Language – DNC-Consulting

Weasel Words – Writing and Speaking Better

cropped-laughing-owl On Friday, an email crossed my inbox regarding how to write better and weasel words. The term “weasel words” first appeared in a short story by author Stewart Chaplin titled “Stained Glass Political Platform,” published in The Century Magazine June 1900. As a term, weasel words were popularized in a 1916 speech by U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt. I often write about plastic words being stretched, twisted, and molded to fit situations and distorted and disconnected from their accepted definitions, so I figured it was time to discuss weasel words.

Weasel Words

Weasels words are vague qualifiers like “generally,” “most,” and “probably” that weaken your writing and speaking, reflecting a weak mind and poor logic. Speakers and writers use weasel words to avoid making direct statements, to mystify, and use vocabulary to play linguistic tricks upon the audience. I heard a joke about weasel words and politicians:

“How do you know a politician is lying?
They are speaking!”

How often have you heard a speaker generalize or witnessed a writer probablize and thought, “How does the writer know?” Check the weasel words. Since weasel words have been around for so long, many speechwriters and editors know these tricks and constantly edit them. But, when you can catch the speaker or author in candid moments, that is when you see just how weaselly they are about the facts and their logical conclusions. Scouring the bowels of the internet | Weasel Zippers | Cartoon jokes, Political cartoons ...

Consider for a moment the following three reasons why weasel words are employed. When considering them, remember when you have weaseled on your speeches or writing, and self-evaluate to improve:

- - Uncertainty: You use weasels when you’re confused about your point, or you’re not sure what you want to write. Ambiguous terms allow you to equivocate. The result is you get something on paper, but it is cloudy.
  - Fear: You use weasels when afraid of making a bold statement. You may know what you want to write but don’t have the depth. These words give you an out.
  - Deniability: You use weasels to protect yourself or dodge taking a stand. If you don’t say anything firm, the thinking goes, you cannot be wrong.

As I have been writing on this topic, I have considered my writing and speaking habits and improved self-editing. I am not afraid, uncertain, or need deniability, but I desire to assert more confidently, speak and write more authoritatively, and support others through language. Hence, the need to understand language and improve how I speak and write.

Examples of Weasel Words

Frankly, I was surprised at some of the weasel words that made the various lists of weasel words found across the Internet. Some weasel words are absolute and are fully supported, others might be conditional weasel words based upon the conversation, and others might not be weasel words at all. Now, out of all that blathering about weasel words, which would you edit as weaselly statements? Yes, I wrote that on purpose!

Well	Experts said	Experts have claimed	Experts insist
Research proves	Research shows	Research concludes	Researchers claim
Often	Probably	Possibly	Some
Many	Could be	With all due respect	Usually
Basically	Somehow	Virtually	Just

Once identified, what does a person do? Writers have it easier, for they can revise and edit.

An author can delete the weasel word following the pattern below:

Read the resulting statement to see if it works.

- - If the message without weasels is confusing …
    Get clarity with your ideas. Determine what you want to say and then say it!
  - If the statement without weasels is too bold …
    Do you have the authority to make this statement; yes, leave it alone. No, quote the authoritarian, and use a reference.
  - If the resulting statement without weasels has no substance …
    Ask yourself whether or not you have something to say. If not, delete the sentence. If so, see the first bullet point again, clarify your ideas, and keep editing.

Speaking and eliminating weasel words requires planning. You have to prepare what you want to say carefully, plan your audience, prepare and practice delivering your points, and repeat until it feels comfortable. Speaking requires remaining consciously aware, listening to yourself, listening to questions, and making choices. Many choices will be made in the preparation and planning stages, and these planning sessions preparing to speak remain critical to mentally speaking to convince. AMID BACKLASH CORRUPT & STUPID DEMOCRATS QUICKLY SWITCH FROM 'DEFUND' TO 'REFUND' THE POLICE ...

However, experience has proven that writing rules work well with speaking, in preparing and planning the message.

Speak aloud the statement to see if it works.

- - If the message without weasels is confusing …
    Get clarity with your ideas. Determine what you want to say and then say it!
  - If the statement without weasels is too bold …
    Do you have the authority to make this statement; yes, leave it alone. No, quote the authoritarian, and use a reference.
  - If the resulting statement without weasels has no substance …
    Ask yourself whether or not you have something to say. If not, delete the sentence. If so, see the first bullet point again, clarify your ideas, and keep editing.

Having spoken publicly and talked to other speakers, it was interesting to see those who spoke well and admitted to speaking into a mirror and those who spoke okay and did not practice the speech verbally. I learned this data point, the Rule of 7-P’s came forcibly to mind, “Proper, Prior, Planning, Prevents, Purely, Poor, Performance.” Practice is part of properly planning to avoid poor performances.

Knowledge Check! Regardless of delivery through speaking or writing, create the time to edit. Create the time to plan and prepare, rehearse, and carefully edit to communicate powerfully. Stop stooping to being a weasel; you are better than that and deserve to allow yourself the ability to achieve through communicating ideas more clearly and powerfully!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

NO MORE BS: Progressive vs. Regressive – Sales Taxes

Any time a debate about taxes arises, the terms progressive and regressive get thrown around like popcorn in a food fight. Whether or not those speaking, even know, or care about the definitions, implications, and repercussions are different topics and one I will not hazard a guess. My intent here is to help you know and better understand the terminology as we discuss the broader topic, sales taxes. Please note, since the early 1900s, the word progress has been twisted by tyrants, plasticized by the media, and manipulated into means one thing to one person and a different thing to a politician. Of all the terms plasticized for tyranny, progress is one of the most egregious examples. Just like the term “Buffalo-wings.”

Progressive

Progressive and progressivism is a political philosophy that empowers a more extensive and more intrusive government, a government without any shred of decency, and a government that is as intrusive as possible into your daily life. Progressivism has been the catchphrase for all sorts of political hooliganism and liberty theft at all levels of government. These abuses by the government have been made possible because, as everyone knows, progress, the root of progressivism, is a good thing.

Progress is defined as moving forward or onward towards the desired destination. Also, progress can be advancement or development towards a better, or more complete, “modern condition.” Archaic definitions sometimes provide critical insight into a word, and in this instance, the archaic meaning of progress was a state journey or official tour, especially by royalty.

Without the political connotations, Progressive means something relating to or characterized by progress, making use of new ideas, findings, or opportunities. In the classroom, progressive relates to an educational theory marked by an emphasis on the individual child, informal class procedures, and encouraging self-expression to the point of sacrificing educational opportunities. The meaning of progressive also refers to making progress, moving forward or advancing, increasing in severity or extent, expanding the base rate of something, and a few other definitions specific to the sciences of computers and lenses for glasses.

President Woodrow Wilson (D) was a progressive, and many of his political detractors were regressive. The distinction was drawn on a political scale to aid in differentiating and scorning political opponents who were concerned about the spread of government. We need to be clear, any time anyone talks about progressive taxes, they are discussing expanding the base tax rate. Making tax increases sound more pleasant is a key to twisting the meaning of words and exercising tyranny on a population.

Regressive

As you might have probably guessed, regression is the exact opposite of progression. Regressive as an adjective relates to the production of regression, decreasing the rate as the base increases, and is characterized by simplification of structures in an evolutionary process. Regression is the action of regressing, and regressing relates to the act of reasoning backward, moving backward to a previous, and possibly worse or more primitive state, but it is also a privilege of going or coming back to something.

Emotions and Language

The terms progressive and regressive are a perfect example of how emotions and language mix. Without knowing all the definitions of a word, people will choose to use the sound of the word to decide whether the word sounds harsh or pleasant. For example, progression sounds good, and regression sounds bad, but progress has roots in royalty taking a trip, and regression is a privilege or returning. Hence, one of the main themes in these articles has been and continues to be how to control your emotions to improve your decision-making, the need to read, the opportunity to learn and keep learning words to empower conversation and knowledge.

When emotions rule, people like President Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, George Bush II, and many others with conspiring congresses get away with fundamentally destroying the fabric of America. One of the tricks used against the citizens of America and in many democratically elected governments across the globe has been using language and emotions to enact reigns of tyranny. Let us face facts, the IRS and the Federal Income Tax are not progressive; America did not move forward by paying a tax that fundamentally hurts people in their wallets. Education reform and progressive schools did not improve America’s ability to compete globally on reading, writing, and arithmetic. The progressive ideas from the late 1800s to shut down literacy among government-mandated schools did not improve America! Frankly, we should count ourselves lucky to have the opportunity to regress on these fronts.

Sales Taxes

Of all the progressive ideas needing to be eliminated, the sales tax sits at the highest pinnacle for regression. Consider this, in states with the highest sales taxes, the sales tax is a pyramid where the final consumer winds up paying taxes on business-to-business transactions, dynamically increasing the price of the final goods or services delivered. Business A buys raw goods from Business B and sells these goods to Business C to make small parts. Business A buys these goods from Business C and sells them as finished goods to a consumer. In a sales tax pyramid, the government gets paid at the end of every transaction; thus, a product in Vermont will be less expensive than a product in South Dakota, due precisely to the sales taxes paid by Businesses AB, B, and C during the manufacturing process. Thus, the top five states in the United States with the highest sales taxes have a tax pyramid scheme in place, and the end consumer pays through the nose for everything!

In states with a less broad sales tax base, the sales tax remains egregious but more silent in how it steals your money! According to the states with tax pyramid schemes, those with a less broad sales tax base are considered regressive, and those with the highest sales tax base are called progressive. Either way, the sales tax continues to be the silent killer of ingenuity, innovation, job growth, and so much more. Because people expect to pay a sales tax as a condition of making a purchase, the sales tax has become the majority of the fuel price paid to power a car, the hinge upon where jobs are produced, and part of the reasoning for populations to flee from.

From an article on sales taxes by the Tax Foundation, we find the following important information:

“Narrow sales tax bases reduce collections, but more importantly, they make the tax less neutral and less economically efficient. Many states exempt certain goods (like groceries or clothing) from the sales tax for political reasons, excluding many consumer services (such as dry cleaning, haircuts, or tax preparation) largely by historical accident. Most states instituted their sales taxes during the Great Depression when services made up a much smaller portion of the economy. Since then, the portion of total U.S. personal consumption dedicated to services has grown significantly, while the purchase of goods has declined. This trend has contributed to the erosion of states’ sales tax bases over time, an unintentional base narrowing that puts upward pressure on sales tax rates.”

Remember, sales taxes going up are considered progress. Reducing or eliminating the sales tax, which is the right path forward, is deemed to be regressive, based solely upon the sound of the terms being used. Broader tax bases are not equitable, but many economists, especially those Keynesian Devotees, will claim broader tax bases and pyramid tax schemes are progressive, equitable, and helps the rich pay their “fair share.” How can a person tell that sales tax schemes do not work to make “equitable” tax bases; “Curiously, a policy expressly designed to inject progressivity into sales taxes—an exemption for groceries—largely fails to accomplish its purpose. Studies suggest that the exclusion of groceries beyond the necessary exemption for food purchased using SNAP or WIC does not favor lower earners.”

While the Tax Foundation does an admirable job pitching for “right-sizing” the tax base to make sales taxes more “equitable,” they miss the forest for the tree. Sales taxes are a silent killer and need to be regressed from American purchases at the earliest opportunity! Taxes never produce progress! Write that on your hand, and use that hand to correct the behavior of politicians who want “progressive taxes,” a “federal sales tax,” or want to improve tax burdens progressively. When did American goods stop being traded, and manufacturing jobs were exported when the income tax started! Why do people not want to live where they pay high sales taxes because of the progressive nature of sales taxes, the other progressive tax structures, and the only entity winning is the government.

America, we need to regress from the state where the income and sales taxes have taken us. We cannot afford the government largess stolen from workers anymore. We cannot afford the size of local, county, state, and federal governments. Until the taxes are regressed, which would be a huge opportunity to realize, we will continue to be treated as the property of the government, and I, for one, am done being owned and forced into indentured servitude just to pay for the government who abuses me!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

NO MORE BS: Clearing up the confusion! – Understanding the Government of America

Representative Deb Haaland (D) sent out an email while a US House of Representatives member claimed America is a “Constitutional Democracy.” I will endeavor to correct this confusion using simple terms; for Representative Haaland’s benefit, please allow me to elaborate. Along the way, let us explore a few connected topics, including the plasticization of words and how that breeds tyranny.

A Republic finds its history lodged in the writings of Plato, who called a republic “possessing the structure and composition of the ideal state.” James Madison provides America with the only definition needed for America to be a republic, “We may define a republic to be … a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people; and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure, for a limited period, or during good behaviour [Emphasis added].” A republic is a government system where the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them. Finally, a republic is recognized by the head of the government, not being a monarch or other hereditary head of state.

America has a Constitution that leaves all the power of the government in the hands of its legal citizens. Legal citizens are not impostor aliens or terrorists captured on a battlefield; thus, US Constitutional Rights do not apply or cover these entities. A Republic is formed around the principle that through property ownership, freedom is generated. A Republic requires time, majorities that clearly surpass a simple majority, and when personal property is threatened or removed from individual citizens, that Republic slips into a democracy. A Democracy cannot climb into being a Republic, but the Republic can be reduced to a democracy.

Democracy is associated with the “rule by the people,” or a simple majority wins. The associations of democracy have become more twisted since the mid-1930s. Therein lies the problem, democracies have existed under the feudal system of government, the communists have tried to instill democratic changes, and dictators like Maduro in Venezuela have employed democracy for personal enrichment and citizen enslavement. Democracy, other than being dangerous, is the belief that simple majority rules for everyone. Winston Churchill is correct, “No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” The reason democracy is dangerous is the belief that people control the rule when they have nothing to do with the ruling. The “Rule of Law does not bind rulers of a democracy”; they are only restricted by statistics reported in opinion polls, which Mark Twain aptly called “Damned lies.”

Consider the United Kingdom, which is a “Democratic Polyarchy” as they have a hereditary monarch ruler, and a democratic parliament; when the people demanded an exit from the European Union, the supposedly democratic parliament stymied and thwarted the people’s will to keep the United Kingdom in the European Union. Venezuela is a democracy where the constitution was destroyed for personal power. The country was bankrupted for the enrichment of the few, and the people are now left starving, wondering where their country went.

America’s founders were interested in creating a representative democracy under a republican form of government to protect the property rights of individuals that generate the most freedom for the most people. Under a republican form of government, everyone is first bound by the rule of law; in America’s case, the code we are all united under is the US Constitution. Even the government must answer to the lowest of citizens. Important to note, a Republican form of government does not mean that the Political Party “Republicans” are the party to rule exclusively. The plasticization of words and terms continues to create confusion where politics is concerned.

America was never expected to be a direct democracy, where Representative Haaland (D) is basing her erroneous statement regarding America being a “Constitutional Democracy.” Here is where the fallacy resides, a constitutional democracy would only require a simple majority to enact new clauses in the constitution. America’s Constitution requires ¾’s of the individual US States to ratify a Constitutional Amendment after the Constitutional Amendment has won supermajorities in the US House of Representatives and the Senate. Thus, any fourth-grade student who has passed American history can tell how and why America is NOT a “Constitutional Democracy,” as stated by Representative Haaland. “Constitutional Democracy” is fallacious, deceiving, and meant to create confusion in the populace. Since Representative Haaland (D) and Senator Udall (D) continue to disregard their constituents, I expect more but have come to realize they will not adhere to providing a higher level of respect for the offices they individually hold, representing their constituents across the political spectrum.

Property – It’s Not What you Think!

Since we discuss the rule of law, republics, and other related topics, let us dig a little into an item that is killing America and her freedom, the loss of private property. Charles Reich, an American legal and social scholar as well as an author who was a Professor at Yale Law School, writes a paper every American citizen needs to read and be concerned over, this paper is referenced below, and the link is active.

Starting in the 1930s, during the “Great Depression,” changes were made to America’s methods of governance by the President, a willing media, and sycophants in the Senate and House. Establishing the Federal and State Government’s ability to rule by largess; picking winners and losers based upon obeisance to a bureaucrat’s whims, wishes, and will. Reich lays out this history, walks the reader through the laws, and makes the case that because of democratic rule America’s Republic has been reduced to a feudal system where the government decides who gets the largess and who does not. With the Federal and State Governments making these decisions, businesses do not compete fairly upon their own merits but upon how much taxpayer money they can bamboozle from Uncle Sam. Unfortunately, the entire system hinges upon reducing private property ownership and the freedoms private property allow to feed the ever-hungry beast of Government consumption.

A perfect example is found in K-12 Schools. When a school insists they need more money from the taxpayer, they blame poverty and race as to why their students cannot learn unless more money is poured into a failing school to purchase a “magic bullet,” e.g., an expensive new toy, technology, or program—providing three lies in one, and excusing designed incompetence for the failure of students who the teachers have abused. Race governing ability is the first lie. Poverty dictating intellect forms the second lie. More money needed in K-12 Education is the third lie. The designed incompetence that allows or encourages a teacher to pass a student that does not meet the standards of learning is an abuse of students, not a problem of funding, and not a problem of the teacher, but a lack of parental involvement and student engagement.

Here is government largess in action; if the school board does not adhere to the lies of race and poverty affecting intellectual ability, that school does not get more money. Repeatedly, we see these lies vociferously declared in the media that poverty and race are holding a school/student back, and the government needs to spend more money. In reality, leadership in the school, reinstating the teacher’s authority, and respect is required for those schools, not more government largess. Indeed not another program or technology that no one can afford will fail to achieve the sales pitch.

Thus, America needs to demand change through the ballot box, insist that freedom and private property are returned to the people. Those representatives who have no moral center, or cannot serve their constituents from both parties equally, are removed from politics; indefinitely! Since America is a Republic and not a democracy (yet!), the problems in representation can be solved.

Plastic Language is Tyranny!

Shakespeare (2016) used Hamlet to relate a line that frequently applies, especially when communicating online, “… thou doth protest too much, methinks.” Too often, those intent on misusing words are protesting too much about something. On social media, every communication, every interaction, and every person is a threat to the intellect of the one protesting and must be lorded over, trolled, and publicly shamed. A recent example of this the world witnessed during Justice Kavanaugh’s confirmation process, where the judge’s children were physically and verbally assaulted—using a warping of legal rights, guaranteed justification for the assault. A careful review of any newspaper, news broadcast, and many politicians speaking will evidence the plasticization of words to justify actions, e.g., President Clinton, “Depends on what your definition of “is” is.” Words to couch a threat while seeming to be helpful and friendly, or worst of all hide abuses of others through twisted logic. Every time words become disconnected from standard meanings, society crumbles, language becomes useless, and the consequences are multi-generational, which is precisely what transpired in recovering Germany after Hitler’s demise.

I had the great personal pleasure of speaking to a senior citizen from Germany who lived through Hitler’s oppression and the recovery of Germany post-WWII, and the person I spoke with affirmed the most challenging social problem was relearning words and definitions to communicate without the taint of Hitler’s Germanic Language. Hence, we can draw several lessons from this experience; language is trained. It can be retrained; relearning language is a social problem fixed through social interactions and personal knowledge, and personal responsibility and accountability remain pre-eminent in communicating correctly. Another lesson from my experience, history repeats itself, and those with dastardly designs will always corrupt language to gain the advantage before showing their true colors as tyrants. Every single despot in recorded history has employed plastic language to lull the population into acquiescence before demanding loyalty and destroying that civilization, society, or culture.

Word Plasticity is LIC!

I cannot stress this point enough; LIC (Low-Intensity Conflict) is a type and style of warfare hosted by a wealthy or politically protected party for the demise of a population through “diplomatic, economic, and psychological pressures.” Language is a social construct. As discussed above, where Germany had to rid itself of twisted words and phrases from the Nazis, the social construct of language is generally the first step in advancing psychological warfare against a population. Recognizing the plasticization of language is the first problem in fighting LIC. How was Maduro able to lull the entire population of Venezuela into false security while he destroyed their constitution? He employed psychological warfare through the plasticization of language. Cuba, China, USSR, and every other tin-pot dictatorship employ the same strategy, twist the language, and conquer the people.

Representative Haaland (D), now Interior Secretary, was employing plastic words to hide her tyrannical ambitions, calling America a “Constitutional Democracy.” The United States of America is a Constitutional Republic with democratically elected representatives. If America is to survive as a Republic; the citizens need to understand where plastic language is employed, understand their government form, and insist that the democratically elected representatives will realize the same. Recognizing LIC is the first step, and the depth of LIC being enacted against America has been allowed to grow until America is in dire straits and dangerous waters! The American Republic must re-embrace private property and refuse what has been done since the 1900s by presidential fiat and complicit Congresses under the heading of “progressivism.”

Reference

Charles A. Reich, The New Property, 73 Yale L.J. (1964). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/ylj/vol73/iss5/1

NO MORE BS: Extreme Plasticity of Words – Media Tyranny

Bias Consider the following article title from the BBC, “Tragic Optimism’: The Antidote to Toxic Positivity.” The article discusses coping during COVID, which is trying in the extreme with a pandemic issued for a viral infection with a survivability rate of 98.8%. With governments across the globe stretching their powers to an almighty height with no logic, the BBC just had to plasticize and spread a little more tyranny.

To the BBC, toxic positivity is a recurring theme, as one of the “Best of 2019” was “How Positive Thinking is Harming Your Happiness.” If the BBC is your news source, I must ask, do you feel the BBC is trying to keep you depressed? The BBC’s Allie Volpe, who authored Tragic Optimism as an antidote for toxic positivity, really stretched to tie these plastic terms to Victor Frankl. Frankly, I am unsure how the BBC can put up with such foolishness unless they practice modular language tyranny by insisting that being positive and optimistic is toxic and tragic.

Detective When fighting modular language tyranny, we must have a full and complete understanding of the definitions of the terms plasticized. Positivity is mainly defined as a practice of being, or an innate tendency, to be positive or optimistic in attitude. Optimism, understood as a general term, is understood as practicing hopefulness and confidence about the future or a successful outcome. The dictionary has no entries for “tragic optimism” or “toxic positivity.” Hence, the only conclusion is to consider the BBC as practicing tyranny through modular language, or stretching words to meet a political agenda, purposefully causing chaos, and attempting to control people through the misunderstanding of words and language!

Theres more In searching less reputable sources online for toxic positivity, I find myself shaking my head and laughing hysterically at the mindset of those who would support thinking positively is toxic. Would one of the modular language tyrants please explain how a person who chooses to look on the positive side of life can be toxic? Would one of the modular language tyrants please explain how optimism can be “tragic?”

Previously I have recommended Uwe Poerksen’s book, “Plastic Words: The Tyranny of Modular Language.” I keep hoping this book will soon be available on digital devices, for I promise the book is worth the time to read. I bought my copy before the hardback version went to $150+ US Dollars. Still, if you can find a copy of this book, it is highly recommended for it shows precisely how those who consider themselves influencers of culture have adopted language tyranny to control populations. I was not facetious when I asked if the BBC’s audience is expected to be depressed, someone must ask the BBC why they think they can control optimism and positivity in their audience.

Detective 4 One of the most challenging parts of my doctoral degree has been the proliferation of “operational definitions” researchers adopt, which is nothing more than the plasticization of words to fit the researchers’ bias. The BBC’s articles quote researchers, who have drunk their own Kool-Aid, and gotten high off the power of authoritarian thought and the policing of the emotions of an audience. Repeatedly, I have gone to research documents from peer-reviewed resources and found the language used so deplorable that I cannot consider that source reputable, usable, or even worthy of my time. Yet, too often, I have been forced to use materials academically that I would never consider using professionally. The problem always arises from how a researcher plasticizes (operationally defines) a term to fit the researcher’s intentions just as the BBC has done to try and make optimism and positivity wrong and demean people who choose to be optimistic or positive their emotional choices.

Fighting tyrannical modular language, or the plastic word games people play to control an audience, I suggest the following:

Question terms used that make no sense—demand logical answers.
Know words and definitions; if unsure, ask SIRI, look the terms up in multiple dictionaries, but don’t rely upon one source for a definition.
When in doubt, practice #2, then #1 until you are less confused. I have found those working to plasticize words cannot stand scrutiny.
Sunshine disinfectant works when tyranny is found; put the tyrant in the sunshine and watch them become a vampire!

A “Liberty FIRST Culture” will not allow words to become plastic to the ruination of all! Never Give Up!

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this: