Print This Post Print This Post          Email This Post Email This Post

1:27 pm CST - November 09, 2009

Posted under On The Record

Part I of III: The Left’s War on U.S. History


A Texas Insider Exclusive

bill-amesIn Part I of a three-day series of articles here, Bill Ames today reveals how various left-leaning groups in Texas might have come together to hijack the social studies review process in order to promote their agenda of indoctrinating Texas’ public school students with a negative, politically biased view of America. 

Have Liberal Activists Hijacked Texas’ Social Studies Curriculum Process?
By Bill Ames

During 2009, the 16 social studies review panels met three times:  In February, July, and October.  Overall, of some 100 members, all but four were “educators”.  In my group of 9, I was the only non-educator, and the only member who consistently supported conservative principles. 

I objected in vain as the leftists first hijacked the standards process by using a bootlegged version of standards, created by the left-leaning Texas Council for Social Studies (TCSS) as the starting point for revision and update.  This action clearly violated the direction of the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE), which required that the existing TEKS standards be the starting point. (TEKS stands for the Texas Essential Knowledge & Skills curriculum framework.)

Outvoted 8 to 1 on nearly every standards issue, I watched the standards go from bad to worse over the months of the project.  We will deal with specifics of major standards flaws in part II of this article.

Today, we will examine facts behind the review process itself, and let the reader begin to answer questions regarding why the process went awry. 

The Texas Education Code (TEC) requires that review panel members be drawn from a cross section of Texans. Specifically, TEC 28.002(c) specifies:

SBOEgroup“The State Board of Education, with the direct participation of educators, parents, business and industry representatives, and employers shall by rule identify the essential knowledge and skills of each subject of the required curriculum … ”

This requirement begs the following questions, as well as some relevant facts I will lay out immediately after:

“How, and to whom, did Texas Education Agency (TEA) send requests for participants in the review panel process?”

“Were the requests primarily directed to the TCSS and the teachers’ unions?” 

“Were organizations outside of the education establishment contacted, for example, any Texas Chambers of Commerce and/or major industry employers?”

“Did the TCSS and teachers’ unions recruit educators sympathetic to their agenda, or were they representative of the hard-working Social Studies teachers group as a whole?”

“Were the resulting volunteer resumes distributed to liberal SBOE members, giving them a large selection of candidates, while the conservative SBOE members were left to find candidates for themselves?”

“How were the liberal SBOE members able to get as many as 16 or 17 educators on the review panels, while conservatives got a just handful at most, or sometimes none?”

“Why were the 16 social studies panels (including my U. S. history since 1877 panel) comprised of roughly 100 educators, mostly leftists, but only four representatives from the non-educator categories?”

“Given the overwhelming imbalance of educators, why did the TEA staff nevertheless reject known-to-be-conservative, non-educator nominees from conservative SBOE members?  By what authority did they do so?”

“Why did the TEA staff overseers allow the use of bootlegged TCSS standards as a starting point for the review process?”

Lets develop the scenarios that help begin to answer these questions.

The review panel meetings are open to the public. 

On Thursday, October 15, during the final review panel meeting, I noticed two observers in the room whom I could not identify.  Introducing myself, I learned that one observer was Ryan Valentine, who is listed as Deputy Director of the left wing, anti-Christian Texas Freedom Network (TFN), an organization which – as much as anything – engages in the politics of personal destruction against any conservatives who disagree with its leftist agenda.  (They describe themselves as an organization which “advances a mainstream agenda of religious freedom and individual liberties to counter the radical right.”)

Although observers are instructed to not become involved in the meeting, during a break I observed Mr. Valentine reviewing input from SBOE member Don don-mcLeroyMcLeroy.  Sure enough, a few days later, yet another TFN article, as usual emphasizing personal attacks rather than rational, adult debate, appeared on the TFN website under the “Ryan” byline.

The second observer, obviously chummy with Mr. Valentine, was one Sharon Pope.  Ms. Pope is the former president of the Texas Council for Social Studies, a liberal educators’ group whose members make up something less than 20% of Texas social studies teachers. 

Ms. Pope is currently listed as editor of The Texan, the newsletter of the TCSS, and is therefore a mover and shaker within her organization.  It was the TCSS that had attempted to hijack the standards review process. Only a sharp rebuke from the SBOE Committee on Instruction on April 22 slowed them down.

The team of Valentine and Pope as observers got me wondering about relationships among the various left-leaning groups.  A little detective work led me to a donor list published in the fall 2008 version of the TFN newsletter, which revealed the answer.  Ms. Pope is listed on the “Freedom Fighters” list, a group of social activists who “make monthly gifts to help sustain the work of TFN”.

Further, Texas’ two major teachers’ unions are also listed as donors, members of the “Texas Freedom Council”, an elite group of major TFN contributors.

One is the Texas State Teachers Association, the Texas affiliate of the National Education Association (NEA), headquartered in Washington, D.C., with its national membership of 3.2 million.

The NEA, more a shill for liberal Democrats than an education organization, supports positions that are totally alien to Texas’ overwhelming majority of nea2conservative citizens, including endless funding increases for public schools, support for abortion and homosexual marriage, anything-goes sex education, big government, confiscatory taxes, and government welfare and dependency.

The other union is the Texas Federation of Teachers, the Texas State Affiliate of the 1.3 million-member American Federation of Teachers, representing more than 57,000 members statewide.

So is it a valid conclusion that TCSS leaders and the state’s teachers’ unions are ideologically joined at the hip, providing financial support to TFN bloggers who conduct smear campaigns against conservative SBOE members, conservative expert reviewers, and any others who oppose their agenda to promote a politically biased, negative view of American history?

I then also learned that the TEA’s (Texas Education Agency) Director of Social Studies – a position of authority in overseeing this process – is, like Ms. Pope, a past president of the TCSS.

SBOE liberals got as many as 17 of their nominees selected for the review panels, while SBOE conservatives got few or none.

Curiously, a number of my fellow panelists-nominees, members of my review panel, admitted they were in the dark about how they got nominated.  They were not aware of who on the SBOE had nominated them, or even how their names had been put on any list for consideration.

I suspect that I know how they got there.  Their comments during discussions over the months exposed their ideological beliefs. 

One member commented, “We do not teach values in public schools”.  She also suggested adding investment swindler Bernie Madoff to a list of business leaders eduteacher_kidwho had achieved the American Dream, an obvious attempt to undermine free enterprise and the American Dream concept. 

Further, she suggested adding the name of self-proclaimed pedophile Harvey Milk of San Francisco to a list of contemporary figures.

Another member said, that under the right set of circumstances, he would “Send his students out to participate in violent protests”.  The two fit the ideology of the groups who likely recruited them perfectly. 

These facts, that review panel members were not aware of who nominated them, suggests a total disconnect between the recruitment of nominees by the TCSS and/or the unions, and the submission of the resulting names by SBOE liberals to the TEA for rubber stamp approval.

Given the facts outlined above, let’s take another look at the questions posed earlier in the article:

“How, and to whom, did Texas Education Agency (TEA) send requests for participants in the review panel process?”

“Were the requests primarily directed to the TCSS and the teachers’ unions?” 

“Were organizations outside of the education establishment contacted, for example, any Texas Chambers of Commerce and/or major industry employers?”

“Did the TCSS and teachers’ unions recruit educators sympathetic to their agenda, or were they representative of the hard-working Social Studies teachers group as a whole?”

“Were the resulting volunteer resumes distributed to liberal SBOE members, giving them a large selection of candidates, while the conservative SBOE members were left to find candidates for themselves?”

“How were the liberal SBOE members able to get as many as 16 or 17 educators on the review panels, while conservatives got a just handful at most, or sometimes none?”

“Why were the 16 social studies panels (including my U. S. history since 1877 panel) comprised of roughly 100 educators, mostly leftists, but only four representatives from the non-educator categories?”

“Given the overwhelming imbalance of educators, why did the TEA staff nevertheless reject known-to-be-conservative, non-educator nominees from conservative SBOE members?  By what authority did they do so?”

“Why did the TEA staff overseers allow the use of bootlegged TCSS standards as a starting point for the review process?”

These review process questions all need to be answered, eventually, thru an SBOE investigation. But for now, mainstream Texans need to focus on supporting those who will be fixing the standards between now and their acceptance in March 2010.

In summary, the ideological, political, and even some financial links among TFN-TCSS-teachers’ unions-TEA staff-review panels-and SBOE liberals seem unmistakable.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to develop probable answers to the questions posed in this article.

And it is almost amusing that “Texas Freedom Network” – the self-described keepers of “a mainstream agenda of religious freedom and individual liberties to counter the radical right” – and the bottom-feeding newspapers that use TFN input for their biased articles, accuse the “right” of “politicizing” American history? Excuse me?

The politicizing is coming from these left-leaning, history-rewriting groups that attempt to invent negative, revisionist history, while conducting aggressive smear campaigns and personal attacks on any Texas conservative whose views of a positive America or Texas stands in their way.

The time has come to shine the bright light of truth on the real story … the left’s hijacking of the social studies standards process.

Tomorrow’s “Part II” article will address what damage has been done to the standards as a result of this one-sided, ideological attack?

_________________________________________

During 2009, Bill Ames has been the only non-educator – as well as, he says, the only conservative – on a nine member TEKS review panel charged with the responsibility to determine teaching standards for post 1877 U. S. history in Texas’ public schools for the next ten years, approximately.

In a three part series published in TexasInsider during September, (Part I, Part II and Part III,) Ames revealed how the nine member TEKS review panel he serves on has chosen to:

  1. Present a negative view of U.S. history thru a prism emphasizing exploitation and oppression of minorities, women and labor;
  2. Set a double standard for inclusion of minorities and women; and
  3.  Introduce shameless political bias into the standards.

He also proposed actions that Texas citizens can take to support the State Board of Education’s (SBOE’s) attempts to counter the leftists’ revisionism of history.

Tomorrow, in part II of this series entitled “The Left’s War on U.S. History”, Ames will assess the damage done to the social studies standards by these groups.

In part III, Ames will discuss the need for diversity of opinion in the standards, and discuss past and recent actions by SBOE conservatives in various curriculum areas. Part III will also suggest actions that individuals and groups can take to ensure that the final standards reflect an overall positive view of America.

Ames welcomes reader feedback at billames@prodigy.net

Post to Twitter

25 Comments

Pauline Hill
8:39 pm CST
November 09, 2009


Teachers are a voting, union block. 99% of them vote to the ‘left’, for self interest.
They know they could not make a living at anything but crowd control.
They are on the side for more DIVERSITY~~~any way they can it.

Mary
10:59 pm CST
November 09, 2009


Before you criticize the educational system, you may want to spell correctly on your website.

Leslie
7:46 am CST
November 09, 2009


Mary, oh Mary…………..you are such a buffoon. What was the purpose of your “spell correctly” comment? It means NOTHING regarding the subject of this article!

Radman
9:25 am CST
November 09, 2009


Well stated, Leslie! Mary, Mary, trite and contrary, cannot refute the message itself, so she falls back on the liberals’ old stand-by strategy of attacking the messenger.

ron staha
10:11 am CST
November 09, 2009


Little wonder our kids have no clue of how we became who we are and the freedoms they stand to lose,

CWJensen
10:20 am CST
November 09, 2009


IT’s Called INDOCTRINATION…………………………………………every Despot since the beginning of time has tried to control HISTORY.
From grade school through college these SOCIALIST LIBERAL mouthpieces are spreading their PROPAGANDA.
Think about it. The average child will spend 7 waking hours a day with a complete stranger that you know very little about.
GET ENGAGED PARENTS………………………………….you owe it to your children to spend at least 30 minutes each day (debriefing) your children.
We always did it at the dinner table . You will be amazed what you learn.
As a teacher If a parent did NOT show up at least one every six weeks I went to them.
I informed them THEY needed to BE PRO ACTIVE in their child’s education.
I DID NOT just expect it I REQUIRED it.
THE BUCK STOPS WITH YOU……………………………or kiss your child GOODBYE,

Doc
10:35 am CST
November 09, 2009


Although I tend to agree with the tenor of the article, I take issue with Pauline Hill’s insulting comment about teachers. I can assure you that 99% of them do not vote to the left and are more on the side of diversity than education as implied by Ms. Hill’s statement. I doubt one could get 99% agreement from the populace that two plus two is four, much less agreement on politics. I’m sure some do vote to the left but her percentage is completely overstated. I see no need to insult the teaching profession and the many teachers who are staunch conservatives. Unfortunately, crowd control is one of the by-products forced upon teachers due to overcrowding of classrooms and lack of support for effective discipline by administrators. Crowd control is not something taught in either liberal or conservative institutions…..at least in their education schools.

Jenny
1:48 pm CST
November 09, 2009


To Pauline, if you are talking about teachers in Texas, you are absolutely wrong.

To Doc, I disagree with your assessment of the article; I found inaccurate facts in the article and found the tenor of it very offensive. However, I agree with your observations about teachers. Thank you.

Radman
7:40 pm CST
November 09, 2009


Wake up Jenny! Wake up Doc! Those teachers who do not vote their union’s party line keep it to themselves for fear they will be ostracized and marginalized by their peers! While I wholeheartedly (and sadly) agree that teachers have lost control of their classrooms…and are almost prohibited from removing disruptive and sometimes violent students, I would point out that until the teachers collectively accept some reasonable competition for the product (“education”) they provide (e.g., vouchers that would permit students to escape failing schools), NO thinking person will believe that the vast majority of teachers will NOT continue to vote for the perpetuation of their monopoly in public schooling.

Oh, and Jenny, you cannot have a “fact that is “inaccurate.” “Inaccurate fact” would be an oxymoron. And don’t just make the statement that there are inaccuracies in the article. If you are going to challenge Mr. Ames, be specific. The unvarnished truth has a way of being “offensive,” especially to those folks whose personal bull is being gored.

CW is right! Parents must find a way to talk to their children about what they are being taught in the classroom. And, if its political correctness or revisionist history, they must take whatever action is necessary to stop it…even if it means educating them at home or sending them to a private school. Otherwise, this nation reaps a tainted crop from what the government schools have sown.

C. R. Evans, Jr.
8:21 pm CST
November 09, 2009


I am probably more conservative than most and a recently retired public schoolteacher. I taught math for 41 years but also am certified in History.

Who are these teachers in your reply? Our school is small. We have a total of 42 certified teachers. Only 6 of them voted for Obama. Most of the teachers that I know are independent, value oriented voters who believe that Obama is the most dangerous man on the planet.

Many social studies teachers are frustrated with the curriculum. The problem is that many are fearful of losing their jobs if they try to “correct” the curriculum. In many schools department heads and and, to a certain extent, administrators control the classroom lessons. They don’t want to lose their jobs because of TAKs. We have to meet the absurd standards of TEKs or else. In smaller schools like ours teachers have a little more freedom…or maybe it’s just our school that has more freedom to “correct” things.

Home schooling is a solution to this problem but we need more conservatives on the Texas State School Board. They have to be the guardians of our history.

C. R. Evans, Jr.
8:23 pm CST
November 09, 2009


There is no”union line” in our school.

Jenny
10:46 pm CST
November 09, 2009


Perhaps I should be more specific. As a retired Texas classsroom teacher and long-time member of the Texas Council for the Social Studies, I am highly offended by the characterization of the organization as “a liberal educators’ group.” The organization seeks to support social studies educators in all fields, history, geography, government, and economics. Most of the members that I know personally, are rather conservative, as I am myself. But above all, the organization has in my opinion, always maintained a forum for open discussion of issues, demonstrating respect for the values and opinions of both liberals and conservatives in addition to moderates. Indeed, this organization has always been more moderate than other teacher groups, such as TSTA and NEA, two organizations I resigned from decades ago because of their liberal leanings.
Additionally, I contest the statement: “It was the TCSS that had attempted to hijack the standards review process.” Teachers across the state knew in advance that the TEKS revision was pending. TCSS provided an opportunity for them to consider possible revisions in the social studies TEKS. The results of the survey were organized to efficiently communicate those ideas to the State Board of Education. It is regretable that anyone was offended by this effort, but let me assure you that hundreds of teachers, both liberals and conservatives, had opportunity for thoughtful input based on their expertise in the field and their experience with students. In addition, untold hours of hard work by dedicated teachers, went into the collection and organization of the information that has been characterized as a “hijacking”.
Despite the atmosphere in Austin, I will continue to participate in the political process of TEKS revision, even though I have retired from the classroom. I also will continue to participate in the Texas Council for the Social Studies, even though it has been inaccurately characterized as “liberal” by Mr. Ames, because it is an organization of skilled professionals dedicated to acting in the best interest of the children, the future of Texas.
Thank you for the opportunity to join this discussion.

Dennis Berger
7:46 am CST
November 09, 2009


Allow me to address the remarks by Mr Ames by pointing out that I am a member of the committee he was on that was charged with writing the 11th grade U.S. history TEKS.
I am a public educator in the Panhandle and have been one for seven years. Before that I served twenty-one years in the Air Force. I have voted Republican for president every year since 1976. That said, I resent his categorization of myself as being liberal. Rather, I prefer to label myself “intelligent.”
In our committee there were a number of persons who proudly labeled themselves liberals, but at the same time I saw a group educators who know that no matter what your ideological bent, you leave it at the classroom door.
In our deliberations on the curriculum there was a great deal of heated discussion about particular individuals and events. We did our best to make the TEKS as inclusive as possible, while maintaining as much balance as possible. For instance, one SBOE member had directed us to note the importance of Congress in “giving” blacks their civil rights. The final TEKS on this issue noted that the Congress, two presidents, and various civil rights groups worked in concert to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Like I said, inclusive and balanced.
In another episode we decided to eliminate the listing of specific World War I battles, not to minimize the sacrifice of doughboys, but to streamline the TEKS. We know that teachers will mention those battles. Yet, when I supported that proposal I was called unpatriotic by Mr.Ames. (It has not escaped my attention that those who have never been to war are always the first to wave the flag.)
Despite Mr. Ames’ contention about interest groups no member of the group, with the possible exception of Mr. Ames himself, allowed an outside group to dictate to us what should go into the TEKS. In my view it is an outstanding product–one that Texas school kids can benefit from.
An outstanding “conservative” scholar at Texas Tech, Dr. Jim Reckner, once mentioned that a “liberal” education was not one in which only liberal leaning topics were taught, but one in which you provide the students with as much information as possible, from both sides, and allow them to interpret it. I believe that with these TEKS the teachers of Texas have that ability.

D. Willliams
10:00 am CST
November 09, 2009


I have been a social studies teacher for 11 years. Four of those years in alternative schools with kids who were on the fast track to jail, not college. I am a parent and a teacher and cannot believe how woefully misinformed some people are.
First, why in the name of all that is sane, do people think that teacher’s unions have all this power? Not in my school, certainly not in my district. The teachers I know are only part of the union to protect themselves from frivolous lawsuits. I don’t know any teacher, myself included, who expects that the union is going to do anything in the way of changing legislation, improving the classroom environment, etc.
Second, why was there not an uproar last year when a right-wing political group proposed that we only teach world history from a European perspective and leave out Africa, Asia and South America as if they didn’t exist?
Third, as a student and teacher of history I can assure you that what some of you may call “revisionist” history is not revisionist, it is just adding what has been left out for 100 years or more. Growing up I never learned anything about Africa or Asia or South America or the contributions of different groups to American history. It was all about Europe and Europeans. Now when I teach, I make sure my students know about both the good and bad that EVERYONE has done throughout the world – and that is the only diversity I’m interested in.
Now I could get into 19 year-old freshman, 16 year-old seventh graders, parents that don’t care (and that’s were it really starts), administrators that are out of touch and a host of societal issues that burden education…but I digress. If Americans want to get real and “fix” education we are going to have to take a very, long, hard politically incorrect look at ourselves. Stop trying to assign blame. Most people aren’t interested in solutions; they only want to be right. Realize that your way isn’t the only way. Understand that helping your kids to get a quality education does not mean that they just learn to agree with you. Give your children some credit; teachers like me want to teach them how to think not what to think. I take great responsibility and pride in knowing that I make a point to explore different perspectives and to “dare” my students to look at things through someone else’s eyes. That is how you foster learning, capture the “video-game” generation and get them to THINK, not push a button and get the answer. That’s what real teachers want. And I know a lot of them. But, of course, I can only speak for myself.

E148
12:48 pm CST
November 09, 2009


I am not an educator.I maybe the only poster, sa far, who is not. I did not go to grade school in this state but my daughter did. I did go to college here though. I know nothing of unions and particularly nothing of teacher unions, so I will not comment on that.

D Williams– your third point: A change to anything is a revision. So your changes are revisionist by definition.

“Growing up I never learned anything about Africa or Asia or South America or the contributions of different groups to American history.” Neither did I so far as American History goes, nor should I learn about South America in US History. I did learn things like the Chinese had a big hand in building the railroads (from the west) but I did not learn that the Irish had a big hand in building the railroads from the East. Nor that a lot of Irish people died in our Civil War on both sides. I went to high school back in the 1970s. US History needs to be taught for the majority of the people and the majority are from Europe.

As time goes on the more US History has happened an must be covered. History is a survey course– highlights. The history of the Chinese and the railroads, for example, is of less importance than the history of the Irish on those same railroads. Most of us are of European origins. Europeans had more to do with making this country what it is.

You can take college courses in African, Asian, or South American studies and focus on them but high school should just give the general background for how we came to be. AS a matter of fact you can probably get a PhD by studying the Battle of Gettysburg or the Civil War in general or in whatever subset of US history you want.

Just because you want to know every detail of US History does mean it should be taught. It is fine that you want to know this, by the way.

E148
12:53 pm CST
November 09, 2009


that should be “so far”.

Edward Stimach
2:03 pm CST
November 09, 2009


I have read all the confllicting comments on education above, and I see some truth in all of them.
So I guess the truth is–too much politics in education…..I don’t have a solution.
No wonder private/home schooling is on the rise. I guess one’s perception becomes the truth.

Don
10:00 pm CST
November 09, 2009


Nohing on the left or the right in regards to politics should be taught in the classroom. Politics should be taught at home. Only historical facts should be taught in the classroom.

D. Williams
11:52 pm CST
November 09, 2009


E148 – I think you missed my point. I teach US History and World Geography. I don’t teach about other cultures/countries in US History, unless we’re talking about (for example) Gemany or Japan during WWII…I mean, how does that not make sense. Again, I think we would have to agree to disagree about what “revisionist” really means. I see a revision as changing a fact as though a mistake was made. When you’re mentioning what had been previously left out, that’s not a revision, it is fact that had never been discussed. Slaves did help to build the economic foundation of the US (more than the two paragraphs in my history books that said black peeople were slaves, the Civil War happened, then they were free and Martin Luther King Jr. came along, had a big march and gave a great speech and everything was OK.) I understand that it is a survey course and we can’t hit everything, but the TEKS for social studies are SO ambiguous that what can be emphasized or not emphasized can be left up to the teacher and I understand how that can be a problem. I had one of my students tell me once that “Blacks and Asians and Mexicans aren’t in history books because they never did anything…” So is that the mindset you want our kids to have? And this was a smart kid who graduated in the top %10 of our DISTRICT.

How would you feel if you are taking a class and you never saw how anyone who looked you ever did anything positive for the country? I have seen ALL of my students perk up when we learn things they had never known and may never know – everyone is not going to college. And when they are able to learn these things, they think “Oh, I really am a part of this…” I AM NOT a touchy-feely liberal or love or leave it Conservative. I am too smart and have far too much common sense to think either political leaning has all the answers or have a clue as to how to handle real issues in the classroom.

And when it comes to politcs, my students can never figure out where I stand. And that means I’ve done my job. Present the information and they make up their own mind. Again, teaching them how to think not what to think.

polako1
6:03 pm CST
November 09, 2009


Bill Ames, and all those who agree with him, are the poster children in favor of abortion! Your parents should have been forcibly sterilized!

Bubbles
8:23 pm CST
November 09, 2009


It is despicable that you right wingers want to eliminate anybody who is not white from Texas history books. Newsflash: people of all races have fought in our wars and built our country. You want to perpetuate a myth of white superiority.

Furthermore, the Founding Fathers were not Christians. Stop spreading that lie.They were Deists. Read “The Age of Reason” by Thomas Paine, and you will see what he thought of Christianity.

Anonymously Anonymous
10:40 pm CST
November 09, 2009


Having known Ryan Valentine since he was just a young kid, and knowing the values he was reared with, and knowing some of his family, I can truly say that “much learning has driven him mad.”

college costs by school
12:42 am CST
November 09, 2009


I am going to start a blog on the same theme soon, for this reason Im so serious about your article. Would you mind if I used a few of your thoughts for my weblog? Ill obviously point out you as the original source and set up a link pointing back to your site. Appreciate it!

window replacement cost estimate
9:46 am CST
November 09, 2009


Thought I would comment and say great theme, did you make it yourself? Looks great!

Julio McGinsburg
8:22 am CST
November 09, 2009


A big HARUMPH to Mr. D. Williams for speaking truth.

Leave a Comment

Your Name
(required)
Your Email
(required - not published)
Your Website
(optional)
Your Thoughts


+ three = 11