Obama’s Tessellated Pattern of Reality: More from the 1990 Harvard Law Revue

© Miri WTPOTUS July 13, 2012 

I recently came across an online copy of the Harvard Law Revue, a parody published in April 1990, dating to when Barack Obama was president of the Harvard Law Review. Images of the pages are provided at the link (until scrubbed). On the back page of the publication, there’s a photo of Obama that was very briefly on the Internet, during the campaign of 2008. (It’s the photo where he has that unusually wide nose.) Obama is shown, presumably standing in the law school library. Superimposed into the photo is a bottle of Dewar’s White Label Scotch. This photo was quickly disappeared from the Web in 2008, whether squelched by the Obama Truth Squad or because of copyright issues with Dewar’s is anyone’s guess.

Obama is mentioned frequently in this comedic publication, which includes an article attributed to Obama (about Obama. Who else but his favorite subject?) That autobiography was the topic of a previous post.

Let’s examine some of the now-historic references to Obama. First, let’s look at his profile, which appeared on the back page, along with his photo [emphasis added]:

Doer’s Profile

Barrage O’Trauma

Age: Extraordinarily mature

Occupation: First African African-American President of a major law revue published outside of New Haven.

Accomplishments: Faking Macho Sports Injury To Ensure Election. Limiting Body Meetings to 2 1/2 Hours. Deflecting Persistent Questioning About Ring On Left Hand.

Last Book Read: Everything I Know I Learned in Kindergarten. Modern Folk Tales

Why I Do What I Do: “To contribute to legal scholarship, sharpen my mind, . . . and the ladies love it.”

Quote: “Engage, empower, smoke Marlboro”

Profile: Shy, awkward, insecure. Not interested in politics.

His Scotch: Doer’s White Label. “Six or seven bottles makes even McConnell go down smooth.


What exactly is an AFRICAN African-American?

Why would they have written that in 1990? Keep in mind the recent discovery by Breitbart that Obama’s publisher said in its biography of author Obama that he was born in Kenya. For almost two decades that biography said that Obama was born in Kenya!

As far back as 1990, when he was in law school, Obama was apparently asked repeatedly about that ring on his left hand. Sounds like he dodged the questions.

Obama is mentioned on the cover, too:

Gödel, Escher, Barack: What’s Wrong With This Picture?

Immediately, the joke regarding Escher and the wrongness of a picture is apparent, given that the reference is to M.C. Escher, an artist who specialized in “impossible reality,” according to Wikipedia.

(Many see much that is “wrong” with photos allegedly of Barack Obama and his family, but surely this wasn’t their point back in 1990.)

M. C. Escher developed a technique featured in his works Metamorphosis I, II, and III:

The concept of this work is to morph one image into a tessellated pattern, then gradually to alter the outlines of that pattern to become an altogether different image.

Or to become an altogether different person? Did Obama’s law school colleagues even then recognize his tendency to morph his own image? What about that reference to Gödel? The man had citizenship issues of his own:

Gödel was born April 28, 1906, in Brno, Austria-Hungary … [and] automatically became a Czechoslovak citizen at age 12 when the Austro-Hungarian empire broke up at the end of World War I. According to his classmate Klepetař, “Gödel considered himself always Austrian and an exile in Czechoslovakia” … during this time. He chose to become an Austrian citizen at age 23. When Nazi Germany annexed Austria, Gödel automatically became a German citizen at age 32. After World War II, at the age of 42, he became an American citizen.

So how many citizenships did he have? Four? Did Obama’s law school colleagues know about his multiple citizenships? Does that explain this reference? Or does this anecdote hold another clue? From Wikipedia:

On December 5, 1947, [Albert] Einstein and [Oskar] Morgenstern accompanied Gödel to his U.S. citizenship exam, where they acted as witnesses. Gödel had confided in them that he had discovered an inconsistency in the U.S. Constitution, one that would allow the U.S. to become a dictatorship. Einstein and Morgenstern were concerned that their friend’s unpredictable behavior might jeopardize his chances. Fortunately, the judge turned out to be Phillip Forman. Forman knew Einstein and had administered the oath at Einstein’s own citizenship hearing. Everything went smoothly until Forman happened to ask Gödel if he thought a dictatorship like the Nazi regime could happen in the U.S. Gödel then started to explain his discovery to Forman. Forman understood what was going on, cut Gödel off, and moved the hearing on to other questions and a routine conclusion.”

In 1990, Peter Suber published a book called The Paradox of Self-Amendment, which explains:

[Gödel] noticed that the AC [amendment clause of the United States Constitution] had procedural limitations but no substantive limitations; hence it could be used to overturn the democratic institutions described in the rest of the constitution.

In other words, the Constitution allows for its own amendment. Suber also explores this potential paradox: Can the amendment clause itself be amended? This article, written in 2007 by Mark Dominus, considers other loopholes:

[Greg] Padgett also pointed out that the scheme I proposed for amending the constitution, which I claimed would require only the cooperation of a majority of both houses of Congress, 218 + 51 = 269 people in all, would actually require a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. He says that to be safe you would want all 100 senators to conspire; I’m not sure why 60 would not be sufficient. (Under current Senate rules, 60 senators can halt a filibuster.) This would bring the total required to 218 + 60 = 278 conspirators.

He also pointed out that the complaisance of five Supreme Court justices would give the President essentially dictatorial powers, since any legal challenge to Presidential authority could be rejected by the court.

Did Obama’s law school colleagues perhaps notice an exceptional interest on his part in finding (and using) loopholes to effect a dictatorial takeover of the US government? Was he prone to excessively focus upon how such loopholes might be exploited to bring about an “evil dictatorship” in the USA? Did he know about Suber’s book, published that same year? Did he plumb the depths of Suber’s book, which speaks about liars, paradox, sovereign omnipotence, and metaphysical omnipotent deities?

A glance at the index of the book shows many topics that might interest a person intent on getting and keeping power in a quest to

fundamentally transform America.

For example, Suber asks whether the Fourteenth Amendment “impliedly” amended Article V of the Constitution; he also speculates about whether a treaty in effect amends the Constitution.

We’re constantly informed that Obama is/was a “constitutional scholar.” Perhaps he was, in a quest for loopholes, such as how a man who is not a natural born citizen might usurp the presidency or how such a man might make himself “King Obama“.

Later in the parody, Obama is listed as an “inmate” of the Law Revue:

Cult-O-Bama–GQ Next?

Another inmate was “Julius Genachowski–Smooth Talker,” who is now part of the Obama administration; he’s the current FCC chairman (much to our dismay).

Other notables on the comprehensive list of Obama colleagues are Bradford A. Berenson (of Sidley-Austin LLP, where Michelle Obama and domestic terrorist Bernardine Dohrn also worked); Michael B. Froman, current Deputy Assistant to Obama and Deputy National Security Adviser for International Economic Affairs; David E. Nahmias, Justice of the Georgia Supreme Court; Thomas J. Perrelli, former Associate Attorney General in the Obama administration; Andrew L. Schlafly, son of conservative lawyer/activist Phyllis Schlafly; and J. Bradford Weigmann, who was Assistant Legal Advisor for Management at the Department of State in 2008. A previous post on our blog identified and discussed many of Obama’s law school colleagues.

There’s a very interesting bogus citation in a footnote to a comedic essay allegedly written by “Laurence DiaTribe” (aka Laurence Tribe). To wit:

Barack Obama, The Semicolon Goes Where?, 666 BLUEBOOKING’S NOT IMPORTANT FOR CELEBRITIES L. J. (1990).

So what can we take from all this? Even back in 1990, Obama was a “celebrity” with a “cult” following, who is kidded about how he, being a celebrity, doesn’t have to follow the edicts of the Bluebook with regard to punctuation? Hmm. What about that allusion to 666? Another footnote to the Laurence DiaTribe essay reads,

Some say that the Revue has a Constitution, and at least one editor claims to have read it. See B. Berenson, WE THE FEDERALISTS: 103 YEARS OF THE REVUE CONSTITUTION 1789 (1990) (arguing that Revue framers never envisioned affirmative action, writing competitions, or Gordon Whitman.)

Yet another reads,

See Lee, Let Me Be Honest … Barack is Black, 104 U. Don’t Say L. REV. 2/4 (1990) (offering unique insights into the presidential race)

Here’s another:

Even incredibly annoying speech and speech habits are protected by this guarantee. See, e.g., Obama, Why I Have a Constitutional Right To Say the Word “Folks” in Every Sentence, 14 INTELLECTUAL LANGUAGES L.Q. 28 (1990-1991)

What comes to mind are news articles, now scrubbed, that talked about the griping among former Law Review editors and presidents with regard to how Obama came to be selected for his position. The implication was that he was chosen based upon his color rather than merit. In other words, via affirmative action. The changes to the selection process were detailed in our previous post.

The entire publication is full of juvenile double entendres, sexist jokes, and allusions to drug use.

Two years later, the Harvard Law Revue was in the news, deservedly so, after the husband of a murdered professor was invited to their annual “gala” where, had he attended, he would have been subjected to insulting “jokes” about his deceased wife.

Derrick Bell, a professor at Harvard Law in 1990, and Elizabeth Warren–alleged Native American, former Harvard Law professor, former member of the Obama administration, current candidate for U.S. Senate from Massachusetts–were both tangentially connected to this issue of affirmative action and the paucity of female professors at Harvard. See here for more about the controversy over the parody of the murdered professor. Warren was a beneficiary of the Bell protest (also affirmative action). This article shows that poor taste had a long tradition at Harvard.

There appears to be an anachronism in the footnotes of the Laurence DiaTribe essay. Page 4, last parenthetical phrase on the page:

(facebook of the 1980’s)

Facebook, the social network site, debuted in 2004. To what, then, does that footnote refer? According to Wikipedia:

Colleges and universities in the United States often published official or unofficial books listing their students, faculty, or staff, together with pictures and limited biographical data.

Is this Obama’s page from the 1990 “facebook”? There is no biographical data.   Wouldn’t it be interesting to know what Obama supplied back then for his biography. Where, for example, did he say he was born?

Again, what exactly is an African African-American? Was he attending Harvard Law as a dual US/Kenyan citizen? Did he tell others that he was still a Kenyan citizen? If so, he should not have, because his campaign claimed in 2008 that he surrendered that citizenship in his early 20s. But was that true?

Given that we have no idea if this edition of the Harvard Law Revue was truly published in April 1990 or whether it’s yet another obot plant, we can’t rule out more Alinsky tactics.

If this entire publication is a snarky recent creation of obots, it nevertheless gives insight into their mentality and may also give clues to the identity of the person or persons who created the bogus birth certificates, the selective service record, the birth announcements, and the photoshopped images.

Even if truly from 1990, the identities of the complicit ones might be found there.

In 2008, Obama had quite a cabal of Harvard-connected people supporting him. This article shows just how many and who they were.

Please read the rest of the pages from this parody and share with us what stands out to you.

34 responses to “Obama’s Tessellated Pattern of Reality: More from the 1990 Harvard Law Revue

  1. By popular demand. 🙂 Enjoy!

    • Anybody able to find the PDF of the Revue?

      • Welcome, Carl. There’s a link in the post. Here it is again: http://obamalot.wordpress.com/2007/03/12/complete-copy-of-the-april-1990-issue-of-the-harvard-law-revue/ It’s not a pdf; it’s images of the pages from the publication. Grab ’em while they’re hot, before they’re disappeared. 🙂

        • Thanks Miri. I grabbed the images but the article references a pdf which appears was not linked.

          • Oh, gotcha. I mentioned that in the post, too. The person referred to a pdf and zip file but the links don’t work. Can’t even guess why. I’m surprised this is still on the Internet. I would be inclined to decide that it’s an obot plant but for the fact that one of the fabulist reporters tried to get out in front of the exposure of this thing by explaining away (or trying to) the most damaging parts of it.

            • Another thing: I clearly remember seeing that back page photo of Obama and the bottle of scotch. Back in 2008. It did get disappeared off the Web pretty quickly. Now I believe it was that “African African-American” phrase that caused it to be scrubbed. I don’t recall anybody noticing that before or mentioning it. Not at the time, in 2008. I didn’t notice it myself at first. Mind plays tricks and sees the expected and brushes over the unexpected. I’d think it was a typo but for the hyphen AND the fact that these things were probably typeset and published at a seasoned press. In fact, I believe they named the publisher. Professional publishers don’t make mistakes, especially when dealing with something like the Harvard Law School. Not in 1990. There wasn’t desktop publishing then (at least not for this publication) and in those days (before everybody went online and published their own stuff) spelling and grammar usage was policed more rigorously. IMHO. 🙂

  2. I don’t know if this is the Gordon Whitman mentioned in the parody or not: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gordon-whitman/ There are many allusions we may not get, not being of the elite. We’re morons, according to Obama.

  3. Miri…. trying to pull my jaw from the ground….. POWERFUL….
    Unbelievable… WOW….. when will “THEY”…. GET IT ???
    So much to digest ….. THANK YOU AGAIN

  4. Just WOW, what Zenway said, I say ditto!

    Miri way back almost two years ago I posted information on what you have above –

    On December 5, 1947, [Albert] Einstein and [Oskar] Morgenstern accompanied Gödel to his U.S. citizenship exam, where they acted as
    witnesses. Gödel had confided in them that he had discovered an inconsistency in the U.S. Constitution, one that would allow the U.S. to become a dictatorship.

    My comment if you can find it has more information on this.

    • You probably did, Leza. As I just said, we’ve looked into so many people and found so much that I can’t remember it all by now. I just posted the link I found the other day, which is what prompted my question about the hanai mother. It’s probably one that you’ve turned up already. I haven’t read all the comments from yesterday yet. As for Gödel, I was looking into who he was, just to be able to link to him and see if I could figure out what the “joke” was with regard to him, Escher, and Barry, when I turned up that citizenship stuff. Albert Einstein, too. How bizarre that these three guys were friends. What a sight that must have been in the immigration office that day.

    • It must have been on TD’s blog because it doesn’t show up when I search here.

      • I had posted the comment here and at Dr. Kate’s. I do not post much at Kate’s maybe only a few time’s I think I maybe able to go over there and find the comment. Will have to be this evening before I get a chance, but if I can find it over there I’ll re-post it here. Renee 🙂 maybe you can ask Kate to run a search for the comment there? TY, would make it sooo much easier!

        • btw, it’s a comment with one or more links, something in this phrase should bring the comment up. Posted approx. 2yr’s ago. TY again.

          On December 5, 1947, [Albert] Einstein and [Oskar] Morgenstern accompanied Gödel to his U.S. citizenship exam, where they acted as
          witnesses. Gödel had confided in them that he had discovered an inconsistency in the U.S. Constitution, one that would allow the U.S. to become a dictatorship.

          • I searched on Gödel and nothing turned up but our recent comments here. I searched on Oskar and nothing turned up but our recent comments and another comment that contained the name of a reporter named Oskar. I can try a domain search on a Web search.

          • I used that phrase on a domain search and nothing turned up from this blog or the research blog.

          • I also tried some last night searching for the comments. Can I say when it come’s to searching for comments through the search function it just well, hummm – suck’s! 😉 At Kate’s I tried searching my name and Renee’s postings keep coming up! I’ll look later and see if I saved the links in my old mail.

            • If you ever find it, let us know because it would be interesting to see what we all said about it last time. I keep finding myself re-researching what we’ve already looked into.

  5. I just can’t get past the fact that a year later, 1991, according to one blog, his publisher was saying he was born in Kenya.

    • Miri, I called and asked my half African-American daughter in law what African African-American would mean, if she knew, as far as to what the terminology would mean without mentioning why I was asking. She said well, that would mean an African from Africa immigrating to the United States, and after their immigration to the U. S. they would then consider themselves to then be African American, (African-then becoming African American) Sounds logical, to me. To be sure, I asked to please call her father who is full blooded African American and a professor at one of the local collages. She just got back with me a bit ago, and his response was the same. African African-American would be an immigrant from Africa “””presume-ably””” maintaining U.S. Citizenship there by then becoming an “African American”. On my daughter in law’s advice I will call her father tomorrow, (he’s at a function this evening) to explain the exact context so there’s no misunderstanding.

      • Well, thanks, Leza. A few independent sources with special insight never hurts. It makes sense.

        If you hear that someone’s an Irish Irish-American, you’d probably assume the person was born in Ireland, came here, and became a US citizen. If you just say, Irish-American, the assumption is the person was born here. Born in the USA. I’m sure the obots will come up with some rationalization, though.

      • I had the chance to talk with my daughter in law’s father last night. There were no misunderstandings with the interpretation. I did explain to him why I was asking, and we had a nice conversation, without going into a lot of details of the conversation I did ask him if he was considering voting Obama this time around, his response – NO!. 🙂

  6. Wow, very interesting. You gals reign in research!

    About that nose from the above picture…As soon as I saw the pic I noticed the width before even reading. Wonder when the plastic surgery occurred? Same person?

    • We’ve always wondered about that nose. I can understand someone getting plastic surgery to narrow it before going into politics but look! It wasn’t that wide in high school or even at Occidental or Columbia. So how’d it get so wide at Harvard? (A variation on a Pinocchio nose–gets wider instead of longer?)

  7. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/us/politics/28obama.html?_r=1

    This is the news article by Jodi Kantor (another Obama fabulist) that inspired that blogger to put the pages of the Harvard Law Revue online. You can see and read all the pages at the link I gave in the post. The person who posted them seems to give permission to download them, although the links to a pdf or zip file don’t work. What jumped out in re-reading Kantor’s article is that she mentioned Ogletree back then, in 2007. This is the professor who Breitbart “outed” for admitting that they hid Barry’s relationship to Derrick Bell. It’s another of those articles where you need your barf bag.

    Kantor says, “As the ribbing in the Revue suggests, Mr. Obama was realizing the power of his own biography.”

    Yes, it does seem as if even then, in 1990, he was working on that memoir. The parody paralleled it too well. You write one bogus biography; you may as well write two.

    Kantor says, “Mr. Obama declined to comment about his time at Harvard. He arrived at the law school in 1988 with a well-inked passport — he had grown up in Hawaii and Indonesia, son of a black Kenyan father and a white American mother — and years of community organizing experience in Chicago, making him, at 27, an elder statesman among the students who had tested and term-papered their way straight there.”

    There’s that worn-out phrase, “son of a black…yadda, yadda, yadda.”

    Wouldn’t you LOVE to see that well-inked passport? Did Kantor see it? I wonder what NATION it was from? Kenya?

    “Along with 40-odd classmates, he won a precious spot on the law review at the end of his first year through grades and a writing competition.”

    So Kantor says he won a spot through grades. Why do I seriously doubt that? ONLY students who voluntarily released their grades had their grades considered. I have no faith that Barry had grades good enough to get him in the running. I have a lot of faith that the writing competition got him in. And guess what? I’ll bet his entry was about himself, ghostwritten by a certain person who, although despicable, seems to have literary talent. And the fact that it was about himself gave the clue to the others who judged the entry so they knew WHO HE WAS so they would know to give him that leg up in the standings. Ya think? I do. HAS HE EVER FAIRLY WON ANY ELECTION HE’S BEEN IN? Nope.

    “… the next year, when other students implored him to run for the presidency, he demurred; he wanted to return to community work in Chicago, he said, and the credential would be no help. Late in the process, he finally agreed, saying he might be uniquely able to heal the review’s partisan divisions.”

    Oh, I’ll bet. They BEGGED him to run and he finally “demurred.” He has a comment in a footnote to his self-tribute about not clerking for the SCOTUS, too. We’re supposed to believe that was his own choice, also, not that none would have him or that if any would, they’d quickly learn what a mistake that was. Those who can’t, teach. Or “lecture”.

    The second page of Kantor’s article is revealing, considering what we’ve learned since we read it first. And it sounds like complete spin to head off any truths people might find for themselves, such as that video that Breitbart turned up of Barry speaking at a rally and honoring the radical Professor Bell.

    “A group agitating for greater faculty diversity occupied the dean’s office and sued the school for discrimination; Derrick Bell, a black law professor, resigned over the issue. … If he failed to use his office to criticize Harvard, Mr. Obama would anger black and liberal students; by speaking out, he would risk dragging himself and the review into the center of shrill debates.

    People had a way of hearing what they wanted in Mr. Obama’s words. Earlier, after a long, tortured discussion about whether it was better to be called “black” or “African-American,” Mr. Obama dismissed the question, saying semantics did not matter as much as real-life issues, recalled Cassandra Butts, still a close friend. According to Mr. Ogletree, students on each side of the debate thought he was endorsing their side. “Everyone was nodding, Oh, he agrees with me,” he said. …

    Mr. Obama stayed away from the extremes of campus debate, often choosing safe topics for his speeches. At the black law students’ annual conference, he exhorted students to remember the obligations that came with their privileged education. His speeches, delivered in the oratorical manner of a Baptist minister, were more memorable for style than substance, Mr. Mack said.

    “It’s the inspiration of the speech rather than the specific content,” he said.

    Just as he does now that he is a senator, Mr. Obama spoke then about his own biography — initially, Mr. Ogletree said, to correct anyone who assumed he had acquired his position with ease. His message, Mr. Ogletree said, was, “Don’t look at my success and assume that I have had a silver spoon in my mouth and gold coins in my hand.””

    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

  8. It occurs to me that the Jodi Kantor article was damage control. This is the only story I have seen that talked about the contents of the 1990 Harvard Law Revue. The EXPLANATORY anecdotes that she has in the article, some of which we know are untrue, such as that he wasn’t born a child of privilege who grew up with a silver spoon in his mouth, just seem too pat. It follows the pattern we saw with the Maraniss book. They got out in front of what might be the most damaging revelations–his drug use, his racism against whites, his lies about the composite characters, his lies in general that are now characterized as literary license to tell a “great” story.

    The more we learn about his family, the more we KNOW that they were well off, especially his mother in Indonesia and Pakistan, where she presided over those get togethers with the rich and powerful. I read another old article yesteday (that I can’t link because I don’t remember which one it was) that called Madelyn a bank “manager” NOT a vice-president. That’s just one example of how they deliberately downplayed his background.

    I’m thinking that part in Kantor’s article about the discussion at Harvard over whether people should prefer “black” to “African-American” was the spin that I predicted obots would come up with. This was a 2007 preemptive strike and now I’m convinced that the photo of that page wasn’t struck from the Internet because of Dewar’s but to get that “African African-American” out of sight before the election heated up. Iirc, it was scrubbed off Free Republic, where I first saw it, and the explanation (again, iirc) was that Dewar’s did or might take it as trademark infringement. I’ll bet it was the description of him as AFRICAN that was the real reason.

  9. Hilton.high on the hog. :lol;

  10. July 23, 2012

    Jerome Corsi:

    “Obama wedding-ring mystery dates to Harvard”

    “A publication produced by Harvard law students in 1990 confirms Barack Obama wore a ring on his wedding-ring finger before he married Michelle in 1992.

    The entire issue of the 1990 Harvard publication was found by blogger WTPotus and posted July 13 with links that lead to a Flickr.com page on which the entire issue can still be viewed, page by page.”


    • Whoops! An actual acknowledgement? Well, the person who originally published this online is the one to credit. Funny how things synchronize, though.

      I’m glad they pointed out those other items that I excised from my post because I thought it was getting too long and I rushed to publish so that (by request) people could have the link. I noticed those “pot” luck dinners, too. I still don’t know whether Barry wrote this himself or if it was written for him. The original news story that reported about it, published by one of the usual suspect fabulists, seemed to indicate that Barry wrote it. If he didn’t, then they certainly have him down pat; it’s obvious that his personality traits were rather fixed, even back then, so he hasn’t grown much since college.

      Were these, then, the first “birthers”? HA! 🙂

      If he didn’t write it, then I get the feeling that his colleagues suspected, as we did immediately, that that tale he tells about his origins is too, too fabulous.

      • Since WND is reporting on the photoshopped pics (aren’t they?) they might have pointed out that the photo of Barry with Granny Sarah, allegedly in 1987, but probably long before, is photoshopped! That’s the classic Polarik “head game” (so-named because the phrase was coined by our pal Dr. P). It’s OBVIOUS that the head is pasted onto the body. I used to think it was someone else’s body but now I believe it is Barry’s, just a younger body to go with an older head, to make it appear as if he was there years later than he really was. I’m disappointed that Corsi didn’t opine about the meaning of “African African-American”. Corsi has a PhD from Harvard! That is interesting.

  11. I just thought I’d offer and update to the definition for African African American ….

    It’s a person born in Africa that has at least one African citizen parent that emigrates to the USA and naturalizes as a US citizen.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s