertainties that quickly come to mind.”

It’s a Due Process case! Equal Protection! Balls and strikes stuff, if there ever was such an approach. Only an intellectually smirking Bush appointee would ask these types of questions in a case inarguably pertaining to due process. He’s calling balls and strikes like Leslie Nielson in The Naked Gun playing Frank Drebin playing Enrico Pallazzo playing a home plate umpire defending the new Monarchies– Corporations..

Or Like Jay Bybee and John Woo trying to figure out how to best retro-actively legalize torture on the opinion that the Law Of The Land against torture is “quaint.”

On March 9, 2009, The WSJ-online accurately described the case as such:

The case has its roots in a complicated tale of political and corporate intrigue between two coal companies, leading eventually to a jury verdict of $50 million in favor of Hugh Caperton, owner of Harman Mining Co., against Massey Coal Co. for fraud and breach of contract. As Massey’s appeal worked its way through the West Virginia court system, Massey CEO Don Blankenship spent $3 million of his personal funds in 2004 on hard-hitting advertisements attacking incumbent state Supreme Court Justice Warren McGraw, who was seeking re-election.

Mr. McGraw’s opponent, Brent Benjamin, won that election and later joined the 3-to-2 majority that threw out the verdict against Massey. The argument before the Supreme Court is that Justice Benjamin should have recused himself from the case because of Mr. Blankenship’s campaign expenditures.

You don’t need a FOIA petition to figure out the conservative justices are not only the types of “activist judges” conservatives verbally project onto so called “Liberal” justices, but they greatly misrepresent their judicial philosophy in public, either to themselves, to the American people, the spirit of founding intent, or all of the above. Essentially, they’re unfit.

I can only wonder how their views of the constitution, interpretation of the spirit of founding intent, as self-proclaimed Originalists, or Federalists– or Whateveralists– how those views would have been inserted, and how they would have shaped Dredd Scott, or the 11th – 24th Amendments that movement conservatism openly diminishes and resents.

If their views on cases so simple and self-explanatory as Due Process and Equal Protection are so compromised that they allow Judges on state and local levels to be openly bought and paid for, they really have no business deciding that the court has no business in determining whether an innocent man should be put to death, or deciding a minor should be subjected to strip search based on he
arsay, or subverting democracy with Bush v. Gore’s unprecedented nature or the blatant conflicts of political and ethical interest, or the ridiculously prevailing determination in the Bong Hits 4 Jesus case.

The dissent in Caperton v. Massey says more about the dangers of the Federalist society ideologues on the court, and does more damage to the credibility of democracy and rule of law than perhaps even the Citizen’s United decision. Because if judges are for sale, justice is smothered and subverted in its basic function at the core of Equal Protection and Due Process. Politicians for sale is one thing.

Justice is supposed to be blind. But according to the Conservative 4, Justice gets a peek at its highest bidder.

In the courts’ minority decision to take the side of Don Blankenship and Massey Coal and their judge-for-hire, Judge Benjamin($), as recent developments have revealed, the Conservative judges on the highest court in the world have traces of human anguish– and blood– on their culpable hands and tinyish heads.

It’s become self-evident that their decisions are quite literally hurting democracy, rule of law, and killing people. I worry that the right wing conservative justices on the court could be clinically defined as “sociopaths.”

I hereby decree, with the research at hand, rudimentary objective case study, precedent and political context, and analysis as my guide, Right Wing men are out of order on the highest court in the land.

“Long Live The Confederacy!”

mlblogsanybetter — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 06:46:25 +0000

So, there’s something in the air.

The Republican party is coming right out and distinguishing themselves as the party that identifies more loyally to the idea of the Old South, or the days before “the Great War of Yankee aggression,” as Congressman Paul Broun(R-Georgia) put it on the floor of the U. S. House Of Representatives on March 18th in describing the passing of one of President Obama’s key domestic initiatives– Health care insurance regulation.

But now it’s getting serious. Newly elected Governor of Virginia, Bob McDonnell, has declared April to be “Confederate History Month!”

This is the same Bob McDonnell that the Republican party used for the purpose of appearing, as Stephen Colbert satirically referred to as– “our alternate universe white President,” in a speech representing the Republican party’s theatrical civil-war/Jefferson Davis re-enactment, or “rebuttal,” to President Obama’s historically significant first State Of The Union Address.

Governor Bob McDonnell gave the party’s rebuttal from Richmond, Virginia– once declared the Capital Of The Confederacy.

April is also the month Virginia officially seceded from the Union- April 17, 1861.

So, Governor Bob, the Republican party, President Barack Obama…

Hmmm…

Are the Republicans stipulating that President Obama is the President Abraham Lincoln in this open re-enactment of “the Great War Of Yankee Aggression…?”

I would be happy to agree with that.

Go right ahead, Republican party.

“Long Live The Confederate States Of America!”

Free Lil’ Wayne!

mlblogsanybetter — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 05:35:16 +0000

Lil’ Wayne Goes To Jail:

That is all.