Tag Archives: George Orwell

LIBERAL INDOCTRINATION – MUCH?

Liberals constantly refuse to differentiate between legal and illegal immigration. In advocating for crackdowns on illegal immigration, conservatives are accused by liberals of being anti-immigration. Of course, this couldn’t be any further from the truth, and pointing this out won’t stop liberals and their henchmen in the main stream media from  lying and hypocrisy. A few years back, one talking head on Fox News asked a liberal if they would acknowledge that there is a difference between legal and illegal immigration, and the liberal did acknowledge  there was a difference.

Could the failure of liberals, unless directly confronted, to differentiate between legal and illegal immigration be a subtle method of indoctrination? Failing to make that distinction on a regular basis for years, and constantly berating the right about its stances on illegal immigration, only muddies the waters. Furthermore, lies from the main stream media coupled with the left’s failure to differentiate, over a period of time, could cause Americans to quit making that distinction. As a result, the left has smeared the line to the extent that a line no longer exists. When no one one any longer makes that distinction, conservatives will be labeled the evil ones and should never be allowed to hold public office. Also, anyone who wants to enter this country and reap the benefits of living in the country will be able to do so.

“War is Peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.” George Orwell.

Former President, Barack Hussein Obama, to the best of my knowledge, coined the expression, “Driving while black.” We’re always hearing stories about blacks being pulled over by the police, particularly white police. Many in the black community, and I’m sure in the non-black liberal community, think this practice is racist and that there are far too many incidents of blacks being pulled over for no other reason than, “Driving while black.”

If there is such a problem with blacks, or other non-white minorities, being pulled over without probable cause, then first we need to determine just how many minorities were pulled over for no good reason. The question must be asked…was the person breaking the law or giving the appearance that he or she might be breaking the law. Was this person speeding, did this person run a stop sign, was this person driving with an expired tag, was this person weaving? Only after determining if there is a problem, can we take steps to correct the problem.

It seems, though, that liberals are also okay with also smearing the lines in this example. Liberals despise law enforcement and want to weaken law enforcement so that the criminal element, most of which are liberals themselves, have more power. Liberals don’t believe in obeying the law, except when it benefits them.

“War is Peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.” George Orwell.

I have a black liberal friend who turns over every stone  looking for racism. And, she’s your typical liberal, who defines racism to suit her needs of the moment. I once indicated to her that when she brings up all these silly things, that she is masking true incidents of racism that need to be addressed and corrected. She simply replied to me, “I don’t agree.” Is the left attempting to make everything racist, and if you don’t agree with them, you’re a racist?

While Obama was president, being called a racist was the worst thing you possibly be called. You could lose you job and your reputation just because someone alleged, not necessarily proved, that something you did or said was racist.

Are liberals trying to make everything racist and destroy anyone who might exhibit alleged racist tendencies. White hate is rampant among liberals, even white liberals. If you’re white, you’re supposed to hate yourself for it, you’re supposed to cry yourself to sleep at night, perhaps even inflict physical pain upon yourself. Is this a segue into making it okay to hate whites, to discriminate against whites, to make whites second class citizens?

“War is Peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.” George Orwell.

On a nightly basis, multiple black lives are lost in Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, and other Democrat run cities due mostly to gangs who are mostly black. But the Black Lives Matter movement doesn’t care about these poor folks. They appear only to care when a white policeman shoots or otherwise harms or kills someone black, no matter what the circumstances are. Black Lives Matter doesn’t wait for the investigation results to be delivered, to riot, loot, and inflict bodily harm. In most of these instances, it was ruled that the policeman was not guilty of any wrong-doing. But that doesn’t matter to liberals. If they want to riot, then they riot.

I observed a liberal post on Facebook, where the commenters were mostly black,  indicate that places like Chicago didn’t matter. Only when blacks were killed at the hands of someone white, did it matter, and warrant repercussions. So, do blacks even care about other blacks like they claim to? Do liberals, in general, care about blacks? Of course not. Liberals are the true racists and bigots of this country.

Let’s strip white people of all their rights. Let’s riot whenever we don’t like something. We’re victims. It’s the fault of whites that we’re victims. It’s the fault of the white people who are alive now that we were enslaved over one hundred years ago. This gives us the above rights.

I often here the left screeching, “right to protest, right to protest.” That is about the only thing in the United States constitution that liberals like. This often happens when I disagree with the protests. When I explain that it’s just as much my right to state my opinion about a protest as it is to protest, crickets. Is this another example of subtle liberal indoctrination? Liberals are most often the ones who protest. Who knows why? Maybe we conservatives are too busy working to get out there and make fools of ourselves? Maybe we conservatives have other ways of expressing our thoughts and feelings? At the ballot box, maybe. By getting signatures on petitions and contacting our representatives in Washington, maybe.

A couple of years ago, I was on a thread with two liberals who were lamenting about the popularity of the Dixie Chick’s bottoming out after they stated, on foreign soil, that they were ashamed that George W. Bush was their president. They felt that it was awful how their fans, mostly southern white, boycotted them. Do the Dixie Chicks no have freedom of speech? When I suggested to these two lefties that southern whites also have freedom of speech and expression and it was their right to boycott the entertainers, my comments weren’t taken so well. They tried to change the subject and ended the thread by calling me names.

In the examples I have cited above, does it appear that the left has pulled out all stops to indoctrinate the populace, thereby rendering the populace totally dependent upon them?

“War is Peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.” George Orwell.

Facebooktwitter

CONDEMN THE WHITE GROUPS FIRST, FORGET THE REST

The citizenry of the United States of America has been conditioned by the left that racism by whites or white groups, particularly white nationalists/white supremacists, is the worst sin that can possibly be committed on the planet. And since the left makes up the definition of racism to fit its needs of the moment, they can accuse you on the spot and take steps to severely punish you, even to the point of ruining your life. And that’s okay.

This liberal directive has also spilled over into the conservative circles. No matter what the facts may be, or if the facts have yet to be determined, if an incident occurs where a white person, or white groups have possibly exhibited  acts of racism, that conservative leader, politicians, pundits, elected officials, etc. must race to the microphone to denounce the white person/white group. No facts are required and if the act turns out to be not true, it doesn’t matter. If the person(s) involved incur damages or if their live/lives are ruined, who cares. They’re white people and it’s our purpose to wipe out all white people or beat them into submission.

The Charlottesville melee has fully confirmed the above. Even though the white nationalist group, “Unite the Right” was acting in unacceptable Nazi-like fashion, the groups, ANTIFA and Black Lives Matter, with histories of hate and violence themselves, showed up and the protest site ready to rumble. But, according to Big Brother (the left and the main stream media), ANTIFA and Black Lives Matter have no responsibility in this. In fact, these two hate groups should be applauded because, according to the left, excuse me, Big Brother, they were there to confront racism.

When watching The Five on FNC last night, I observed that Kimberly Guilfoyle and Dana Perino, both conservatives, were displeased with the president’s responses to Charlottesville, thinking that he should have barreled out, grabbed a microphone, and denounced “Unite the Right” as being the sole perpetrator of the events in Charlottesville. Jesse Watters was the only talking head that seemed satisfied with the three addresses by the President. I couldn’t get a feel for what Greg Gutfeld was thinking, and of course Juan Williams thought the President’s actions were unacceptable and that ANTIFA/BLM had no blame in the melee whatsoever.

As I write this, I’m reviewing an article posted on townhall.com in the last hours. According to townhall.com, House Speaker, Paul Ryan, is taking issue with President Trump’s statements regarding the Charlottesville melee. Speaker Ryan tweeted the following: “We must be clear. White Supremacy is repulsive. This bigotry is counter to all this country stands for. There can be no moral ambiguity.

In addition to Speaker Ryan, GOP Chairwoman, Ronna Romney McDaniel corrected the president as to who is to blame for the violence. Chairperson McDaniel tweeted the following: “In Charlottesville, the blame lays squarely on the KKK and white supremacists.”

Speaker Ryan Questions Trump’s ‘Moral Ambiguity’

Like I said above, with respect to acts of racism committed by any white individual or white group, the entire nation appears to have been conditioned to zero in on the white folks/white groups involved and exclude any other groups which may have behaved badly also.

I’m currently listening to Rush Limbaugh and what he’s saying parallels to what I’m writing. Of course, I will be demonized by the left and perhaps some on the right for my observations and opinions. While I may have known this all along, the Charlottesville incident has made me more aware than ever of how the left in American has continuously brainwashed and conditioned the American people and will continue to do so.

In fact, the United States of American is dangerously close to becoming Oceania in the George Orwell novel, “1984.” In fact, I’m going to say it…We are “1984” with the left, including the main stream media assuming the role of “Big Brother.”

Facebooktwitter

TEAR THEM DOWN OR LEAVE THEM UP – PART TWO

In my introduction to what should we do with those pesky monuments commemorating heroes of the Confederacy, I laid out my feelings about the actions of a few folks with whom I’ve come in contact who have moved to the Southeastern United States (the South) from other parts of the country and the attitude that some, not all, have displayed toward southern culture and the southern people.

Since Dylann Roof entered a Charleston, S.C. church in June 2015 and opened fire, killing nine church members, all black, there has been a frenzy by the left to destroy anything relating to the United States Civil War. The reasoning: In some photo, Mr. Roof was seen holding a Confederate battle flag. The left and some members of the right immediately called for the banning of the flag because it was a symbol of hate. Everyone who owned a Confederate battle flag or something depicting the Confederate battle flag, even it was just a belt buckle, was automatically labeled a racist, a white supremacist, a hater, etc. No room for argument. Because the left said it was so, then it must be so. Conservatives from outside the south, and even from within the south were also piling on.

Did I own anything depicting the Confederate battle flag? If I did, it was packed away in some box in the back of the basement. I didn’t like the attitude of the left plus the attitude of some fellow conservatives. While it was determined that Dylann Roof was indeed a racist, white supremacist, and a hater, does that necessarily mean that everyone owning an object depicting the Confederate battle flag was also all of these things? Apparently the left and many conservatives thought so, though. Was explaining that owning a Confederate battle flag or an object depicting a Confederate battle flag, could mean the remembering of heritage, of history? According to the left and other conservatives, absolutely not. These folks wouldn’t even listen to the other side.

Of course, the left would never, ever listen to the other side, and the conservatives were too scared of being labeled a racist if they did listen to the other side and acknowledged the reasoning. In 2015, being labeled a racist by the left was one of the worst things that could happen to an individual.

In the South, there are many monuments in public places honoring Confederate heroes, plus many buildings, schools, streets, and towns are named after prominent southerners living in and around the time of the Civil War. Following the Charleston church tragedy, there has been a movement by the left, and yes, by some conservatives, to destroy everything that is a reminder of the Civil War.

The Alabama legislature has passed a statute indicating that monuments meeting certain criteria cannot be removed from their locations. Of course, this has the left and those sympathetic conservatives up in arms. But guess what, I don’t care, and I’m not the only one.

In New Orleans, a city run by Democrats, headed up by a Democrat mayor, the taking down of statutes honoring prominent Confederate military men and prominent southerners has begun. Earlier this month, a statute of Confederate Army General, Robert E. Lee, was recently brought down to the angst of many people, including me. As a frequent traveler to New Orleans, I have driven around Lee Circle many times. The statute is indeed impressive.

Robert E. Lee graduated with honors from West Point Academy. He was also a prominent general in the United States Army and was set to lead the Union Army in the Civil War. However, General Lee was from Virginia and loved his home state. Because of this, General Lee accepted the position to head up the Confederate Army. He couldn’t bring himself to fight against Virginia. Also, Robert E. Lee hated slavery and had freed his slaves years before the Civil War began.

Liberals have argued that even though Robert E. Lee may have been a “good guy,” he still chose to fight for the south and thus, he was “anti-American, anti-moral, and anti-non white people,” a quote from an individual who is in favor of taking down statutes honoring, in any way, the Confederate States of America.

I’ve also heard that the display of statutes honoring prominent members of the Confederacy is tantamount to Germany displaying statutes honoring Adolph Hitler and other notorious Nazis. But you can’t even compare the actions of Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis to the actions of Adolph Hitler and other higher ups in the Third Reich. Robert E. Lee and other prominent southerners who served the Confederate States of America fought to preserve their homeland and their way of life. The president of the Confederacy, Jefferson Davis, didn’t round up human beings who he hated and send them to concentration camps to be tortured, experimented on, and killed.

The following is a list of some of the more prominent Confederate Generals: Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, J.E.B. Stuart, Nathan Bedford Forrest, James Longstreet, Braxton Bragg, George Pickett, Bloody Bill Anderson, Albert Sidney Johnston, John Mosby, P.G.T. Beauregard, A.P. Hill, Richard Ewell, Joseph Johnston, Jubal Early, Kirby Smith, John Bell Hood, Barnard Bee, Lewis Armistead, and Porter Alexander. Also, there was Jefferson Davis, the first and only president of the Confederacy.

While it has been documented that Robert E. Lee was a good person and a fantastic general, I can’t say that I know much about the others listed above. I’m sure some of them were good and some of them weren’t. That’s true about the entire human race.

Slavery was legal, and an accepted practice in the first century of the United States of America. When you are born and raised to think something’s okay, you generally consider it okay until others may sway your thinking, or until you decide for yourself that it’s wrong based on research, observations, and ‘gut instinct.’ What I’m trying to say, and admittedly having a bit of a difficult time doing it, is that southerners or anyone else for that matter who owned slaves, and slavery was also common outside the south, and throughout the world, were not necessarily engaging in it because they wanted to do evil, whereas the desire of Hitler and the Nazis was to do evil and create a master race, thus eliminating all of those who they considered inferior. And as we have studied, many people with disabilities were executed for no other reason than that they didn’t fit the mold of the blonde haired, blue-eyed master race that was Hitler’s goal to create.

The Civil War is part of the history of the United States of America and a very important part. It represented a dark time for this country, and one that we certainly don’t want to repeat. One of the reasons that so much emphasis is placed on learning history is that history does repeat itself. In studying about the Civil War and reconstruction when I was in school, it was drilled into my head that we don’t want to ever ‘go there again.’ Secession from the Union was a terrible thing, and when I hear quips about the state of California wanting to secede from the United States, I wince.

Remember the novel, “1984,” by George Orwell? The party regularly destroyed and/or altered history. In our public schools today, and even in some of our private schools, what is taught has been altered or completely left out because it might offend some students. This is being driven by the liberals, including the teachers’ unions.

Liberals are advocating not only the destruction of statutes honoring prominent members of the Confederacy, but they are advocating changing the names of all buildings that are named after prominent Confederates. They are also advocating changing the names of schools, streets, and even towns that may have been named after anyone who had a part in the Confederacy.

Folks, that is going to be a nightmare. There’s a county in Alabama called Lee County. Will that have to be changed? Will all the towns and cities named Jackson and Jacksonville have to be changed because of General Stonewall Jackson? Will anything that has the name of Jefferson, such as Jefferson County in Alabama have to be changed? Or will anything with the common name of Davis have to be changed because it might relate back to Jefferson Davis, the first and only president of the Confederacy? Gives me a headache.

I’m hearing, though, that it might be okay to memorialize the Civil War in private museums. Well what if those museums are located where folks have to walk by them who might be offended by the contents of those museum?. Or maybe just knowing about a museum that illustrates the history of the Confederacy offends someone?

Do you really think that after directing the demolition of statutes, and changing the names of buildings, schools, streets, and even towns is going to stop the left, fueled by their overwhelming hatred for anyone who disagrees with their political philosophy, including southern white conservative Christians, from declaring war on private museums that house Confederate memorabilia? And after shutting down these private museums, do you think the left is going to stop and say, ‘job well done?’ Why stop there? Let’s force anyone who has in his or her name ‘Jackson,’ or ‘Davis,’ or ‘Lee,’ or ‘Smith’ (Kirby Smith was the name of a Confederate General), etc. to change their name because such names might be offensive to certain people.

Furthermore, I have observed from some of those who are in favor of the tearing down of the Confederate monuments, a hidden hatred for the south, even though they visit, and enjoy our food, our music, our beautiful beaches, and our weather. The hatred appears to be for the southern people who may or may not have had ancestors who owned slaves.

In other words, after accomplishing all of the above, will the left then advocate the persecution of those of us who are “southern born and southern bred?” Will they round us up and put us in internment camps?

YES! The last few paragraphs are Kabuki Theater, far-fetched, and perhaps ludicrous. But the left is currently advocating the demolition of statutes, changing street names, school names, building names where those streets, schools, and building names may relate back to the Confederacy. Making all of these changes will be a nightmare, in fact, this will be worse than a nightmare.

We have to stand up to the left now, we have to preserve our history, lest we repeat it. We have to ‘nip it in the bud.’

STOP THE LEFT AND THOSE CONSERVATIVES WHO ARE COWARDS AND ARE AFRAID OF BEING CALLED BAD NAMES! STOP THEM NOW!

And yes, I’m against the demolition of statutes and memorials honoring prominent leaders of the Confederacy.

Note: The phrase, “southern born and southern bred,” is a phrase in the Song, “My Home’s in Alabama,” performed by the country music artists, “Alabama,” and written by Teddy Gentry and Randy Owen.

 

Facebooktwitter

THREATS AND INTIMIDATION

Have we become a country where our day to day behavior can be determined by threats and intimidation? It certainly appears that way.

The vote of the electors of the Electoral College which makes the nation’s president elect the official next president usually goes off without a hitch. It’s a formality which might take up a half-minute on the news.

This year, as we all know, was an exception. President Elect, Donald Trump, captured the most electoral votes and surpassed the required number to become the next president on election night, November 8, 2016. Even though Democrat nominee, Hillary Clinton, conceded the election to Mr. Trump. Democrats, who could not fathom that Clinton could have lost the election, immediately fought back. There was rioting in the streets, crying on college campuses and elsewhere, the popping up of support groups for those who were experiencing severe angst and trauma from the election results, and so on and so forth.

Since the election night, the Democrats have stopped at nothing to de-legitimize the election results and the upcoming presidency of Donald Trump. First, they demanded recounts in states where the Trump campaign flipped from blue to red. Did the Democrats use threats and intimidation in over-seeing the re-counting of the votes? If they did, it didn’t work.

In a last-ditch effort to de-legitimize Donald Trump, and in their dreams, to maybe overturn the election, they attempted to get electors, especially in the states that Trump won, to re-consider and vote for Hillary. From various news sources, I learned that emails numbering more than 2000 were sent to each elector, even in Alabama where Trump received over 60% of the vote. Furthermore, I learned that electors in the states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania were receiving death threats in order to make them change their votes.

We live in the United States of America where any form of threats and intimidation by the government or any political party of law-abiding citizens should never take place under any circumstance. But sadly, threats and intimidation have become a popular tool of the Democrat party to get what they want.

I’ve been reading, mostly on social media, that many musicians and refusing to perform at Donald Trump’s inauguration. Earlier today, I read an article about Andrea Bocelli, a friend of the president elect, had accepted an invitation to entertain, but had to back out because of the threats and intimidation he was receiving from the left. All the social media posts about this have come from the left. Could this be fake news? Be that as it may, I thought that maybe Mr. Trump could go the country music route. He could also invite second or third tier acts who might be looking for exposure. And what better way to get it that to perform at a presidential inauguration?

But wait. If a good local or regional singer or band who has aspirations of maybe one day getting to Hollywood, Chicago, New York, or maybe even Nashville were to perform for President Elect Trump’s inauguration, would they be branded for life by the Hollywood, Chicago, New York, or Nashville leftists (and there are some leftists in Nashville). Regardless of how good the individual or group is, would Hollywood automatically reject them for having performed for Donald Trump? The implication of threats and intimidation; could they possibly prevent young artists from accepting the “gig of their dreams?”

A Trump presidency should give this nation at least four relief from what has been the continuing progression of government taking over as many aspects of our lives as possible. If President Trump can get Obamacare repealed in its entirety or replaced with something much less insidious, maybe we can get a little relief on our health insurance premiums. If all those federal lands that Obama placed off limits to oil and natural gas exploration, can be re-opened for these activities, we could take some giant steps toward becoming energy independent, meaning our personal energy costs would decrease, and the fear of massive increases which were championed by the Obama administration would cease to exist.

The left, including the mainstream media, sadly has become an enemy of the United States of America. It is an enemy that will always be with us and will always use threats and intimidation to change our behavior, similar to the threats and intimidation used in the George Orwell novel, “1984.” Threats and intimidation includes not only threats to our health and property, but will include the hurling of false accusations at those of us who refuse to tow their line, in an effort to weaken us or brainwash us into assuming their way of thinking, again like what was written in the novel, “1984.”

Many of us, in church, with our families, or just by ourselves, have prayed for our country during the Obama administration because we were afraid of the results of the implementation of many of Obama’s policies. Prayers for our country cannot stop. In fact, prayer is going to be even more important. The threats and intimidation that will continue from the left will weaken us at times and may even tempt us to flip to the other side. Some say it’s easy to be a liberal. I wouldn’t know. So, please keep fighting the good fight because we now have a chance to take our country back.

Facebooktwitter

1984 ARE WE THERE – PART THREE

Remember newspeak? It’s the fictional language in George Orwell’s novel, 1984. Newspeak was created by Mr. Orwell’s totalitarian state of Oceania as a tool to limit freedom of thought or what was commonly referred to in the novel as “thought crime.”

In order to maintain maximum control over the outer party, words and phrases were eliminated and replaced with inner party approved or politically correct verbiage.

The aim of newspeak is to remove all shades of meaning from language, leaving simple concepts that reinforce the total dominance of the state.

In the past forty or fifty years, many words, at the behest of the left have been considered politically incorrect to utter. These words were replaced by other words that the left considered acceptable and less offensive. One such example includes the words, “retarded” or “handicapped.” “Retarded” and “handicapped” have now been replaced with the word, “challenged.” We have the politically correct terms, physically challenged and mentally challenged, and to utter the words retarded or handicapped is considered offensive and language that shouldn’t ever be used. Perhaps the word, “challenged” is more acceptable and less demeaning, but we’ve come to a point where uttering either retarded or handicapped can get you in trouble with the left, sometimes to the point of losing your job and/or being socially ostracized.

Has a liberal ever asked you what you mean when you say, “Take our country back?” Of course, it means getting rid of the liberals and liberal philosophy that have been elected to office or appointed to certain governmental positions. When explaining that to a liberal, you may see a look of disappointment on their faces. They didn’t want to hear that, they wanted you to say that you wanted the strip Obama of the presidency because of the color of his skin. Because of the wishes of the left, the term “take our country back,” is now considered a buzz phrase for take our country back from its black president. Liberals decided this and it’s a lie!

Presidential candidate, Donald Trump’s campaign theme, “Make America Great Again,” is now considered racist. Liberals are insisting that it means take America back to before Civil Rights legislation was enacted (1964). That’s ridiculous and we all know it. But the liberals are pounding a racism connotation to Mr. Trump’s theme and the main stream media is running with it. Thus, those who are not particularly politically astute or don’t follow politics, opting instead to watch mindless TV such as “Dancing with the Stars,” have no choice but to believe that it’s true. The result is votes for Hillary.

Even using what the left considers improper in describing a person of color is labeled racism. The University of Alabama football team has had string of excellent running backs, all of them black.  A few years ago, one of these great running backs was referred to as a “beast.” He was. But the left tried to make that into something racist. Thankfully, they didn’t get far. Don’t you panty-waists interject yourselves into our football! You will regret it!

I don’t deal in buzz words or phrases, and when confronted with a liberal saying to you, “this is a buzzword for thus and so,” tell that liberal to take a hike.

Another good example of how liberals are attempting to force “newspeak” upon us is the renaming of “illegal aliens/immigrants” to “undocumented workers.” Even the conservative leaning media outlets are saying “undocumented workers.” While we all know that undocumented workers are nothing but illegal aliens or immigrants, liberals have repetitively forced this language on us to the extent that we hear it and think nothing about it or about using the new term ourselves. Furthermore, the left generally refuses to distinguish between legal immigrants who are here in this country legally and may be preparing for rightfully becoming U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants who have broken the law and entered this country illegally, but think they are entitled to the same benefits as all American citizens. With the left continually failing to make this distinction, people are once again being brainwashed into assuming that conservatives are against all forms of immigration. This is, of course, another leftist lie.

In 1984, the novel, the inner party was working to convert the language of the outer party in the region called, Oceania, from oldspeak to newspeak and had established a timeline of sixty or so years to do so.

While liberals claim to be advocates of tolerance and free thinking, it’s not true. In fact, nothing could be any further from the truth, unless your free thought aligns up with liberal thought. Is the left attempting to alter the way we talk and adopt a politically correct language such as newspeak? I’m giving you my opinion and you can decided.

Facebooktwitter