Monday, October 21, 2019

An Open Letter to a Globo-Homo Freak who Badmouths Ethan in John Ford's THE SEARCHERS

Are you so-called 'lefties' capable of saying anything other than 'racism, racism, racism' about THE SEARCHERS? 

And I find this passage hilarious. Andrew Stewart: 

"He wishes to kill his own family for inter-ethnic coupling. When Ethan speaks the wretched words he does, it is vital to remember that Wayne was saying on screen what a whole generation of fathers were saying in private about the idea of their precious white daughters going to school and perhaps one day dating African teens. The film’s literal Indian War is a deep analogue for the culture war that was going on at the time.... y understanding that Wayne’s Ethan is as psychotic and sexually-confused as De Niro’s Travis Bickle, it is possible to see the earlier film on a psycho-analytic level that otherwise escapes today’s viewers."  

You describe yourself as 'queer'. Ain't it funny that a guy whose idea of 'sex' is fecal penetration with other men would make a fuss about OTHER people's psycho-sexual hang-ups. 

Maybe you haven't heard but sexuality is DARK. It is animal. It is about territory, pride, possession. It isn't something so genteel and refined like a tea party. It isn't lovey dovey in its essence despite the romantic trimmings(but then, is the art of courtship even alive anymore in the West?)

The reason you don't get THE SEARCHERS is because you 'lefty' types see everything through the simplistic prism of 'racism'. Also race-ism is Truth insofar as different races and racial differences exist. Race-ism, properly defined, should mean belief in the reality of race and racial diversity/differences. After all, '-ism' means belief, and there is no reason why race + ism should automatically mean racial hatred or supremacism or prejudice. 

But first, to get a better grasp of THE SEARCHERS, suppose we remove the racial element. The emotional dynamics would be more or less the same though, of course, the factor of race amplifies the tension. It's like this: If a black guy kills a black woman, the family members of the slain victim will feel vengeful toward black killer. But the rage will be greater IF the killer is white. Then, it will be seen as a white-on-black-murder. Indeed, the whole BLM outrage is predicated on the race-rage that young black men are being killed by WHITE cops. Why were Americans so angry when Pearl Harbor was attacked? Because the 'Japs' done it. Jewish media and FDR(that wanted US entry into WWII) were ecstatic because the anger toward the yellow 'Japs' would rile up Americans, even isolationists, into entering the war. 

So, race makes it more intense, but sexual dynamics are pretty dark and brooding on its own. Take THE ODYSSEY. The hero comes back and kills all the suitors. He also kills the female servants of the house who sexually serviced the suitors. Odysseus is about manly pride. He ruthlessly reinstates his authority as man of the house. He kills other Greeks, but the rage isn't different in kind from that of Ethan Edwards. Though the element of race raises the rage level in THE SEARCHERS, Ethan's blood thirst is driven at least in part by healthy manly pride. Maybe you, being a queer, lack an understanding of real manhood. Maybe you are used to other men sticking their dongs into your bung. Maybe you like to play bitch to the stronger Negro. Maybe, maybe not. But real men are like Ethan, a true hero on the Greek scale. And it's not just about race, race, race. Suppose his brother's family had been killed by Liberty Valance and his gang than by Indians. Ethan would be just as furious and vengeful. He would hunt them down and kill them.

As for his willingness to kill Debbie, it's dark but understandable. Ethan wanted to save her but also feared that she'd grow up to become a breeder for the Indians. Imagine that. A tribe of 'savages' murdered his brother and his brother's children. The woman Ethan dearly loved was raped and butchered. Same was done to the older daughter soon after. OF COURSE, Ethan is angry as hell. 
Suppose I'm a leader of a gang, and my gang did such to YOUR family. Wouldn't you be enraged? Wouldn't your bloodlust be PERSONAL? It's like in THE GODFATHER. After the attempt on his father's life, Michael felt compelled, indeed obligated, to kill the Turk and the police captain. And the young Vito Corleone(DeNiro) eventually returns to Sicily to take revenge on the man who'd killed his family long ago. Vito had a calm exterior but always longed for vendetta. And Hyman Roth is committed to taking out Michael because of the death of Moe Green, who was like a little brother or even son to him. Jews may act 'liberal', but they are intensely clannish deep inside and never forget. They still want to destroy Germany for revenge sake. Maybe you don't understand such sense of revenge, pride, honor, and family/clan loyalty as you're a deracinated white queer 'lefty' who prefers abstract and bogus ideas of 'social justice' divorced from reality. 

If Ethan's brother's family had been spared and if Jorgensen's place had been raided instead by the Comanches, Ethan wouldn't have been so obsessed. The issue here is PERSONAL. Ethan really loved Martha. It was bad enough that he'd lost her to his brother(just like Marty nearly lost Laurie to the guitar strummer). But to find her body raped and killed by Indians? That was some bad shit. Ethan loves Debbie and wants to save her. But he knows that as the years pass, she will become part of the very tribe that raped and butchered her family — Ethan's brother and Martha. She will be serving the very people who committed horrors against her own kind. Of course, we and even Ethan know that it's not Debbie's fault. She was taken as a child and the Indians came to accept her as their own. But it means she will make red babies who will grow up to kill white people. THIS is what Ethan cannot tolerate. But your queero PC mentality can only see 'racism, racism, racism'. You don't understand true manly pride cuz you're globo-homo. 

But surely, even a homo can have feelings like that of Ethan. Suppose my gang wiped out your family. Suppose my gang is ultra-right-wing and hate 'progressives' such as yourself. Suppose my gang took your young sister(whom you dearly love) and plan to use her womb to create ultra-right warriors who will attack and kill more 'progressives'.  Wouldn't you be livid with rage? Wouldn't a part of you wish your sister was dead than join the enemy(like Patty Hearst, topic of the Paul Schrader movie) and attack you and your kind? 

Indeed, suppose we flip the SEARCHERS. Suppose it is about a bunch of white cowboys that attack an Indian village. Suppose these imperialist & 'genocidal' white men rape red women and kill almost everyone. But they take one Indian boy and raise him as 'honorary white' and teach him to hate and kill Indians. Suppose the Indian father or uncle of that boy wants to rescue him. But suppose the years pass and the abducted boy has joined the ranks of white invaders-settlers to fight Indians. Wouldn't it at least be understandable why the Indian father and uncle would want to see him dead? 

Do you know about the Ottoman Turks? They ruled over Greece for 300 yrs. They took many Greek Christian boys, brainwashed them, and turned them into Janissary trained to fight and destroy Christendom. Many Greek fathers and mothers would have preferred that their sons die than be taken and turned that way. Does your queer mind at least understand such mindset? Or would you accuse those Greek mothers of 'racism'? 

Indeed, Greek mythology and folklore are filled with such stories. What is the main musical form in US today?  Rap music which is about tribal blacks yapping about how their life be all about fighting and fuc*ing and how they finna blow away anyone who done dis they's pride. You 'progressives' are okay with the violent sexuality of Rap Culture, yet you bitch about how Ethan is enraged over his brother and family having been mutilated and rubbed out in the most gruesome manner. You're too much of a pansy PC ideologue to understand human psychology and instinct. Sure, Ethan is angry, even unhinged at times, but his feelings are understandable and all-too-human. And on some level, it is virile and healthy. Man is, at the root, an animal driven by survival, sex, territory, and pride. It is YOU who are sick because you lack such healthy instincts. Instead, you have the anti-instinct of decadence and racial suicide. 

Now, I'm not saying men should always act out their rage. The World would blow up like in DR. STRANGELOVE. But those instincts are natural and of the essence. There is a powerful bond within the race and between parents and children. 
Why does the black woman in BELOVED(by Toni Morrison) kill her own baby? She would rather have the baby be 'murdered' than grow up a slave.  To Ethan, Debbie has become a sex slave of the very people who raped and murdered her family. And from her womb will come more warriors to kill whites. To him, that isn't 'being alive'. 
Of course, you know and I know that the history of the West was tragic for the Indians. From their point of view, they were defending their own land from white invaders. Indians had their own reasons and pride. The Walter Hill movie GERONIMO is a magnificent tale of a man who fights for his race, land, and pride. Sure, he does horrible things and kills 'innocent' white folks, but it is war, and war brings out the 'worst' in people. After all, it was the democratic powers that economically blockaded Germany in WWI, thereby driving many German children to starvation. It's like Ethan shooting bison to starve the Indians. And the Jews who control the US forced sanctions on Iraq in the 90s, killing by some estimates 500,000 women and children. Ethan has nothing on the Jews when it comes to mass killing. And it was democratic Harry Truman who nuked Japan and killed all those babies. And Jews used Barack Obama to aid terrorists in Syria to bring down Assad. It's amusing how so many progs bitch about how 'racist-wacist' the fictional Ethan is but are totally okay with Jewish-Zionist mass murder around the world. 

Anyway, we need a better understanding of the dynamics of male pride, its dark side but also as a source of courage and inspiration. After all, what is the catalyst of events in SEVEN SAMURAI. One of the farmers had his wife taken by the bandits. He was helpless to do anything and feels shame as a man. His wife is being raped by scum, but he's impotent to do anything about it. He feels the kind of rage that Ethan feels. But I'll bet you're the sort of PC pansy who'd accuse the farmer of 'psycho-sexual hang-ups'.  Or consider Angel in THE WILD BUNCH. He returns to his village and finds out his father was murdered by General Mapache. And his woman was taken... or worse... she freely went off with the very man who killed Angel's father and pillaged the village. So, when Angel encounters Teresa and she mocks him and laughs, of course he's angry as hell and shoots the 'puta'. It is a barbaric act in a barbaric world but understandable. A man's pride can take only so much humiliation. Akira Kurosawa understood this. Sam Peckinpah understood. So did John Ford. But all you can do is bitch about 'racism, racism'. 

Also, you say Ethan's fear of miscegenation is some kind of sickness. Why? If a white man has a white daughter, he naturally wants the girl to look up to her father and marry someone like him. It's part of human nature. If she goes with a man of another race, it means she finds Other Men to be racially-sexually superior. She would be sexually betraying her own kind. 
During Southern slavery, black men sometimes felt this way. Some black women happily gave themselves to white massuh. White master had the whip hand, and the black ho wanted the white man's seed than of the Negro slave. Imagine how humiliated the Negro male must have felt. 

In today's world, white women are finding out that black men are more muscular and bigger-donged. They look down on white males as 'slow white boys'. So, it is only natural that many white men would feel hurt and offended by this. Why wouldn't white men feel like Japanese men after WWII? Bigger and beefier white and black GI's were turning Japanese women into whores, and Japanese women flaunted their relations with American occupiers in front of defeated yellow men. Of course, Japanese men were wounded in pride.  Races are different. Black men are more muscular and tougher than white men. So, it is NATURAL for white men to feel threatened in racial/sexual/masculine in relation to blacks, just like Japanese men felt belittled and humiliated by American men sexually conquering Japanese women. And there is a whore element in womenfolk. Women are naturally into hierarchy. They are not egalitarian in their sexual preferences. They want winners with more money, more muscle, and/or bigger dongs.  So, Japanese men were bound to lose out to American men, and white men are bound to lose out to black men.  It's like French women threw themselves at Nazi German victors upon French surrender. Given that France was defeated, you'd think French women would have stuck with their own men out of national loyalty. But many French women didn't give a damn about that. They saw German men as winners and French men as losers.  French women acted like Teresa in THE WILD BUNCH. Like Arletty said, "My heart belongs to France but my ass belongs to the world."  Women are natural whores who will always go with Power.  Women like power and look down on 'losers'. Women may be politically on the 'left', but their sexual preferences are hierarchical. They want to put out to the Best and reject all the Rest. 

Historically and socially, white men had the advantage over blacks, who'd been historically oppressed. But white men were right to fear that, once social discrimination were removed, black men would gain over white men. Tougher black guys would beat up white guys, and white girls would look upon black men as racially-sexually superior. You see, race-ism is TRUE. Races are not the same. Get rid of social 'racism' and you end up NOT with equality but natural 'racism' that picks new winners and losers. Look at sports. Social race-ism of Yesterday favored whites as blacks were kept out of sports. But natural race-ism of Today favors blacks and discriminate against whites, browns, and yellows. We say US is so diverse, but NFL and NBA are almost all black. 

So, white fathers were understandably worried about their daughters going with Negro men. It meant racial-sexual defeat of white males, not colorblind racial equality. 

Such white girls(as 'mudsharks') were not opting for racial equality but rejecting white men as less manly than mandingo-like Negroes. We hear of the cuckold fetish among white liberals. Why is it racially so unequal? We don't hear of white couples inviting Mexican, Hindu, or Asian men to their bedrooms. It is usually the Negro. And we don't hear of black guys inviting white guys to do their women. Tyrone don't say, "Hey, white Wilbur, hump my Yolanda and humiliate by black ass."

And what does Rap music tell us about black sexuality? Negro rappers say, "da only thing on my mind is fuc*ing and fighting and whupping faggoty ass white boys and banging white girls." 

I find it amusing that white Libs condemn D. W. Griffith's THE BIRTH OF A NATION for saying that black men are a bunch of sexual beasts, but when one looks at rap culture, sex/porn industry, sports franchises, and much else(all controlled by Jews and Liberals), the message is black men are wild studs, white girls should put out to them, and white boys should accept their wimpy secondary status and be cucky pussyboys.  White Libs SAY one thing but they CELEBRATE another. They say all races are the same and race is just a myth, but they really celebrate black superiority as athletes, singers, sex beasts, mandingos, and studs. And the music industry is run by Lib Jews and 'progressives'. Not by KKK or by D.W. Griffith. But their favored depiction of Negroes is as badass thugs and sex lunatics. And blacks themselves lead all the other races in promoting thug behavior, skank culture, and whore attitude. So, it seems THE BIRTH OF A NATION wasn't entirely wrong about blacks. Its fears about blacks were dismissed by Progs as 'irrational', but the favored Prog image of the Negro is as the thuggish sex stud or gangsta mandingo. Lib Jews control sex industry and own music industry, and the prevailing image of Negroes is a wild studs who have nothing on their mind fuc*ing white women. The ONLY difference between Griffith and Lib Jews is Griffith saw this as a bad thing, a threat to the white race, whereas Lib Jews welcome it because they want to castrate white males so that the white race will never regain the pride and unity necessary to challenge Jewish power. Indeed, consider the Old Spice advertising: It says Negro is the sex stud who is racially-sexually superior to the cuckish white boy. It's the same logic as in THE BIRTH OF A NATION. Difference is Griffith called on white race to resist the looming black sexual imperialism. But cucks like you and Ken Burns celebrate your own racial-sexual demise as beta-male wussies before the macho black man. You guys are like the pansy-ass male Eternals in ZARDOZ. You have lost your male instinct to fight and survive. You guys really hate Ethan because he, like Geronimo, is a warrior for his race. You are collaborator cuck dork wimp. You can hide behind all this talk of 'social justice', but you have surrendered to Jews and blacks. 

Anyway, sexuality is dark and brooding. It's like what Camille Paglia said. We have to start from nature. Nature is at the root of everything, and nature is 'unfair' and 'unequal'. It made men stronger than women. Nature is sex-ist because it created stronger men who can beat up women. Nature is also race-ist because evolution made Jews smarter to rule over us all and made blacks stronger to beat up other races. 

Indeed, if US had imported small Vietnamese as slaves, would we have the same problems? No. White males wouldn't be afraid of shorter and scrawnier yellow males. But whites bought powerful muscular blacks from Africa, and once the blacks were freed, they began to whup white guys who became wussified and afraid. White women lost respect for white guys and more of them go with Negroes. You see, this is not equality. It is the new inequality. More social freedom means nature will play a bigger role in sex and crime. Since blacks are stronger and more aggressive, social equality between the races means blacks will beat up other races. This is why white folks want guns. Man to man, a white man is likely to get whupped by a black guy who will then rape the white guy's wife.  In fact, white guys are so demoralized that they now invite black guys to fuc* their wives. White guys are into cuckold fetish. Do you see black guys invite white guys to fuc* black women? 

Take STRAW DOGS? Sexuality sure can be disturbing. Dustin Hoffman's character got the girl because he's smart and successful. Girls like winners with careers who can provide, like Hoffman's David. But girls also like studs, and studs resent and look down on successful geeks or nerds who lack 'genuine manhood'. So, the sexual dynamics in STRAW DOGS get all confused. That's how nature works. But you are too PC priggish and neo-puritanical to have the requisite empathy to understand. Instead, you hysterically shriek, "Oh, that is so racist, that is so sexist, that is so... blah blah blah." You will never fully appreciate art and reality if you are such a neo-victorian PC pussy boy. 

Yes, all the characters in STRAW DOGS are sexually anxious and/or 'hung-up',  but that is natural. You see, all guys are anxious on sexual matters in one way or another.  A big strong ugly guy can attract a girl with his toughness, but he is jealous of the handsome guy and smart guy. It's like Jake LaMotta in RAGING BULL. He got the girl cuz he's a tough boxer. But he is outwitted by old gangsters, and he is intensely jealous when his wife says Tony Janiro is good looking, something LaMotta is not. Or a guy may be handsome and attract girls. But he may be anxious cuz he can be whupped by strong ugly guys. And a smart guy can get a girl with his money, but he may be anxious cuz she might be attracted to strong guys and handsome guys. It's like that Eagles Song 'LYING EYES'. 

Surely, you know about The Iliad. That was about a woman.  A war for Helen. But then, what do men live and fight for? Land and pussy. That's what matters most. Before there are ideas, there has to be life. And life is created through man and woman. So, if man loses the woman, he is lost. No children, no lineage. And if he has no land, he is vulnerable. This is why Jews obsessed about race for 3,500 yrs. Unless Jewish women had children for Jewish men, the Jewish race would face extinction. Today, there's lots of intermarriage among Jews, BUT most Jews insist that mixed-children be raised as JEWISH and goy partners usually go along because Jewishness has prestige as identity(whereas whiteness is vilified as 'racist' and yellowness is derided as weak). And even after 2,000 yrs of exile, Jews found a way to take back the land with the creation of Israel. Even the most Liberal Jews supported this massive ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.  Also, blood matters a lot to Jews. Take the Moses story.  Like Debbie was raised by Indians, Moses was raised by Egyptians as one of their own. But he rediscovered his roots. He sided with Jews, and to defend the Tribe, he worked with God to kill all the first born of Egypt. Jews still celebrate that murderous event as Passover. That is how Jews survived for 3,500 yrs. There was a bit of Ethan Edwards in all of them. 

Such is the way of life. Ethan is like a little Moses. He fights for his people. And it's understandable why John Wayne stuck up for Ethan. Wayne's remark about the Indians in your article is valid and invalid. Wayne said the Indians were greedy for having all that land for themselves. He was right in the sense that the US as a nation couldn't have become a reality if a few million Indians had all of it. There would have been no roads, factories, schools, hospitals, universities(favorite bastions of progs), and etc. UNLESS white man took over and settled the land. Besides, the moral logic of Wayne's pro-white-settlement account is now used by Progs. They say US is so big and bountiful that Americans must share the land and wealth with people all around the world. They say whites mustn't hog it for themselves, just like Wayne once said it was wrong for Indians to have sole claim to the land. These progs who feign outrage over Wayne's remark don't seem terribly interested in reviving Indian communities or returning much of the land to them. Instead, they call for even more mass invasion-immigration so that the remaining Indians will lose their ancestral hunting grounds to ALL THE WORLD.

For those who believe in the American enterprise, Wayne's sentiment has much validity because the Indian Way had to go to make way for civilization modeled on European achievements. After all, what has America been but a vast social experiment where white peoples, under leadership of Anglo-Americans, were given a virtual blank slate of land and freedom to show the world what they are capable of? At the time, no other people, provided with the same resources and opportunities, could have done as much. Not even close. 
But Wayne's argument is also invalid because, for the Indians, it wasn't just a matter of economics or politics or 'social progress'. The land under their feet was sacred and mythic, spiritually alive to them. Their folklore and identity were wedded to this land. And even though red 'savages' couldn't build a great modern nation like the Anglos did, they lived in brutal and rough balance with nature, and there is something to be said for nature and wildlife.  America built by whites is a tremendous achievement, but so much nature had to be destroyed to make way for farms and factories. We modern folks don't wanna live like savages, but Indians had a deeply meaningful relation to the land, and it was tragic that it was lost in the progress of industry and science and etc. Progress is good but came at a price. 

So, you see, there are always two ways to look at things. Even what you say of MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE misses the point.  On one level, it is true that the man's career was built on a lie. But it was also built on a truth. While it's true that Wayne's character of Doniphon was the man who really shot Valance, it is no less true that the James Stewart character showed remarkable courage when he picked up a gun to take on Valance. So, his career was built on a half-lie, not a total lie. He mustered the will to stand up to Valance and prove his manhood, all the more admirable because he's no gunman. If Stewart's character had ran from Valance but taken credit for having killed him, that would really have been a lie. But he did show incredible courage in challenging Valance. 

One thing for sure, Ethan is very different from Travis Bickle of TAXI DRIVER(written by Paul Schrader, directed by Martin Scorsese). Ethan is one tough hombre, a leader of men. He is man among men. An alpha. He becomes enraged because of what happened. He can be sociable and in sync with the world around him. He is a good reader of people's character and motives; he's a good leader of men. In contrast, Bickle is really messed up in the head. You can tell he is sort of like Norman Bates crossed with one of Robert Bresson's characters.  
Also, we are talking of two entirely different worlds. In THE SEARCHERS there is civilization vs savagery. Though Ford is somewhat sympathetic to the Indians, the coming of progress means savagery must make way for churches and rule of law. In contrast, TAXI DRIVER is more disturbing because it is set in the heart of civilization, New York, the greatest city on earth. Yet, the decadence and degeneracy are worse than savagery. It is savagery at the core of civilization. 

Some say Bickle is 'racist' cuz he fears black thugs. But this is so dumb. I mean how could any honest person NOT have noticed black thuggery and crime in NY, especially in the 70s? Things got so bad that even 'liberal' NYers finally got Republican Rudy Giuliani to clean things up. NYers also elected centrist Jewish-Supremacist Michael Bloomberg three times to get tough on blacks through stop-and-frisk(the 'nigger'). So, in a way, Bickle's fears were shared by Libs themselves. You surely have it too. If not, go live in Detroit or the black parts of Baltimore. It's easy for you to talk the Lib talk while refusing to walk the Lib walk.  Indeed, look at all the biggest Liberal cities.  They've been gentrifying to drive out dangerous blacks. San Francisco is only 6% black.  Housing projects have been torn down in Chicago to make way for posh condos for white and Jewish 'progressive' yuppies. And for all those 'nice libs' voted for Clinton who locked up tons of Negroes. So, while all you Libs put down Bickle, your ACTIONS confirm his fears. 

In the original screenplay of TAXI DRIVER, the pimps were black. Some say Bickle is 'racist' cuz he tries to save  a white girl from black thugs. What in the hell is wrong with that?  Suppose a black taxi driver saw a bunch of white pimps exploiting black girls. Would it be wrong for him to feel racial rage? 
Weren't Vietnamese men angry that whites and blacks were turning their women into a bunch of whores? Viet Cong men were a bunch of Travis Bickles who were trying to end sexual imperialism by the US. Bickle wants to save a white girl from black sexual exploitation. 

If a bunch of Arab men sexually exploited Jewish women, Jewish men would be angry as hell. And good thing too. Suppose Arab men exploit Jewish women in the way that Jewish men exploit Slavic women as sex slaves in Israel and Ukraine. Suppose Arab men control pornography and get mostly Jewish women to have sex with Negroes for money. Jewish men would growl with rage. Any man who is okay with men of another race exploiting the women of his race is a pussy-bitch(like what the Japanese have become since the end of WWII).  

Anyway, sexuality is dark matter. It brings out the murderer in us. Consider what OJ did to Nicole Simpson. Or consider what happens in Othello. In Romeo and Juliet, the two young ones commit suicide or murder themselves for love.  
Sex also creates family and new dynamics of bonds and hatreds. When Agamemnon had Iphigenia sacrificed to the gods, his wife got so angry that she waited for him to return and then had him killed. And then her kids killed her. All very dark and crazy stuff but also very understandable since humans are driven by dark passions. But I'll bet you're the sort of PC pansy freak who can only think in terms of 'that's racist', 'that's sexist', or 'that's homophobic' when it comes to the arts. 

This is why humanities have come to suck so bad. Too many ideological freaks like you reduced art to a set of buzz words. You don't know the true nature of passion. Consider Marty in THE SEARCHERS. He comes across the voice of reason through much of the movie, but when he finds out Laurie his love is about to marry the guitar-strummer, he turns all 'savage', and the 'Indian' side of him emerge. For a moment, he seems even more unhinged than Ethan as he even bites the groom in the ear. You as a homo should know this since the homo community is filled with all sorts of obsessive freako people who are so vain, narcissistic, possessive, and even socio-pathic. But so lacking in self-awareness.

No comments:

Post a Comment