Monday, October 31, 2005


Election Information

The San Jose Mercury News showed that the governor's propositions are beginning to fall behind (free acrobat reader needed).

I found this site, Vote Circle, which seems to do a good job of being balanced. It shows who the primary backers are for both sides of the contested issues. It also has adequate summaries of the impact of the propositions should they pass.

Friday, October 28, 2005


Be an Angel

Be an angel!

The Prison Fellowship Ministry is sponsoring its annual Angel Tree. This program delivers Christmas presents to the childrend of prisoners. For most, it may be the only present that they get.

The easiest thing to do is to donate money that will be matched by matching grant this year. So, for example, your donation of $44.80 will be doubled by the grant and will provide for eight children.

If you want to do more, you and/or your church organization can volunteer to help deliver presents as well.

Please do something today as it takes time to plan and organize such a large scale effort.

I thank you and may God bless your.

Thursday, October 27, 2005


Mark Twain

"I wrote Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn for adults exclusively, and it always distressed me when I find that boys and girls have been allowed access to them. The mind that becomes soiled in youth can never again be washed clean." - Mark Twain

An interesting thought especially since Huck Finn is taught in our public schools...


Huh, Hugh?

Party Hack Hewitt writes:
I think Ms. Miers has been unfairly treated by many who have for years urged fair treatment of judicial nominees.

She deserves great thanks for her significant service to the country. She and the president deserved much better from his allies.

I happen to think that the conservative base deserved much better from the president.


On the Grassy Knoll

Miers was a set-up all along...Her withdrawal allows Bush to appoint someone the conservatives like so that they will rally around the administration as it takes hits from WaterScooterGate and the inidictments...

How's that for a Machiavellian conspiracy theory?!?!?!?!

Wednesday, October 26, 2005


Mr. Wilson's Wife

If she told her neighbors she was a CIA agent, how can anyone else have "leaked" her name?


Stomping Out Ignorance

The Christian Educators Association International, an organization that provides union-like benefits for its teacher members and appears to be closely affiliated with the evangelical movement, has recently sent out "information" to its members about the upcoming California Special Election as follows:


Following are things you may hear in the California media and at your school sites. We have included some facts to give you the broader picture.

I. WHAT YOU MIGHT HEAR: The governor and big business is trying to silence the voices of teachers.

THE BIGGER PICTURE: CTA leadership is refusing to debate teachers within the CTA who have differing opinions from theirs. They ignore that their own members don't agree with their politics and blame big business and the governor for trying to silence teachers' voices. But they use the funds of all teachers to support leftist politics, thereby silencing a good portion fo their moderate and conservative membership. See the State of Labor, 2005 labor union accountability report here.

II. WHAT YOU MIGHT HEAR: CTA members already have a choice to divert political funds into a charity.

THE BIGGER PICTURE: CTA gives members the choice of whether or not to divert a small amount of Political Action Funds (under $10 monthly of the $90+ fees) to a charity. Yet, they refund $250-$300 per year to non-members which they have defined as non-billable expenses or political funds. CTA's recent dues raise was admittedly for political purposes. CTA has already spent that money and is seeking to borrow $40 million more. See here. Poltical spending is about to make CTA go broke if it hasn't already. This political spending cannot be account for by the mere $10 per month from each member.

III WHAT YOU MIGHT HEAR: The union has its own internal democratic process through which members can participate in influencing union policy.

THE BIGGER PICTURE: CTA members can elect representatives who make all the state-level decisions. But no one reports how those representatives vote so they can be held accountable. Often, members are not informed of the issues being voted on in a timely enough manner to give representatives their viewpoints. State and national leaders are voted into office through the representatives and not by the rank and file members. Less than a quarter of one percent of members make the decisions for CTA membership.

This information piece is signed by Finn Laursen, Exectutive Director with an instruction to contact Forrest Turpen for more information.

Well, Mr. Turpen, here goes! (I have e-mailed the link to this blog to him, and he is welcome to respond in private via e-mail or publicly through the comment section below).

I. Your response is a red herring. Instead of addressing the "what you might hear" portion, you choose to ignore the charge and attack the CTA on another issue.

First, let us look at the information you should have addressed. The website promoting proposition 75 lists several people, most of them union members, as supporters. The reality of the situation is far different than what is presented at the supporters site.

As the old saying goes, the mothers milk of politics is money; and, in this case, there are a select few who are really backing proposition 75. In fact, 97% of the money backing Proposition 75 has come from a handful of very rich people and corporations who are hostile to labor and unions in general.

Second, as for your red herring point, I am reminded of my libertarian friends who scream and yell about the Republican Party, join the libertarian party, and become completely ineffectual. Although I can only go on my own personal experience and that of some of my colleagues in other districts, I have found that the union is quite responsive to my points even though I often disagree with policy and have opted out of contributing to the CTA PAC. Instead of throwing ineffectual spitwads from outside of the system, I have chosen to remain inside and preach to the masses. At the risk of over-hyping my own impact and inflating my ego, I recall that Jesus spent most of his time with sinners (tax collectors, prostitutes, etc.) in his attempt to change them specifically and change lives in general. Perhaps the CTA would be a stronger organization as well as a more moderate one if your members would do the same by joining it and being active. This is not meant to imply that your members do not have a positive impact at our site because they do. I am only arguing that they have little impact on the major power player that is the local, state, and national union (NEA).

II. Relying solely on the National Right to Work group for you information is dangerous. After checking with my site represenative and my local president, I have found that the CTA accountants and lawyers are meticulous in their review of non-billable expenses and where the money goes. In reality the amount that is diverted to the general fund on a yearly basis by opt-out people such as myself is equivalent to the amount refunded to agency fee payers. Your information is flat-out wrong. As for the amount of money being borrowed, I fail to see how this is different than purchasing a home with a loan with the intent to pay it back. Just because a person has a mortgage does not mean that the person is broke. Given that the CTA and other unions are fighting the deep pockets of a handful of welathy people and corporations as shown above, the borrowing makes sense, unless, of course, you are hostile to the idea of promoting liberty and political choice.

III. Do you honestly believe that every union member has the time or desire to review every issue and vote on them? That seems to be what you are implying in section III. The way the upper leaders are selected takes after how we originally elected U.S. Senators in this country and how similar leaders are to be elected in Iraq under our democratic based, and now approved, Iraqi constitution. If the "problem" you see is that much of a concern, join and fight on the inside... and fight with accurate and forthright information.

The packet that was handed to me to review is from a member of yours that I respect. In fact there are a few members of your union on our campus, and I respect all of them.

However, I do not agree that by joining your union one would be more effective as a Christian educator of both Christian and non-Christian students (this would apply solely to a public school setting), nor do I see any information in the packet given that your are effective in protecting my rights and interests in California including protecting STRS, promoting smaller class sizes, increasing necessary funding for new textbooks etc. In fact, the packet I received is more of an anti-NEA/CTA work than a proactive Christian attempt to improve the lot of students and teachers in public education. Although I disagree with many NEA/CTA positions, the only effective way to get any positive change in an unperfect system is to be in that system when no reasonable alternative exists. I see no evidence that your union is a reasonable alternative for public school teachers. Perhaps you have such evidence, and I would welcome a chance to review it; however, it was not in the packet nor was I able to find it on your website.

I wish you all the best; I am sure that by working with the excellent members of your union, the high school at which we all teach will continue to excel. I only hope that in the future your communications with your members are more accurate so that they may indeed make informed decisions.

Vivat Jesus!
Matthew J. McKinley

Monday, October 24, 2005


An E-mail to Fr. X

I just sent this e-mail to the priest referred to in the blogs below (and, yes, I used his real name in the e-mail!)

Dear Reverend Father X:

Although I am not a parishioner, I attended Mass yesterday while on a short visit to Big Bear. I must say that the content and tone of your sermon was remarkable. I am in no position to judge the hearts and minds of the parishoners and people of Big Bear that you so readily labeled as racists, but I am skeptical of your conclusions based on several statements that you made, including the fact that you said "I have never met an illegal alien." It might seem easy to dismiss this statement as a priest focused solely on his ministry of the sacraments to people who come to his church; however, in the context of your society-wide diatribe, I can only come to the conclusion that your sermon was based on radical multiculturalist theory which would negate the ministry-only defense.

Since you claim to have not met any illegal aliens, perhaps you can get in contact with the relatives of the vicitims of illegal aliens found:

Perhaps they can enlighten you.


Matthew J. McKinley


Out of Many, ONE!

E pluribus unum may be found on much of the currency of the United States of America. Of course, it is found on the Great Seal of the United States of America. Now there are many people who get entrenched in Masonic conspiracy theories about our seal and mottos; if you are such a person, then this blog is not for you.

However, this blog is for people who believe that e pluribus unum is not just our motto, it is our goal. This includes people who support assimiliation of legal immigrants into our culture. The motto is not a racist one although there have been several groups in the history of our great nation who opposed immigration due to racist ideas while still presenting themselves as "good Americans" (the Know nothings, the KKK, etc.).

If one accepts the motto, then one is obligated to help legal immigrants to our country. This is not to say that immigration should not be regulated and controlled. How best to do that is a subject for another day (and past blogs if you want to dig through the archives).

Out of many one can best be lived out if it is broadly applied. It is fairly easy to see how it should be applied to public education, access to politics and government services, etc. However, the process of assimiliation (and I subscribe to Proferssor Huntington's tomato soup concept), if it is to be successful, should focus on cultural interactions as well.

Unfortunately, the multi-culturalists, the uninformed, and the down-right naive people in certain sections of society oppose this idea. The most recent example witnessed by this blogger was at Mass yesterday in a small town that caters to tourists. The pastor, and only priest of the parish, went on a 25 minute diatribe about how town A was the most racist town in which he had ever lived. Specifically, he was critical of the predominantly "white" parishoners (whose own cultural backgrounds were not taken into consideration) who had opposed his introduction of a Spanish Mass. Now since I was not privy to any of these discussions, it may be true that some or all of the parishoners who opposed this new Mass were racists. However, given Fr. X's extrapolation of local problems to the big issue of immigration from south of the border, my educated guess is that Fr. X is pushing a multiculturalist agenda based on liberal politics grounded in the Gramscian-Marxist multicultural movement.

This is not to say that Fr. X is a Gramscian-Marxist. I have found that most ardent multiculturalist have no clue as to where the movement started. The goal of G-M movement is to fracture the hegemonic culture that gave us such ideas as political liberty, democratic republics, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, etc. in an attempt to install, in the long run, a G-M world system. I will give Fr. X the benefit of the doubt and assume that he is an unknowing pawn of the multiculturalists.

How so?

In his unhinged rant against the racist community of town A, he defended the Spanish Mass as being necessary for the Spanish speaking community of A who was and continues to be the victim of racism at the parish and in the community. But is his catering to the Spanish community good for the Spanish community, the community of A, and the greater society of the United States of America.

The answer is a resounding, "No!"

Is his policy fueling the racist fire (which, by the way, I have never seen in town A)?

The answer is, "Yes!"

In the Parish's vision statement (yes, I know, beware of organizations with a vision statement) the idea of community is presented first. But how is a community united if it caters to separtist cultural agendas by having separate masses in different languages as well as separate events? The answer, again, is obvious since it cannot promot unity while promoting divisive multiculturalism. In fact, this parish has a "Coordinator of Hispanic Ministry" who can only be seen as further contributing to the problem of cultural and religious segregation.

What Fr. X should have done was devise an assimilation process for the new immigrant community thus living out the idea of a united community - or, in other words, out of many, one. Perhaps the Spanish Mass could have been a temporary and transitional event, and not the apparent permanent and divisive one it has become. Given that the Church wants its members to be the united body of Christ, perhaps the best solution would be to offer all Masses in the common language of the Church - Latin. The readings could then be in the tongue of the particular group (English or Spanish), but others who do not speak that language could read the readings in the missalette and only "miss out" on the homily. In fact, people of both languages should be encouraged to go to the Masses of the other groups until the immigrant groups learns a sufficient amount of English so that the partial Spanish Masses could be eliminated.

Now, this does not mean that some specific cultural and religious events, such as the Our Lady of Guadalupe celebrations, should be eliminated. Such events are the pieces of food in the tomato soup. All immigrant groups who came to America and assimilated have contributed such things to the assimilation process.

The question now becomes: will the multiculturalists in the Church at large and in Fr. X's parish realize that their policies are more divisive than helpful? Unfortunately, I think not, but I will continue to pray that I am wrong on this point.


More on Fr. X

Fr. X mentioned that he had "never met an illegal alien." He also stated that he didn't know whether or not we should have an open border.

Perhaps he should talk the relatives of the victims of illegal aliens.

Thursday, October 20, 2005


Proposition Polling Data Update

Click here to see that Arnie's positions are sliding.

And what about Miers' unacceptable answers? Is the bad nomination finally doomed?

I'll be gone for a few days... hope to post again on Monday or Tuesday next!

Wednesday, October 19, 2005


Hugh the Party Hack Strikes Again!

Although he links to the original article in the Wall Street Journal penned by Judge Bork this morning, Hugh Hewitt continues to show us that he is in and of the world of politics to the point that he can only be described as a party hack. His latest diatribe against Judge Bork is based on a very selective reading of Judge Bork's analysis of Miers qualifications and an odd interpretation of Bork's analysis of Miers evangelical status that in no way can be considered to be contemptuous of her faith. Rather, Judge Bork is contemptuous of the idea that Miers' faith should be considered to be the constitutional qualification as he should be if that were brought up about any one nominated to the Supreme Court.

In reality, Judge Bork shows that Miers is a poor writer, a muddled thinker, and lacks any credentials that would indicate that she has any serious grasp of weighty constitutional issues. Read Judge Bork's opinion piece and then Hewitt's and you will see that Prof. Hewitt has done an extremely poor job of summarizing Judge Bork's position.

Frankly, it is hard to see how Hewitt keeps his job as a professor of constitutional law at Chapman University Law School when he appears to think that opposition to Roe is the necessary and sufficient qualification in a Supreme Court candidate. The overly simplistic comment by Hewitt in regards to Roe shows that maybe he does not have a true grasp of the severity of the constitutional issues that the court faces every year in areas other than abortion rights. I find that hard to believe given Hewitt's past statements on other issues before the Court, but his party hack position on the Miers nomination seems to have erased other vital issues from his memory bank. His logic is now as muddled as Miers.


Support Our Troops

Click here and here.


Weintraub Misleads on Proposition 76

In today's Sacramento Bee (free subscritption required), Daniel Weintraub states the following:

If you think the people you elect to the Legislature and future governors should be allowed more leeway to set school budgets annually in accordance with the revenue that's coming in from taxes, you should probably vote for Proposition 76. If you prefer the status quo - setting school budgets by a strict formula in the state's constitution - you should probably vote against this measure.

What Weintraub fails to mention in his article is that if there is a fiscal crisis in the future, the governor would have the ultimate say in the budget, thus trashing the idea that the legislature has the power of the purse.

The fact that California would have a different concept of the separation of powers than the one that exists in Washington D.C. is neither new nor wrong. The October 2005 issue of the California Bar Journal shows just that in its coverage of Marine Forests Soceity v. California Coastal Commission (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1 where the appointment powers for commissions has been shown to be constitutional in California when it is shared by the governor and the legislature. The question in Proposition 76 is whether or not the power should be shared except when the legsislature and the governor cannot agree on mid-year budget cuts when revenues do not meet expectations. Proposition 76 would allow the governor to ignore the wishes of the duly elected legislature to cut what he (or she) wants. That is a bad idea on its face as it allows for no check on the governor's power.

Proposition 76 needs to be rewritten if it is going to actually be helpful and keep with the traditions that have been shown to work in our great nation and state. The idea of tossing out constitutional mandates so that our elected officials can actually do their jobs is a good one. Allowing a governor to have unchecked financial power in economic downturns is a posion pill that the voters should not swallow.

Tuesday, October 18, 2005


It's a Quagmire!

Yes, the constitution was rejected in Iraq and the Marines are burning babies somewhere while Haliburton rapes the Iraqi countryside... blah, blah, blah....

Or, maybe we can start reading posts like this one, and ignore the biased MSM and the blowhards of AirAmerica who blow every negative out of proportion while ignoring the positive in Iraq.


The Anti-education Staw Man?

Much of the right of the blogosphere and talk radio in California seems to be enamored with the recent declaration by the controller of the California Teachers' Association that the funds of the three-year $60.00 assessment has already been spent, and that additional monies need to be borrowed or else the CTA will cease to exist.

Is this the Propositional Straw Man? In other words, will this issue now be used by those supporting the governor's bad ideas found in the special election to bash the CTA and "prove" that the CTA is a deceptive organization that "obviously lies about everything" that it doesn't like? This straw man seems to have been rolled out since the governor and his supporters have provided no evidence that tenure or the current removal process is actually hampering student achievement.

On a side note, the special assessment is not a tax like many of its opponents claim. The power to tax is a governmental power. The special assessment was approved by the duly elected representatives of the CTA membership. If you are a CTA member and do not like it, then vote for new representatives or run yourself!

This is not to say that CTA does not have some explaining to do! The potential financial crisis for the CTA and its members is very real. However, it is a different issue and should not be confused with the debate about what is needed to reform public education in California for the great good of all.


War on Life

My school is proposing that we collect money during the Halloween season for UNICEF. I immediately balked at this upon receiving the information this morning as UNICEF supports abortion.

On a more positive note, Roe of Roe v. Wade recently addressed L.A. Hispanic Catholics.


Leftist Nonsense

Well, the left isn't helping education much either with their theatrics. The goofiest ones are convinced that there is an evil Bush regime in control, and, well, they are going to something about it!

Like, what, you may be asking?

By not working and not going to school on November 2! Yes, students, you can do your Marxist best and resist (OR DIE!)! AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Such silly drama!


What Proposition Will Fix This?

Our district's textbook budget just suffered a $250,000 cut when we need to buy new books in the K-8 cycle.

Our district is not alone.

What, exactly, is the actor doing to fix this mess?

Thursday, October 13, 2005


Hugh the Ant

The man has lost his mind. Let's see... Hewitt posts that Rove backs the Miers nomination because she has been so involved with the process of judge selection and knows what the president wants.

The first President Bush was certainly loyal to President Reagan while the former was VP (even after whacking the latter in the primaries with "vodoo economics");however, the first President Bush was certainly notloyal to the Reagan legacy and Reagan's endorsement when Bush broke his campaign pledge and raised taxes.

Many of us voted for the first President Bush since we knew we had no other reasonable choice. That is definitely not the case with the Miers nomination. At least we knew the potential negatives as well as the positives (for the most part) of the first Bush. We know no such things about Miers.

Pehaps Hewitt should change his theme song to "the ants go marching one by one, hurrah, hurrah..." because that is the tune he is marching to "down, down into the ground" to get out of the conservative rain!


Hewitt vs. Neuhaus

We all know that Hugh Hewitt has smugly and firmly planted his feet in the shoes of loyalist hack for the White House. Just the other day, he was predicting not only confirmation for Miers, but conservative conversion for her. He was just as smug and certain about this as he was about finding WMDs in Iraq.

Then there is Fr. Neuhas' take on the issue in First Things:

I'm glad to see the Wall Street Journal weighing in, from an angle more sensible than that of the Interfaith Alliance, on the use of religion in promoting the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. A similar ploy was used when Justice Anthony Kennedy was nominated. Senator Jesse Helms said to Kennedy, "I think you know where I stand on abortion." Kennedy responded, "Indeed I do and I admire it. I am a practicing Catholic." We know what that means—or doesn't mean. Once he was on the court, Kennedy helped entrench the unlimited abortion license in the Casey decision of 1992, and has since "grown," as they say in Washington, in sundry other liberal directions. It is very good to know that Ms. Miers is born again, but that doesn't tell us a whole lot about her views on the legal protection of the unborn. As Dr. Timothy George, dean of Beeson Divinity School, a Baptist institution, will remind us when he delivers FIRST THINGS annual Erasmus Lecture next week, the Southern Baptist Convention was still supporting Roe v. Wade as late as 1980, and many evangelicals have still not been converted to the pro-life position. It seems Ms. Miers is definitely pro-life, but that doesn't tell us how she would read the law with respect to abortion. As I said earlier, I expect Ms. Miers will not withdraw (and) her nomination will likely be confirmed by the Senate, and, if she turns out to be a constitutional textualist along the lines of Scalia and Thomas, the present row will soon be forgotten, with only wounded conservative egos to show for it. On the other hand, if...

I will go with the good Father on this one who, as a convert to Catholicism, has a better understanding of what is at stake than the one has turned from the complete Truth.


Learn to Drive

I have a saying that my wife, unfortunately for her, has heard way too many times,"If you don't know how to drive the vehicle, you shouldn't be allowed to drive the car!"

Now, that saying is not directed at my wife; rather she has to suffer hearing it while I scream at people driving by braille in their large SUVs. I am not against large SUVs, just the idiots who buy them but don't know how to drive them. These are the folks who cause accidents but aren't in them as the rest of us react to their poor driving.

The worst drivers appear to be those who own Hummers. Well, here is a place that they can go to get their faux-outdoor experience and to get that bad driving out of their systems... I hope. On second thought, maybe they will have such a good time that they will not come back! Of course, if they just want to learn how to drive that monstrosity, they should take a class offered by the folks who build the beast. PLEASE!

Tuesday, October 11, 2005


Another Reason to Vote Against the Austrian's Plans

John McCain, the anti-conservative Republican, now supports the governor's plan.


Help Pakistan Earthquake Victims

Islamic Relief Worldide


The International Response Fund of the Red Cross


Alexander Hamilton on Harriet Miers

In Federalist Paper #76, Hamilton wrote about the role of the Senate in its advise and consent capacity as follows:

To what purpose then require the co-operation of the Senate? I answer, that the necessity of their concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, a silent operation. It would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from State prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment, or from a view to popularity. In addition to this, it would be an efficacious source of stability in the administration.

President Bush has appointed someone who appears to fall into the category of "favoritism." Now, one can argue that this may be true in previous picks as well, and the Senate has confirmed them (to the bench or other offices). But two (or two thousand) wrongs don't make a right. For those of us who are strict constructionists, Hamilton speaks to us now"

"Just say,'no' to Harriet Miers."


The Face of God

The last couple of weeks at the house have been rough, especially for my lovely wife. The end came yesterday with the "official" miscarriage at about 11 weeks, although we have known for two weeks that the event was likely to occur.

When a personal tragedy hits, it is quite tempting to ask, "Where is God?" Or, to blame Him outright. I found the face of God in all of the people, family and friends, who have expressed their sympathy and empathy (I had no idea how many women have suffered with the same fate) from people of various religious backgrounds and affiliations. Your prayers have been a comfort to us all.

Yes, we have seen the face of God in all of your kind faces.

One of the teachers with whom I work and who has gone through the same traumatic experience, suggested that we plant a rose bush in memory of our lost child so that we will think of Faith Xavier whenever it blooms. I planted the bush shortly after the event yesterday morning. The variety I chose to plant was Angel Face.

God Bless and thank you all.

Wednesday, October 05, 2005


Will v. Hewitt

Well, on one side, we have George Will in the Washington Post (free subscription required) who obviously is not gushing out the Bush talking points on the Miers.

Then we have party hack Hugh Hewitt who is marching along with the rest of the mouthpieces of the administration. In one of his posts, he delcared that Miers was a "solid B+ pick."

With very little information on her qualifications, it is obvious that Professor Hewitt is grading on a curve. I hope he is more rigorous at Chapman Law School.

Tuesday, October 04, 2005


Another nomination!

I think we can all approve of this nomination and advise & consent process.


Separation of Powers - Proposition 76

Does anyone remember Montesquieu? Does anyone remember the Federalist Papers? Does anyone in California remember that our state republican form of government is modeled after the Federal government and its three branches, separation of powers, and checks and balances?

Well, the folks who have brought you the dangerous Proposition 76 seem not to care one whit about the solid legal traditions of our country or our state.

Under the guise of trying to control the budget, Arnold and his troops have crafted a system that wrecks the idea that the power of the purse resides in the legislature. Now, when a Republican governor is in office, and if this proposition were to pass, it might mean that cuts would be made, I and many other Republicans would rejoice. But what happens when a Democrat resides in the governor's chair? Would that Democrat cut areas that are dear to Republicans (like police, prisons, etc.)?

Tampering with the separation of powers goes against the conservative principle of having too much power reside in the hands of one person. If the Republicans wish to sponsor an initiative that rids California of all pre-set spending so that the legislature could do the job it has been elected to do, I will happily sign on the dotted line even if it means gutting the pro-education Proposition 98. Unfortunately, this initiative is short-sighted and could cause more damage than it supposedly will fix.

Monday, October 03, 2005


Fire This Man!

Bad coach, bad, bad coach! Use your last time out and get your FG unit settled!

Okay, maybe not fire, but slap him around some!



Visitors to this page!


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?