Showing posts with label Mark Steyn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark Steyn. Show all posts

Saturday, March 17, 2012

History From Obama And Steyn

There always have been folks who are the naysayers and don’t believe in the future, and don’t believe in trying to do things differently. One of my predecessors, Rutherford B. Hayes, reportedly said about the telephone, “It’s a great invention, but who would ever want to use one?” That’s why he’s not on Mount Rushmore — because he’s looking backwards. He’s not looking forwards. He’s explaining why we can’t do something, instead of why we can do something.

President Obama, Speech on Energy, 15 March 2012

--------------------------------------------------

But obviously Rutherford B. Hayes isn’t as “forward-looking” as a 21st-century president who believes in Jimmy Carter malaise, 1970s Eurostatist industrial policy, 1940s British health-care reforms, 1930s New Deal–sized entitlements premised on mid-20th-century birth rates and life expectancy, and all paid for by a budget with more zeroes than anybody’s seen since the Weimar Republic. If that’s not a shoo-in for Mount Rushmore, I don’t know what is.

Mark Steyn, Obama's History Lesson, NRO, 17 March 2012





Read More...

Sunday, March 11, 2012

"When Even Casual Sex Requires A State Welfare Program . . ."

". . . you’re pretty much done for."

So says Mark Steyn in his column at the NRO. It's one of his better ones, which is saying a lot:

. . . No, the most basic issue here is not religious morality, individual liberty, or fiscal responsibility. It’s that a society in which middle-aged children of privilege testify before the most powerful figures in the land to demand state-enforced funding for their sex lives at a time when their government owes more money than anyone has ever owed in the history of the planet is quite simply nuts. . . .

Insane as this scenario is, the Democrat-media complex insists that everyone take it seriously. When it emerged the other day that Amanda Clayton, a 24-year-old Michigan million-dollar-lottery winner, still receives $200 of food stamps every month, even the press and the bureaucrats were obliged to acknowledge the ridiculousness. Yet the same people are determined that Sandra Fluke be treated with respect as a pioneering spokesperson for the rights of the horizontally challenged.

Sorry, I pass. “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom,” wrote Benjamin Franklin in 1784. In the absence of religious virtue, sexual virtue, and fiscal virtue, one might trust to the people’s sense of sheer preposterousness to reject the official narrative of the Fluke charade. Yet even that is not to be permitted. . . . But let me say this. Almost every matter of the moment boils down to the same story: The Left’s urge to narrow the bounds of public discourse and insist that “conventional wisdom” unknown to the world the day before yesterday is now as unquestionable as the laws of physics. Nothing that Rush said is as weird or as degrading as what Sandra Fluke and the Obama administration are demanding. And any freeborn citizen should reserve the right to point that out as loudly and as often as possible.

I think he misses the boat when he says that the issue here isn't about religious freedom.  I think religious freedom is at the very center of the issue, as I've pointed out here.  But beyond that, Steyn nails a perfect 10.








Read More...

Saturday, December 17, 2011

The War On Religion: Mark Steyn, Ron Paul & Congress

Mark Steyn weighs in on modern Christmas traditions, the fear of even religious institutions to proclaim their faith out of fear of litigation, and what it all means:

Christmas in America is a season of time-honored traditions:

The sacred performance of the annual ACLU lawsuit over the presence of an insufficiently secular "holiday" tree.

The ritual provocations of the atheist displays licensed by pitifully appeasing municipalities to sit between the menorah and the giant Frosty the Snowman.

The familiar strains of every hack columnist's "war on Christmas" column rolling off the keyboard as easily as Richard Clayderman playing "Winter Wonderland" ...

This year has been a choice year. A crucified skeleton Santa Claus was erected as part of the "holiday" display outside the Loudoun County courthouse in Virginia — because, let's face it, nothing cheers the hearts of moppets in the Old Dominion like telling them, "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus — and he's hanging lifeless in the town square."

Alas, a week ago, some local burghers failed to get into the ecumenical spirit and decapitated him. Who are these killjoys? Christians intolerant of the First Amendment (as some have suggested)? Or perhaps a passing Saudi? . . . .

Across the fruitcaked plain in California, the city of Santa Monica allocated permits for "holiday" displays at Palisades Park by means of lottery. Eighteen of the 21 slots went to atheists — for example, the slogan "37 million Americans know a myth when they see one" over portraits of Jesus, Santa, and Satan.

. . . Perhaps Santa Monica should adopt a less theocratic moniker and change its name to Satan Monica, as its interpretation of the separation of church and state seems to have evolved into expressions of public contempt for large numbers of the citizenry augmented by the traumatizing of their children.

Boy, I can't wait to see what those courageous atheists come up with for Ramadan. Or does that set their hearts a-flutter quite as much?

One sympathizes, up to a point. As America degenerates from a land of laws to a land of legalisms, much of life is devoted to forestalling litigation. What's less understandable is the faintheartedness of explicitly Christian institutions. . . .

When an explicitly Catholic institution thinks the meaning of Christmas is "tenderness for the past, vapid generalities for the present, evasive abstractions for the future," it's pretty much over. Suffering no such urge to self-abasement, Muslim students at the Catholic University of America in Washington recently filed a complaint over the lack of Islamic prayer rooms on the campus. They find it offensive to have to pray surrounded by Christian symbols such as crucifixes and paintings of distinguished theologians.

True, this thought might have occurred to them before they applied to an institution called "Catholic University." On the other hand, it's surely not unreasonable for them to have expected Catholic University to muster no more than the nominal rump Christianity of that Catholic college in New England. Why wouldn't you demand Muslim prayer rooms?

As much as belligerent atheists, belligerent Muslims reckon that a decade or so hence "Catholic colleges" will be Catholic mainly in the sense that Istanbul's Hagia Sophia is still a cathedral: that's to say, it's a museum, a heritage site for where once was a believing church. And who could object to the embalming of our inheritance?

Christmas is all about "tenderness for the past," right? When Christian college administrators are sending out cards saying "We believe in nothing", why wouldn't you take them at their word?

Which brings us back in this season of joy to the Republican presidential debates, the European debt crisis and all the other fun stuff. The crisis afflicting the West is not primarily one of unsustainable debt and spending. These are mere symptoms of a deeper identity crisis.

It is not necessary to be a believing Christian to be unnerved by the ease and speed with which we have cast off our inheritance and trampled it into the dust. When American municipalities are proudly displaying the execution of skeleton Santas and giant Satans on public property, it may just be a heartening exercise of the First Amendment, it may be a trivial example of the narcissism of moral frivolity.

Or it could be a sign that eventually societies become too stupid to survive. The fellows building the post-western world figure they know which it is.

And then there is this worthy essay on the topic from Ron Paul in 2003.

As we celebrate another Yuletide season, it's hard not to notice that Christmas in America simply doesn't feel the same anymore. Although an overwhelming majority of Americans celebrate Christmas, and those who don't celebrate it overwhelmingly accept and respect our nation's Christmas traditions, a certain shared public sentiment slowly has disappeared. The Christmas spirit, marked by a wonderful feeling of goodwill among men, is in danger of being lost in the ongoing war against religion.

Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view. The justification is always that someone, somewhere, might possibly be offended or feel uncomfortable living in the midst of a largely Christian society, so all must yield to the fragile sensibilities of the few. The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity.

This growing bias explains why many of our wonderful Christmas traditions have been lost. Christmas pageants and plays, including Handel's Messiah, have been banned from schools and community halls. Nativity scenes have been ordered removed from town squares, and even criticized as offensive when placed on private church lawns. Office Christmas parties have become taboo, replaced by colorless seasonal parties to ensure no employees feel threatened by a “hostile environment.” Even wholly non-religious decorations featuring Santa Claus, snowmen, and the like have been called into question as Christmas symbols that might cause discomfort. Earlier this month, firemen near Chicago reluctantly removed Christmas decorations from their firehouse after a complaint by some embittered busybody.

Most noticeably, however, the once commonplace refrain of “Merry Christmas” has been replaced by the vague, ubiquitous “Happy Holidays.” But what holiday? Is Christmas some kind of secret, a word that cannot be uttered in public? Why have we allowed the secularists to intimidate us into downplaying our most cherished and meaningful Christian celebration?

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders' political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government's hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life.

The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance. Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people's allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation's Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war.

The war on religion is perhaps best captured this year by the fact that our elected Representatives in Congress have been advised by the Congressional Franking Comission that they cannot send out greeting cards to constituents on the Congressional dime that say "Merry Christmas."

The Supreme Court has so moved us from the true meaning of the First Amendment's anti-establishment clause that every one of the Founders - even the deist Thomas Jefferson - would be horrified at what has become of Christianity in the public sphere today. It is a travesty that is having a profound and lasting effect on our nation - and none of it is good. For a much more in depth explanation, please see the speech of James Buckley here.

Read More...

Monday, May 9, 2011

Steyn On Handwringing, Heads & The Unchecked March Of Radical Islam

Yes, we got bin Laden. Then we buried him in accordance with Muslim tradition - though I think we should be demanding to know of what that "tradition" consisted, since it appears that a traditional Muslim ceremony includes prayers that Islam triumph completely over Christianity and Judaism.

And as Mark Steyn points out in his latest missive, the death and post-death treatment of bin Laden encapsulates in a nutshell everything that is wrong with our approach to this war against "radical Islam." We are engaging in the physical war, but not the war of ideas. Indeed, in the latter, we lay prostrate, not merely failing to engage, but showing great concern for the sensibilities of those who would slaughter us. Steyn's two points - one, we could use a lot more Kitchner and a lot less Obama; two - the Muslim radicals are winning the war of ideas, here and everywhere. And it is that only that war that ultimately counts.

This from Mr. Steyn:

The belated dispatch of Osama testifies to what the United States does well – elite warriors, superbly trained, equipped to a level of technological sophistication no other nation can match. Everything else surrounding the event (including White House news management so club-footed that one starts to wonder darkly whether its incompetence is somehow intentional) embodies what the United States does badly. Pakistan, our "ally," hides and protects not only Osama but also Mullah Omar and Zawahiri, and does so secure in the knowledge that it will pay no price for its treachery – indeed, confident that its duplicitous military will continue to be funded by U.S. taxpayers. . . .

. . . On Sept. 12, 2001, Gen. Musharraf was in a meeting "when my military secretary told me that the U.S. secretary of state, Gen. Colin Powell, was on the phone. I said I would call back later." The milquetoasts of the State Department were in no mood for Musharraf's I'm-washing-my-hair routine, and, when he'd been dragged to the phone, he was informed that the Bush administration would bomb Pakistan "back to the Stone Age" if they didn't get everything they wanted. Musharraf concluded that America meant it.

A decade later, we're back to Sept. 10. Were Washington to call Islamabad as it did a decade ago, the Pakistanis would thank them politely and say they'd think it over and get back in six weeks, give or take. They think they've got the superpower all figured out – that America is happy to spend bazillions of dollars on technologically advanced systems that can reach across the planet but it doesn't really have the stomach for changing the facts of the ground. That means that once in a while your big-time jihadist will be having a quiet night in watching "Dancing With The Stars" when all of a sudden Robocop descends from the heavens, kicks the door open, and it's time to get ready for your virgins. But other than that, in the bigger picture, day by day, all but unnoticed, things will go their way.

In the fall of 2001, discussing the collapse of the Taliban, Thomas Friedman, the in-house thinker at The New York Times, offered this bit of cartoon analysis:

"For all the talk about the vaunted Afghan fighters, this was a war between the Jetsons and the Flintstones – and the Jetsons won and the Flintstones know it."

But they didn't, did they? The Flintstones retreated to their caves, bided their time, and a decade later the Jetsons are desperate to negotiate their way out.

When it comes to instructive analogies, I prefer Khartoum to cartoons. If it took America a decade to avenge the dead of 9/11, it took Britain 13 years to avenge their defeat in Sudan in 1884. But, after Kitchener slaughtered the jihadists of the day at the Battle of Omdurman in 1897, he made a point of digging up their leader the Mahdi, chopping off his head and keeping it as a souvenir. The Sudanese got the message. The British had nary a peep out of the joint until they gave it independence six decades later – and, indeed, the locals fought for King and (distant imperial) country as brave British troops during World War Two. Even more amazingly, generations of English schoolchildren were taught about the Mahdi's skull winding up as Lord Kitchener's novelty paperweight as an inspiring tale of national greatness.

Not a lot of that today. It's hard to imagine Osama's noggin as an attractive centerpiece at next year's White House Community Organizer of the Year banquet, and entirely impossible to imagine America's "educators" teaching the tale approvingly. So instead, even as we explain that our difficulties with this bin Laden fellow are nothing to do with Islam, no sir, perish the thought, we simultaneously rush to assure the Muslim world that, not to worry, we accorded him a 45-minute Islamic funeral as befits an observant Muslim.

That's why Pakistani big shots harbored America's mortal enemy and knew they could do so with impunity. Bin Laden was a Saudi with money, and there are a lot of those about funding this and that from South Asia to the Balkans to Dearborn, Mich. They've walked their petrodollars round the Western world buying up everything they need to, from minor mosques to major university "Middle Eastern Studies" departments. By comparison with his compatriots, Osama squandered his dough. In that long-ago Spectator piece, I wrote, "Junior's just a peculiarly advanced model of the useless idiot son – a criticism routinely made of Bush but actually far more applicable to Osama, who took his dad's fortune and literally threw it down a hole in the ground."

A lot of American policy followed it. A decade on, our troops are running around Afghanistan "winning hearts and minds" and getting gunned down by the very policemen and soldiers they've spent years training. Back on the home front, every small-town airport has at least a dozen crack TSA operatives sniffing round the panties of grade-schoolers. Meanwhile, at the UN, the EU, at the Organization of the Islamic Conference, in the "Facebook revolutions" of "the Arab spring," the Islamization of the world proceeds: Millions of Muslims support bin Laden's goal – the submission of the Western world to Islam – but, unlike him, understand that flying planes into buildings is entirely unnecessary to achieving it. Will being high-flying Jetsons with state-of-the-art gizmos prove sufficient in a Flintstonizing world? The Pakistanis are pretty sure they know the answer to that.

Read More...

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Quick Hits

Unemployment -
Instapundit - [Gallup reports] unemployment up to 10.3 Percent. I’ve noticed a divergence between the Gallup numbers and the “official” numbers lately. I wonder why that is? Is it seasonal adjustment, or something else? Underemployment is up to 19.7 percent.

BizzyBlog comments on an IBD editorial explaining why businesses aren't accepting Obama's offer to "get in the game."

CPAC -
The speeches at Hot Air: Coulter, Cain, Romney, Bolton, Daniels

Globull Warming -
I have several core concerns with global warming theory, with the single most fundamental being that I don't trust the historical temperature record for all the reasons set forth here and here. We learn today that several scientists, inlcuding Anthony Watts, are about to set up an independent temperature monitoring program that addresses those concerns. Whatever data this produces, the concept - the actual practice of transparent science in the climate field - sounds quite promising.

Egypt
Mark Steyn critiques the dismal performance of our intelligence agencies.

Michael Totten on Tariq Rammadan and the false face of moderation in the Muslim Brotherhood

Read More...

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Ignorance Is Fleeting


“You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time.”

Abraham Lincoln, September 1858, Speech in Clinton, Illinois



This from Mark Steyn on the travails of Obama:

So what went wrong? According to Barack Obama, the problem is he overestimated you dumb rubes’ ability to appreciate what he’s been doing for you. “That I do think is a mistake of mine,” the president told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “I think the assumption was if I just focus on policy, if I just focus on this provision or that law or if we’re making a good rational decision here, then people will get it.”

But you schlubs aren’t that smart. You didn’t get it. And Barack Obama is determined to see that you do. So the president has decided that he needs to start “speaking directly to the American people.”

Wait, wait! Come back! Don’t all stampede for the hills! He only gave (according to CBS News’s Mark Knoller) 158 interviews and 411 speeches in his first year. That’s more than any previous president — and maybe more than all of them put together. But there may still be some show out there that didn’t get its exclusive Obama interview — I believe the top-rated Grain & Livestock Prices Report — 4 a.m. Update with Herb Torpormeister on WZZZ-AM Dead Buzzard Gulch Junction’s Newstalk Leader is still waiting to hear back from the White House.

But what will the president be saying in all these extra interviews? In that interview about how he hadn’t given enough interviews, he also explained to George Stephanopoulos what that wacky Massachusetts election was all about:

“The same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office,” said Obama. “People are angry and they’re frustrated, not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years but what’s happened over the last eight years.”

Got it. People are so angry and frustrated at George W. Bush that they’re voting for Republicans. In Massachusetts. Boy, I can’t wait for that 159th interview.

Presumably, the president isn’t stupid enough actually to believe what he said. But it’s dispiriting to discover he’s stupid enough to think we’re stupid enough to believe it. . . .

Americans may, by and large, be politically ignorant. And true, they voted for Obama and the snake oil he was selling as our corrupt MSM spared no effort to insure that they would be kept in ignorance. But Americans are not stupid. A year on, they can take stock for themselves. So long as the democratic process remains not yet wholly corrupted by vote fraud and selective recounts, they will take revenge. And as Obama's crashing poll numbers (and the crashing ratings number for liberal media) would seem to indicate, once Americans have seen the artifice, they really get a little annoyed at still being treated as idiots.

This is a real problem for far left ideologues, since at the very center of their world view is a heartfelt belief in the superiority of their intellect and, thus, both the absolute truth of their cause and the necessity of imposing their will. It is a paradigm that will never allow the ideologue to realize that they might be wrong. As we see it being played out by Obama, if the voters don't agree, that can only be because they don't understand. Left wing ideologues conflate the temporary ignorance of an electorate that voted them into office with a congenital stupidity that only exists in the arrogance of their imagination.

No matter. By all means Mr. President, talk on, talk on.

Read More...

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Freedom of Speech North of the Border

Ezra Levant is a Canadian publisher who published the Danish cartoons. For that act, a Saudi cleric living in Canada made a complaint to Canada's HRC which Mr. Levant was hauled into the commission to answer. He was kind enough to videotape these proceedings and post them to the net.


















You can find Ezra Lavant's website here.

And do see these post's from the Volokh conspiracy on freedom of speech in Canada:

Canada Restricts Freedom of Speech.

Canadian Islamic Congress Website Reveals Its Views.

Free Speech Challenged in Canada.

The Strange Canadian Human Rights Statute Might Have a Loophole.

Another Attempt to Restrict Speech in Canada

Calling Speech Restrictors "Enemies of Free Speech" Can Now Lead to Legal Liability in Canada

And lastly, there is this rather amazing exchange chronicled by Mark Steyn at NRO:

. . . .this exchange from the Warman vs Lemire hearing before the Canadian Human Rights Commission (page 4793 of the transcript). Dean Steacy is the principal "anti-hate" investigator of the HRC:"

MS KULASZKA: Mr. Steacy, you were talking before about context and how important it is when you do your investigation. What value do you give freedom of speech when you investigate one of these complaints?

MR. STEACY: Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don't give it any value.

MS KULASZKA: Okay. That was a clear answer.

MR. STEACY: It's not my job to give value to an American concept.


Read More...

Tuesday, January 1, 2008

Interesting News - 1 Jan. 2008

"Never bet against the American soldier. King George III did. He lost. Jefferson Davis did. He lost. Hirohito did. He lost." And this year, it was Don Surber’s "Loser of the Year," Nancy Pelosi’s foolish bet.

As Iraqi celebrates the New Years, Brussels cancels their fireworks over threats of terrorism.

Ralph Peters interviews Gen. Petraeus on Christmas Day about the "Year of Wonders." Notable is Petraues’s explicit statement, contrary to assertions by the highest levels of our State Dept., that Iran is continuing to train and arm Shia proxies in Iraq.

Party like its 1499 B.C. This is some archeology we can all appreciate – uncovering a Bronze age Irish brewery and trying out the old recipes.

Over 150 billion petrodollars have flooded Iran’s coffers during the 30 month Presidency of Ahmedinejad. So why are Iran’s economic hardships increasing?

An interesting article on Iran’s byzantine political structures and circles of influence.

Frontpage Magazine has an interview with Homa Arjomand, the Coordinator of the International Campaign Against Sharia Court in Canada.

Analyzing Sarkozy’s decision to end relations with Syria until Syria stops its meddling in the internal politics of Lebanon’s election of a President.

After a survey across the "length and breadth of the country," it appears that Indian men are not quite measuring up, so to speak.

The Washington Times memorializes the Canadian Islamic Congress human rights complaint against Mark Steyn, charging him with hate speech for quoting Imams. This is nothing more than Wahhabi dissimulation – the hallmark of the Wahhabi Salafi religion that claims any criticism is hate speech. And the Canadian Human Rights Commission is appeasing them. Outrageous.

From Caroline Glick: "If democracy and freedom are the U.S.’s ultimate aims in this war, the only way to achieve them is to first fight and win the war. Bhutto – like her Palestinian, Egyptian and Lebanese counterparts – was a sideshow."

At the NYT, Pinch Sulzberger welcomes the staff back from what he hopes for each was a "wonderfully secular winter solstice," announces the hiring of Bill Kristol as a columnist, and gives the staff helpful pointers on how to understand and interact with a neo-con.

A Pakastani Imam and head of a madrasa tells of his dream to bring Sharia law to Pakistan and then Britain, by force if necessary.

Read More...

Saturday, December 8, 2007

Interesting News From Around the Web

Our intelligence community recently called in the NIE for placating Iran by negotiating with Iran to allow it to achieve its goals for regional influence. Today, under the cover of an aid project, Iran is consolidating Shia control over southern Lebanon by building a large mountain road that critics believe is a supply route for Hizbollah. It does not seem Iran requires our help.

Michael Yon has posted part IV to his article, Men of Valor. It is an incredible read.

The EU Referendum looks at the debate over the Common Fisheries Policy and how the EU has torpedoed Britain’s once significant fishing industry. Most depressing, it would appear that neither major political party in Britain cares.

The Lyrical Terrorist has been convicted in the UK of collecting articles "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism". She was a promoter of the jihadi philosopy, penning prose supporting Osama Bin Laden, martyrdom and describing beheadings. In her house, she was found with an al Qaeda manual and that NYT best-seller, the Mujahadeen Poisons Handbook. The judge in the UK has given the budding jihadist a prison term of . . . 0 days. That’s the way to be tough on terrorism.

Ironic Surrealism II blogs on the Islamic sour grapes north of the border. It’s a good explanation of the Mark Steyn affair and the response of the Canadian Islamic Congress who are screaming Islamaphobia and bringing suit.

Bookworm Room is blogging on NBC’s oh so principled decision not to accept advertising in support of our troops. My t.v. shall not land on their channel again.

Rhymes with Right is a bit perturbed at the attitude adopted by the Mexican government towards its northern neighbor – an attitude that has been historically quite hypocritical. At any rate, RwR is suggesting a Southern Surge for our troops no longer needed in Baghdad.

Right Wing Nuthouse observes that the release of the NIE was a tribute to American exceptionalism. I agree in as much as the NIE was released. My heartburn lies with the fact that I think our leadership shirked their duty in flushing out this NIE before it was released. And I think the reason for that was driven purely by partisan politics of the past three years.

Gateway Pundit has the story of 19 year-old Makwan Moloudzadeh who was hung on Wednesday for having gay relations when he was 13. The 19 year-old was pardoned by an Iranian judge in November but the regime hung him anyway. 6,000 people attended his funereal.

And finally, ‘tis a foul and hellish wind from across the pond.

Read More...