Cult Watch: 1st Graders Forced To Pledge Allegiance To… Obama?

obama_flags

This is just beyond the pale :

A parent in the Clark County School District of Las Vegas, Henderson area reported today that his son, who is in 1st grade, came home yesterday saying that he didn’t want to go back to school anymore.

When asked why, the boy said that during the Pledge of Allegiance the teacher put up a large image of Obama next to the flag.

Thinking that the boy might be exaggerating, the man asked his son if he was sure, and suggested that by “large” he might mean an 8×10 photo of the president. The boy apparently said “No, it is a large picture of Obama and when we are done, the teacher turns off the image.”

The same thing was not done for President Bush last year.

After investigating this morning, the other parent reported that what the boy said was true.

At least three of the five classrooms have an overhead projector and as the children stand to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, the teacher turns on the classroom overhead and a full body image of Obama, with six U.S. flags behind him, comes up about 4 feet away from the flag that hangs on the wall. The screen is apparently around five feet by six feet.

Huh. I thought libs were all about taking God OUT of the pledge.

Seriously  though, the vice principle has said, he’ll “take care of it”, and another report is due out tomorrow to see how that goes.

I never complained  about this, because it seemed petty….but on inauguration day, at our elementary school, the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades were corralled into to library to watch BHO being sworn in, live.

I don’t remember that happening when George Bush was inaugurated in 2000, or 2004. My older kids don’t remember it, either.

Via: Doctor Bulldog and Ronin

Hat tip: Jawa Report

*UPDATE:

This story is being called a hoax by some in the blogosphere, although it is not at all clear that it is. Geoff tells me that the original post for the story appeared at The Tree of Liberty.

From there, he says,  “the story went to InfoWars.net, and was finally picked up by News Blaze, which is just a blog. The News Blaze fellow promised an update the next day and didn’t deliver, so it’s possible that the story is fabricated. If Ed Driscoll’s unsourced claim that Clark Country officials have checked with all schools in their jurisdiction is true, then that conflicts directly with News Blaze’s claim that they talked to the VP”.

In the meantime, The New Blaze has updated its post with this:

Update Jan 29th: The teachers at the school today talked to the children about flag etiquette and the meaning of the flag and why the pledge is said. The lights were left on, so the flag could be clearly seen and the children were told that they should face towards and look at the flag. The parent spoke to the Principal and the child’s teacher. The Principal said they would not show the image of the president at the same time as the pledge tomorrow. The Principal apologized for causing offense. The parent and Principal and teacher left on good terms.

I’ve emailed The New Blaze to see if they can provide  more specifics, like the name of the school, and the name of the Principle the parents spoke to.

There are definitely a lot of Internet rumors out there,  concerning Obama, so you do have to be careful.  Another  that has come out recently, is this one, which has been picked up by many blogs, and is almost certainly a hoax.

The problem with wild stories about BHO and his followers…is you just can’t dismiss them out of hand because so many horrendous rumors have turned out to be true.

Who would have ever believed that American children would be trained to sing songs of praise to Obama while he was still a candidate, or that 15 pages would already be devoted to him in middle school history books. Not to mention the absolutely startling numbers of products glorifying his name appearing all over America. Who would ever have believed that American flags with his face printed on them would be de rigueur at the inauguration? Or that the benediction at his inauguration would turn out to be a race-baiting mother goose rhyme? I feel like I’ve been conditioned to expect  mind-numbed cultlike Obama worship at every turn.

I’ve stopped being appalled, and have come to expect it.

UPDATE II:

Alan Gray, the Editor in Chief of NewsBlaze emailed me back with this message:

Hello Debra.

The name of the school was purposely not given out,
in order to give this a chance to be resolved without causing a major issue
and so the school would not be inundated with calls.

The Principal has stopped the simultaneous display of the image and the reciting of the Pledge
and apologized for the problem it caused.

He also enclosed his update which I already posted, above.

I am inclined to believe that the school made an honest mistake, and corrected it. The persons involved didn’t want it to become a huge national story, and it didn’t.

Incidentally, the photo above is a picture of Obama standing in front of some flags. It was never meant to be taken as the picture being used in the classrooms.

Duh.

UPDATE III:

Here is the conclusion to the story, as given by the source.

The school only wanted to honor Obama. Did this same school honor President Bush in the same way?

About these ads

45 Responses to “Cult Watch: 1st Graders Forced To Pledge Allegiance To… Obama?”

  1. ATNorth Says:

    I have a son in 1st grade and I volunteer in a local middle school. At both schools, they had all the kids watch hours of the inaguration instead of, say, learning.

    I can’t remember ever seeing an inaguration at school. The closest thing was watching the Challenger coverage in 1986.

    Best Regards

    Like

  2. nicedeb Says:

    Did you complain?

    I didn’t want to sound like a sore loser, but it was aggravating.

    Like

  3. Betty Says:

    Absolutely outrageous. Definitely things to keep an eye on so we are aware . This kind of thing can get out of hand real quick. Something tells me obama would never object.

    Like

  4. 7HEAVENS Says:

    When the Ayatollah Komeni took power he ordered all of the images of himself smiling be confiscated and destroyed. They were replaced by images of him scowling as only he could do. When Obama’s images start scowling, we’re in trouble. (Sura 2:29)

    Like

  5. nicedeb Says:

    He never objected to his image being printed onto United States flags, so I don’t see why he would object to this.

    Like

  6. pumabear Says:

    The Roman ended when they defied the emperor. We’re headed that way now without a single word of disapproval from liberals. Pass the kooliaid PLEASE!

    Like

  7. geoff Says:

    Hoax!

    It’s not clear if it’s a hoax or not, at least to me. The story started with this post at the Tree of Libery forum. The author is apparently standing by his story, and he’s apparently known to at least one other forum regular.

    From there the story went to InfoWars.net, and was finally picked up by News Blaze, which is just a blog. The News Blaze fellow promised an update the next day and didn’t deliver, so it’s possible that the story is fabricated. If Ed Driscoll’s unsourced claim that Clark Country officials have checked with all schools in their jurisdiction is true, then that conflicts directly with News Blaze’s claim that they talked to the VP.

    But so far, I don’t think you can say for sure, especially with Driscoll’s lack of cites.

    Like

  8. Ed Darrell Says:

    As a former member of the Society of Professional Journalists, let me say that Newsmax is behaving badly. I suspect their editor is lying.

    He can call me and give me the name of the school if he has the guts to do it. I’ll protect the school’s name, but I’ll check it out.

    Newsmax=hoax. Most of the time.

    This sort of hoax was stock-in-trade in Stalin’s Soviet Union. Newsmax, if they had any virtue in them, should be embarrassed.

    Like

  9. Ed Darrell Says:

    The Roman ended when they defied the emperor. We’re headed that way now without a single word of disapproval from liberals. Pass the kooliaid PLEASE!

    Your history is a little spotty, but let’s be clear here: Defying Newsmax is the sort of thing Cincinnatus would have done. It’s not the liberals lying in this case who need to be opposed. Oppose the lies without regard to political bias, you’ll do well by America.

    Like

  10. geoff Says:

    As a former member of the Society of Professional Journalists…

    Then surely you can figure out which journal you’re talking about. The referenced article was written by News Blaze: it has nothing to do with Newsmax.

    Like

  11. geoff Says:

    I suspect that the News Blaze update was based on this new comment by the original poster. The poster never intended for this to become a news story or cause celebr&eacute – he was just recounting his personal experiences on a forum he frequents.

    I think that in the future, Mr. Driscoll’s debunkings should be based on a more rigorous investigation.

    Like

  12. geoff Says:

    I think we can pretty much ignore Mr. Driscoll henceforth. In his blog post he says:

    Isn’t it odd that they use a color photo while saying it was projected on an overhead projector, which would turn that photo into gray and white mush?):

    That there is pretty funny, except where it violates the laws of physics.

    Then he revises it to:

    All overhead projectors will do color. Getting a transparency made in color is a different issue, and most schools can’t do it.

    Making a color transparency is hard? Not for anybody with an inkjet printer which is, wow, just about everybody in the freaking country. I’ve printed transparencies on inkjets for 10 years. It’s so easy and cheap that one time I went on a business trip to DC and bought an inkjet printer there so that I could print out my presentation in my hotel room.

    For a careful journalist, Mr. Driscoll certainly makes some careless statements.

    Like

  13. nicedeb Says:

    Geoff, don’t you mean Mr. Darrell?

    Like

  14. nicedeb Says:

    I thought his comments about the photo were odd, too.

    Like

  15. geoff Says:

    You’re so right, ND. I’m getting my Eds mixed up. Plus I can’t get my e with an acute accent to work.

    I need a hug.

    Like

  16. Ed Darrell Says:

    Hoax indication #8: “It’s all nicely resolved, but as the perpetrator I’ll be damned if I give credit to a brave public servant to met my objections.”

    Still won’t identify the school? The guy claims to be a veteran — of whose army?

    If a veteran did something solid for citizenship as he claims this principal and teacher did (which suggests all the complaints earlier were really out of line), everybody would be up in arms that no credit went to the vet.

    Well — here he’s denying credit to a patriotic teacher.

    It smells of hoax to high heaven.

    My blog is open. This fellow who claims to be the father of the child can contact me easily. We can corroborate the story, and get credit to the educators who deserve it.

    The door is open, but no vets with kids in Las Vegas schools are walking through . . .

    Like

  17. geoff Says:

    This fellow who claims to be the father of the child can contact me easily.

    Does he know that? Or care?

    Like

  18. Ed Darrell Says:

    He probably would not care to talk to me. If he exists.

    I never complained about this, because it seemed petty….but on inauguration day, at our elementary school, the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades were corralled into to library to watch BHO being sworn in, live.

    I don’t remember that happening when George Bush was inaugurated in 2000, or 2004. My older kids don’t remember it, either.

    Shame on you for complaining about watching history. Regardless whether you watched it last time — shame on you for failing to be sure your kids saw Bush’s inauguration, at least on tape — why would anyone complain about watching history, any time?

    Can y’all just go take some anti-crabby pills and chill out for a while? I’m sure there’s a study that shows trying to maintain a permanent sense of dourness, permanent crabbiness, and refusal to smile at good things, causes heart attacks, stroke and cancer.

    You’re going a long way toward convincing me it’s true that Bushites didn’t really love the flag they waved or the nation it represents. As soon as the other party wins the presidency, pledging the flag, reading great speeches, studying history, witnessing history, are all anti-patriotic things, to you.

    You know what? Patriotism hasn’t changed since November, nor since the inauguration. But a lot of people have abandoned their patriotism. For what?

    Like

  19. geoff Says:

    You should probably stop talking now, Ed. You’re digging yourself in deeper with every comment.

    Don’t take this as discouragement – if you want to keep digging those logical holes, we’ll hand you some shovels. But you clearly haven’t thought this through on an objective level.

    Like

  20. Tim Says:

    I remember watching Both Clinton inaugurations while I was in school. It was considered a learning experience. I believe my brother remembers the Bush I inauguration at school. Additionally, when Bush II was inauguration it was another President being inaugurated, no history was being made. There is something to be said about the first black president and the history it contains…and if you can’t see that as more of a reason to watch an inauguration or have your students watch it then shame on you. And I’ve seen plenty of pictures of GW in classrooms and even professor’s offices.

    Like

  21. nicedeb Says:

    I think having a black President is wonderful, but I’m more interested in his policies than his skin tone. And I don’t think anyone should get preferential treatment based on skin color.

    I’m not surprised that Democrat inaugurations are shown at school. My question is, have they done the same for Republican Presidents? Maybe in most cases they have. I don’t know…

    Like

  22. geoff Says:

    There is something to be said about the first black president and the history it contains

    …and boy has it been said.

    Like

  23. nicedeb Says:

    ….ad nauseam.

    Like

  24. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consilere Says:

    There is something to be said about the first black president and the history it contains…and if you can’t see that as more of a reason to watch an inauguration or have your students watch it then shame on you. And I’ve seen plenty of pictures of GW in classrooms and even professor’s offices.

    The only thing that merits a nod as historical is the peaceful transition of power, which is the consistant miracle of the American political experience. Other than that, it is a very
    showy ceremony with a tepid speech jam-packed with generalilities, carrying a very large price tag, both in the cost to put on and the cost to clean up.

    As for watching inaugurations in school, it sounds like you had lazy instructors who couldn’t be bothered with a lesson plan. And in professor’s offices? Fuhgidaboutit!

    Like

  25. Ed Darrell Says:

    Still waiting for confirmation. Where is that guy, Geoff? If he exists, why can’t anybody find him — including, as best I can tell from my e-mails, the author of the article at Newsblaze?

    One of the best lesson plans I’ve seen in the past several months was the one from the Bill of Rights Institute on inaugurations.

    But then, what do you care about the Bill of Rights, right?

    Like

  26. nicedeb Says:

    Ed…why don’t you post a query at the Tree Of Liberty since you’re not satisfied?

    Like

  27. geoff Says:

    But then, what do you care about the Bill of Rights, right?

    I think he’s graduated from chump to a**hole.

    Like

  28. Ed Darrell Says:

    Not a member of Tree of Liberty. Can’t post. If you’re a member, please feel free.

    Alan Gray can’t get verification, either. It’s not as if it’s waiting out there.

    Geoff, if you can verify the story, be my guest. Otherwise, your advocacy of spreading gossip doesn’t make me the waste vent.

    Like

  29. geoff Says:

    Geoff, if you can verify the story, be my guest.

    If you go back through my comments, you’ll find that I never gave a crap about the story per se – I only got interested when you claimed that it was a hoax. After reading your snark-laden, self-congratulatory, poorly thought-out post, I was motivated to track down the source of the story; something you apparently couldn’t be bothered to do.

    As I said last week, what I found was that some guy wrote about his personal experience to his friends on a private forum. He has been a member of the forum for some time and apparently (unless there was sockpuppeting going on) was known to at least one other member. He was concerned about preserving his privacy, and never expected the story to be picked up by the blogs.

    According to his account, the issue was resolved quickly with a minimum of fuss and no negative feelings on either side. So you are left with a commenter who has absolutely no motivation to give you any details of the story, because it can only harm him and his family.

    It’s possible that some lonely guy fabricated the story to impress his mates on the Tree of Liberty forum, but Occam’s Razor says there’s no reason not to take it at face value. It’s unfortunate that after InfoWars picked up the story, the pedigree of the story became blurred and then lost, but the InfoWars post is absolutely accurate: there was in fact a blog post that provided this story. The News Blaze excerpt above is also true: a parent reported this story.

    Is the parent’s story true? Probably.

    Should it have been checked before publication? Sure, but blogs are not yet news organizations, though they are rapidly supplanting them. The blogosphere runs on a caveat lector basis (where I’ve loosened the definition of caveat lector), so one’s skepticism should always be handy. At the ToL forum, people were questioning whether the account was true – the author returned to assure them it was.

    Was your debunking enough to prove that it was a hoax? Not nearly, particularly as you generated errors faster than you were debunking.

    Did you, supposedly a protector of the standards of journalism, take cheap shots at conservatives in your original post and throughout your comments since? Absolutely.

    At the end of the day, my point stands – you weren’t able to debunk the story. In fact, now you’re asking me to step in to do your work for you. Sorry, buddy – my only reason for taking it this far was to expose you as a preening idiot.

    And right now I’m feeling pretty accomplished.

    Like

  30. Ed Darrell Says:

    So you are left with a commenter who has absolutely no motivation to give you any details of the story, because it can only harm him and his family.

    We’re left with a venal tale that needlessly lambasted our President and sullied the flag unnecessarily, and which, in the original version, made teachers and educators out to be villains and scum.

    Then, when challenged, the teachers suddenly turn into heroes. Who wouldn’t want to know who the heroes are?

    Oh, you don’t. Can’t afford to talk about teachers as heroes.

    You’re feeling pretty accomplished, but the rest of us have this scummy taste in our mouths, grit in our eyes, and the stench of hoax that Lysol just won’t touch.

    It’s likely that the story is a complete concoction. Nothing in it checks out. Occam’s razor would suggest that nothing in it was true.

    How can anyone “debunk” a story about an incident that didn’t happen? There’s nothing to work with.

    Like

  31. nicedeb Says:

    We’re left with a venal tale that needlessly lambasted our President and sullied the flag unnecessarily, and which, in the original version, made teachers and educators out to be villains and scum.

    This story didn’t lambaste Obama or the flag…so you’re just making that up. Pretty weird of you, I must say. Not that I don’t have posts that lambaste Obama. I have plenty of those. In fact that’s my specialty. It just didn’t happen, here. The story did lambaste the absurd, unthinking Obamania we’ve been witnessing for over a year, now. It’s one out of literally dozens of stories I’ve posted here, that follow that pattern.

    The teachers don’t turn out to be heroes…not sure where you got that. The principle turned out to be someone who could be reasoned with. Nice, but not heroic.

    And now we’re down to: you don’t think it’s true based on what, I don’t know. That’s your prerogative.

    It’s not one of my better sourced stories, to be sure, but that’s the reason for the question mark in the title. And I believed it…still do. I base my opinion on the testimony of the witness, and the fact that the story follows a very familiar pattern.

    Let it go, dude.

    Like

  32. Ed Darrell Says:

    The teachers don’t turn out to be heroes…not sure where you got that. The principle turned out to be someone who could be reasoned with. Nice, but not heroic.

    From other bloggers who claim they don’t need to pursue it since the teachers and principal fixed everything.

    But then, I don’t expect the people who spread this hoax to agree on the facts and their interpretation — especially since there simply are no facts that anyone could agree upon.

    Let it go? I did long ago. I’m not the one defending a completely unevidenced claim as true, here.

    Like

  33. geoff Says:

    the rest of us have this scummy taste in our mouths, grit in our eyes, and the stench of hoax that Lysol just won’t touch.

    Far be it from me to criticize your lifestyle choices, but…

    It’s likely that the story is a complete concoction.

    And yet, that’s not sufficient to disprove it.

    You’ve done nothing to disabuse me of my original impression of you and your investigative skills. Perhaps it would be best if you started afresh on a new topic. Something that would let you put your gross errors behind you.

    Like

  34. nicedeb Says:

    Let it go? I did long ago.

    Yet you keep coming here to argue about it. Odd, that.

    Like

  35. geoff Says:

    Yet you keep coming here to argue about it. Odd, that.

    I wasn’t going to point that out to the lovable little goofball. It’s great the way he consistently undermines his own comments.

    Like

  36. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consilere Says:

    One of the best lesson plans I’ve seen in the past several months was the one from the Bill of Rights Institute on inaugurations.

    But then, what do you care about the Bill of Rights, right?

    If your snarky, conclusory remark was directed to me, then I challenge you to explain just how you arrived at the erroneous conclusion that I do not care about the Bill of Rights.

    Like

  37. Ed Darrell Says:

    My snarky, pointed remark was directed at your snarky, unevidenced, and incorrect claim that there would not be a decent lesson plan to use to watch the inauguration, or that teachers who teach civics (and those of use who teach AP government got plenty of stuff about the inauguration — it’s coin of the realm for the advanced students) are lazy to do it.

    In short, it’s a great opportunity to discuss the Constitution and the processes that go into a change of government, and the Bill of Rights. Any 8th grade student could figure that out, and distinguished teachers at all levels did. But they are used to looking for opportunities to elucidate the good workings of U.S. government, the genius of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. You missed it, though it was right in front of your nose. And then you got snarky about it.

    Erroneous conclusion? All I can work with is what you posted, and you demonstrated a worse than cavalier attitude toward the Bill of Rights. I’ll accept your apology, when you get a clue and offer it.

    Like

  38. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consilere Says:

    Ed, you really do a very poor job with reading comprehension, don’t you?

    I come from a family of teachers. I broke the tradition and became an attorney because I decided that if I was going to work for a corrupt organization, I would rather it be my own. There are a great many teachers (but not all) who might think that showing the innauguration might be a great lesson plan, because it requires little of them other than turning the TV on.

    As for my concern for the Bill of Rights, I do care quite a bit about it, both how it was intended by many of the founders as demonstrated in the Federalist Papers, and how it has been perverted and misapplied by activist courts in the intervening years in order to achieve results that could not have been obtained through other branches of government where such changes to the law could and should have originated.

    After ten years of post-secondary and graduate study of this history and law, I must confess that I am baffled by your conclusion that the inauguration is somehow a demonstration of the Bill of Rights in action. The Inauguration is a largely symbolic transfer of power, which makes official the transition from one office holder to another which, barring any ongoing crisis or exercise of executive powers, was made manifest on Election Day. Seeing as you believe you possess a somehow superior intellect, which you believe entitles you act smug and condecending with other commenters who point out the flaws in your logic, reason, and delivery, perhaps you would deign to describe, in detail, just what about the inauguration is so very illuminating to the study of the Bill of Rights?

    As for what I posted, I have gone back and re-read my prior comment, and I didn’t mention the Bill of Rights, let alone demonstrate a “worse than cavalier attitude toward” it. Given that, I can only wonder if yes, your conclusion is indeed erroneous, or if you are liberal, in which case you should openly admit that it had nothing to do with anything I actually said and everything to do with how you feel.

    Since I have nothing to apologize for, you should not wait around expecting me to do so. Given your apparent inablility to find a clue when others have recognized your obvious handicap and being obliging, have nailed one to your forehead for your easy reference. Since that kindness has obviously failed, I too will forego the wasted time involved in waiting for one from you.

    Like

  39. Ed Darrell Says:

    As for watching inaugurations in school, it sounds like you had lazy instructors who couldn’t be bothered with a lesson plan.

    You claim to be from a family of teachers, and a lawyer, and you can’t see a lesson plan in the inauguration? I don’t believe that.

    Think Article II. Think about the speeches the presidents give, and think about the questions possible on powers of the president, where they are found in Article II, or how they are derived if the call is for something not specifically mentioned. Particularly with the writing requirements of most civics courses, you couldn’t put together a four-hour discussion on executive powers and the transitions of power?

    HotChalk provided links to videos on 25 past inaugurations — 25 potential projects for students (it was in conjunction with NBC News, an education in itself:

    http://www.hotchalk.com/mydesk/index.php/editorial/130-special-features/526-25-inaugural-addresses)

    There is another large collection of materials at the American Presidency Project. The lesson plan from the Bill of Rights Institute was really very good, looking back at several past inaugurations and providing a malleable template to kick off analysis of the inauguration speech and the policies that would be likely to flow from that.

    http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2009/01/14/i-swear-or-affirm-ready-for-the-inauguration/

    In short, there are solid lesson plan possibilities all over the place. I won’t excuse your contempt of teachers, even knowing you come from a family of teachers (how can you go home now?). Now that we know you’re a lawyer by training, we have to assume you were just temporarily drawing a blank thinking about lesson plan ideas. In the past I have found it difficult to limit discussion on the presidential powers in Article II to under 90 minutes in practical law classes in colleges here. With the economic and financial crises facing the nation, my government class went on at some length exploring the powers and especially the limits to the power of the president, based on Obama’s speech as compared to FDR’s first inaugural, Kennedy’s, Johnson’s, and Reagan’s first.

    Not lazy instructors. Unthinking critics who appeared unfamiliar with the Constitution and especially Article II, and what goes on in government, and in government and history classes.

    Like

  40. Blackiswhite, Imperial Consilere Says:

    I am very familiar with Article II, but thank you very much for the discusssion of how it relates to the Presidency…something I learned in 8th grade, and never really forgot.

    As for my contempt for teachers, it is really more a contempt for teacher’s unions, and their uncritical analysis of the flaws in education, which rarely if ever pinpoint the weaknesses in the classroom as being teachers who are too ill-equipped or disinterested in actually teaching the students, but nearly always claim that teacher pay is the issue, andtherefore end up causing taxpayers to pay a very handsome price for a very questionable result. Going home isn’t really a problem. Most of the techers in my family have retired, and more than a few of them have stated out loud the objections I have just stated for you.

    Returning to my specific question, how have I displayed a “worse than cavalier attitude” toward the Bill of Rights that you accused me of doing with such certainty? For someone who talks of limiting discussions in classes as you do in your prior comment, you seem to have a difficult time answering direct questions that are asked of you.

    Like

  41. geoff Says:

    Sooooo… Where does the Bill of Rights fit in again?

    Like

  42. nicedeb Says:

    Anyone else think that a lesson plan about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights might be a bit much for first graders?

    Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,676,389 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 544 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: