WHERE DID PRIVILEGE COME FROM: Revolutionary cadres!

THURSDAY, MAY 15, 2014

Part 4—Can maintain a strong sense of privilege: As we’ve been noting, the concept of “privilege” is suddenly very hot.

How hot is it? This hot:

Last night, Bill O’Reilly and two guests conducted a very fuzzy segment about the very hot concept. The segment was geared to the report that the Kennedy School would be teaching a course on privilege.

When Mr. O does a segment, that’s hot! And not only that:

One hour earlier, the very hot topic had turned up in Salon’s headlines again—and Tal Fortgang’s name wasn’t mentioned! The concept of privilege is so hot that it can carry a Salon report all by itself at this point!

Who needs Fortgang? This is the way a new report was bannered by Salon:
WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 2014 06:59 PM EDT
The privilege of being “invisible”: As a brown Muslim woman, my visibility comes with my Otherness
When I think of white privilege, I think of the ability to be seen as more than a tired symbol in a culture war
MARIA KHWAJA
“When I think of white privilege, I think of the ability to be seen as more than a tired symbol in a culture war,” Khjwala had said.

Except she also pretty much hadn’t. In her 1550-word piece, the word “privilege” appears only once, in passing. Khjwala’s piece was carefully reasoned—and it made almost no use of a certain hot new term.

Why was “privilege” crammed into those headlines two times? To appearances, Salon’s headline writers had done it again:

Hoping we’d click, they gave us a reason. In revolutionary times, such corners will often be cut.

The concept of privilege is hot. For that reason, we’ve been thinking about the ways the concept can perhaps be helpful—and about the various ways the concept can be misused.

In the current media world, varieties of journalistic misuse will often turn out to be endless. To some extent, that’s how it has seemed as we’ve explored the concept of privilege through the revolutionary cadre at the new Salon.

Full disclosure! Yesterday’s fiery piece at Salon may have been even more wrong than we suggested. Will the Kennedy School really be teaching a course called “Checking Your Privilege 101,” as the hapless but revolutionary Prachi Gupta reported?

In yesterday's report, we noted that Gupta seemed to have misread a joke by her source at New York magazine. And sure enough!

At some point, Gupta’s bungled report was rewritten, with a correction stuck at the end. Meanwhile, Marketplace posted the text of an email from the Kennedy School. The email suggests that Gupta’s bungle may extend beyond the name of that supposed course:
KENNEDY SCHOOL (5/15/14): There appears to be false information in the media being conveyed by reporters who have not contacted Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) officials to verify the accuracy of the information. Contrary to one article that has been picked up by others, the school is not planning to offer classes, coursework, or sessions devoted specifically to "power and privilege"...
Whatever! Which, in its Latinate form, could appear as the motto on the new Salon's coat of arms.

Warning! For better or worse, the new Salon represents the cutting edge of a new revolutionary cadre which is emerging from within the pseudo-progressive world. Not unlike certain groups of locusts, these cadres seem to emerge every fifty years. And make no mistake:

Membership in such cadres will often confer a very strong sense of privilege.

To our nostrils, the fiery young writers at Salon often convey a remarkable sense of privilege. In these revolutionary times, there’s no need to observe even the simplest rules of evidence, argument or logic in the course of their fiery work.

Everything is permitted at such revolutionary times! The dumbest children in the country may end up atop the ramparts. They may reinvent language along the way, or even turn to real bombs.

The last time such a cadre appeared, Theodore Allen was introducing the concept of “white privilege,” if this history by the world’s foremost authority can be believed. Sensibly utilized, the concept might well have its uses.

But alas! At revolutionary times, exceptionally silly cadre members may not be entirely careful in the way they employ and apply their new constructions. Drawing on the research of the highly privileged Julia Fisher, we will observe two possible downsides to the use of the current hot term:

(1) The term can be used to stifle debate or dissent.
(2) The term can spread an unhelpful sense of guilt among those who have grown up with social advantages.

(Quoting Fisher, the term can have “the effect of invoking guilt, in large part because the phrase is so often used ungenerously, as a weapon rather than a gentle reminder.”)

Please understand: According to Fisher Think, inappropriate use of the term can even be used to spread unuseful guilt among those who favor social justice as defined by the revolution. At one point in her Little Red, White and Blue Book, Fisher paints a gruesome portrait of the way the concept can affect the suggestible and compliant:
FISHER (5/6/14): In liberal spheres of debate...privilege can be a sort of scarlet letter. Gawker's tournament may have been intended as comedy, but it was not without insight. “Privilege: so sweet to have,” Hamilton Nolan wrote in the introduction. “But even sweeter to not have. Privilege has its benefits, but the lack of privilege confers that sweet, sweet moral superiority.” The bracket makes explicit the competitive nature of the today's debate about privilege. Everyone is checking everyone else's privilege, competing to be the least privileged person present—and, thus, the most authoritative on the subject of privilege. Privilege is stigmatized; hardship—or assumed hardship—becomes a badge of honor.

Take, for example, the biographies of the students who run the popular tumblr “Check Your Privilege at the Door.” If the blog weren't so self-serious, I'd assume this was parody: “I am mixed race (white and Korean) and a lesbian. I also identify as fat and as an atheist. My privileges include white-passing privilege, cisgender privilege, class privilege and able-bodied privilege. I am an extrovert with low social skills.” Nothing about her personality, interests, or achievements—only where she stood in the Internet equivalent of my high school's sorting exercise. Mixed race: one step back. Fat: one step back. Cisgender: two steps forward.
Can lack of privilege confer that sweet, sweet moral superiority? Yes, but so can rejection of privilege.

It’s amazing to see how many people can be taken in the sad direction conveyed by the highlighted passage above. As we noted in Tuesday’s post, the foremost authority describes a similar phenomenon the last time a pseudo-progressive revolutionary cadre began to arise:
The concept of white privilege also came to be used within radical circles for purposes of self-criticism by anti-racist whites. For instance, a 1975 article in Lesbian Tide criticized the American feminist movement for exhibiting “class privilege” and “white privilege”. Weather Underground leader Bernadine Dohrn, in a 1977 Lesbian Tide article, wrote: “...by assuming that I was beyond white privilege or allying with male privilege because I understood it, I prepared and led the way for a totally opportunist direction which infected all of our work and betrayed revolutionary principles.”
Speaking like a member of a northern branch of The Shining Path, the highly suggestible Dohrn self-criticized to beat the band. After that, she turned to the bombs, getting several people killed and sending Reagan to power.

Make no mistake—membership in revolution can confer a strong sense of privilege. Among the highly suggestible, it may seem that previous rules have all ceased to apply.

Journalistic rules no longer apply, as we routinely see at Salon. Beyond that, exciting private languages can and should be invented. Soon, the others are being told to shut up with the claim that they’re mansplaining, whitesplaining or failing to check their privilege. Failing to check its own dumbness, an excitable cadre seizes the banner of “progressive” debate.

In our view, there’s no doubt about it: dumbly applied, the language of “privilege” can end up being very unhelpful. Tomorrow, we’ll look at one particular wondrous use of the hot new fifty-year-old term.

It comes from a former Teach For America member who now pursues the revolution from an unlikely perch at Booz Allen. She has the language of “privilege” down cold.

On balance, we think her piece just isn’t real smart. More strikingly, it conveys an astonishing sense of privilege, even leaving Booz Allen aside.

Tomorrow: Membership can confer an extremely strong sense of privilege

40 comments:

  1. Salon should admonish Gupta for reporting things that didn't happen.

    ReplyDelete
  2. They should also go back and correct the article.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why? BOB sets the standard for good journalistic practice
      and he never does. In BOB's guild, you call for others to make corrections. When they do you belittle the quality of those corrections. When you make a mistake, you almost always let it stand.

      Delete
    2. Case in Point 1:

      "Governor Ultrasound still hasn’t been charged!
      TUESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2014

      Once again, Maddow errs: Your Daily Howler just keeps getting those results!"

      Maddow didn't err. Ultrasound was indicted before the post with the silly erroneous headline was posted, and BOB let it stand with nom update. It remains his best example of how to not correct anything no matter how foolish.

      KZ

      Delete
    3. The headline was posted before the announcement of the indictment.

      Can we expect a correction from you, prefererably a coherent one?

      Delete
    4. Out favorite exchange from that daywhich established deadrat as the BOBpologist supreme:

      "Anonymous
      January 21, 2014 at 4:13 PM

      Who will be the first member of Bob's loyal tribe to rush to the blog and say, "Well, when Bob wrote that, he wasn't charged. Yet."

      Replies

      deadrat
      January 21, 2014 at 5:12 PM

      Here's what TDH wrote: "Will McDonnell be charged? We don’t know ...."

      Are you suggesting that when TDH wrote his headline, he'd already heard the news? Now that McDonnell has been indicted, does that mean that Darlin' Rachel was right when she reported that the DoJ said they had delayed an announcement when they actually said they'd delayed their decision?


      Anonymous
      January 21, 2014 at 5:20 PM

      And the winner of the race to be first to defend the indefensible is . . . . deadrat!

      Boy, is CeceliaMc going to be sauced!"

      KZ

      Delete
    5. Allow me to note one of the typical troll practices:

      Step 1: Say something stupid and erroneous to put what TDH writes (or TDH himself) in a bad light.

      Step 2: End by saying something like "How long will I have to wait for a Bobfan to come to Bob's defense?"

      Step 3: Wait until somebody points out that what you've written is stupid and erroneous.

      Step 4: Don't defend your stupid and erroneous comment, but write, "Bobfan! Bobfan!"

      Here's another:

      Step 1: Say something stupid and erroneous to put what TDH writes (0r TDH himself) in a bad light.

      Step 2: Wait until somebody points out that what you've written is stupid and erroneous.

      Step 3: Post a comment with a rhetorical eye-roll about commenters who tell you what TDH really means.

      Of course, you have to pretend that TDH isn't usually poundingly, repetitively clear about his main themes. Or that when he isn't, a discussion of interpretations isn't exactly what a blogger's commentarial is supposed to provide.

      You may now return to your usual trollery.

      Delete
    6. And you may return to your fainting couch.

      Delete
    7. For the record, deadrat, commenters on the day Governor Ultrasound was charged presented some evidence that BOB posted after the indictment was announced. You posted a guess with no evidence that BOB's headline preceded the announcement. Regardless, once the indictment was announced BOB had a day to post an update, correct the headline, or pull the post. He did nothing.

      Lowest chain on the lowest tank in the whole damn water closet.

      But the tank fills fast!

      Delete
    8. Oh, dear. You evidently have confused me with another deadrat. The guessers were people who claimed that TDH posted after the announcement. I was the one who examined the source of the blog entry, and found the timestamp from the software that generates blogspot blogs. It predated the announcement.

      Delete
    9. Deadrat, you can nitpick all you want about whether Somerby posted before or after the charges were filed, while refusing to consider in what time zone that precious stamp that only you and Penelope Garcia have the savvy to find.

      The fact remains that Somerby made a complete ass out of himself by posting "Gov. Ultrasound still hasn't been charged" on the very morning that a 14-count indictment came down.

      You might have noticed that Bob handled that humongous embarrassment the same way he handles most of legion of things when he has been proven wrong.

      To wit: Gov. Ultrasound has been conveniently disappeared from these parts.

      Kinda like that "legitimate traffic study" he howled about for months that had never been "disproven, on a journalistic basis."

      Somerby MO: When you do a face plant, simply ignore it and move on to something else. Like racism. His sheep will conveniently forget how dumb you were, as they low on the new batch of sweet hay.


      Delete
    10. Anonymous @5:33A,

      Either TDH posted his "Gov. Ultrasound" entry after the announcement of the indictment or before. In the former case, he told a deliberate falsehood; in the latter, he prematurely declared a rhetorical victory.

      Either I posted "a guess with no evidence" about the time of the entry's posting or I looked up the timestamp, which by the way, indicates which timezone it refers to so it's easy to compare the posting time with the announcement time. In the former case, I'm the clueless one; in the latter, it's the confederacy of trollery on this blog.

      In both cases, the latter obtains. Are these consequential matters? I'd say no, but this is a blog, and as the trollery is fond of pointing out, a particularly inconsequential one. But I find it passing strange that nevertheless you're the self-proclaimed defender of accuracy but only when it comes to bashing TDH.

      (And what's with the "savvy" crack? Are you saying I'm making it up or are you excusing yourself from getting the time wrong because it was just too difficult to figure out? I had to look up the Penelope Garcia reference. Apparently, that's the name of a character on a TV show about a fictional team of FBI behavioral "profilers." How embarrassing for you.)

      But, yeah, it was an embarrassing misstep. I don't understand why this looms so large for you. So what? Why is it "convenient" that McDonnell has disappeared from the blog? He's pretty much disappeared from the news except for his appointment to a position at Liberty University. (Is that even news?)

      TDH's larger point is that journalists are too consumed with scandal, including one so venial that it didn't even violate state law. And he doesn't think it's a good idea to gloat about your political opponents possibly going to prison. I disagree. I think the McDonnells of this political world ought to be hung around the neck of the Republican Party. Not because I think that Democrats are necessarily more honest, but because McDonnel's behavior and worse is the inevitable result of electing people who don't really believe in governing. If McDonnell goes to prison, then that's an example of bad things happening to bad people, which restores the karmic balance in the universe. I guess believing that makes me a less evolved person than TDH.

      And, sorry, but I don't think a stickler for accuracy like yourself should be claiming that TDH thinks that the Christie traffic jam was the result of a legitimate traffic study. TDH has consistently said that closing the lanes was idiotic and that any claims of a study could be a ruse or a hoax.

      KZ's broadcasting from the Galaxy Schizophrenia notwithstanding, TDH doesn't get legions of things wrong. When he does get something factually wrong, I'd like to see a correction, but it isn't my blog. I think that his emphasis on Maddow is misplaced and a tad overdetermined, shall we say? That contrary to his claims, Donald Sterling and Cliven Bundy are not one like the other. That he's missing a bigger point when he carries on about the size of the wage gap.

      But so what? TDH's opinions and mine don't always match. Evidently yours and his don't either. I don't read this blog because I have to agree with the blogger. Why do you?

      Delete
  3. OMB (Stupidest Line in this Post)

    "(1) The term can be used to stifle debate or dissent."

    We would nominate it for stupidest BOBline of the day, but he tops that in his Behghazi post and he has yet to "solve" Tuscaloosa for those of you locusts in the pseudo-liberal world hanging on the words of subhuman droogs.

    KZ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Man, you a idiot!

      Delete
    2. Well. That certainly won't stifle me. Try laying some privelege guilt on me. That always works. According to BOB.

      KZ

      Delete
    3. He's not an idiot, he's just an insidious troll.

      How is a troll different than a critic? A critic observes a basic respect for the discourse in question and lodges substantive objections that can in turn be criticized. A troll isn't strong enough to do this and so the troll engages in muddying the water, obfuscation, misdirection, cutsie private language, ad hominem attacks--lather, rinse, repeat.

      David in Cal is a critic. KZ is a troll.

      Delete
  4. One or two other downsides of the concept of privilege. One is where the white guy gets home from his low paying low status menial job and hears somebody talking about "white male privilege". First reaction is gonna be anger. Gonna react with "these people are frigging nuts, talking about how privileged I am."

    A recent article illustrates that. It is called "How to explain privilege to a poor white person". The author's initial reaction to being told she was privileged - "The fuck?"

    Fortunately for her though, she didn't just get to be privileged as a white person. She got to be a victim as a female. She quickly embraced the concept of male privilege.

    The other part is the superciliousness towards the working class white males who reject the concept. They are ignorant, and probably racist. They are afraid of losing their privileges. Afraid of competing on a level playing field (wonder why that would be, since playing on a supposedly privileged playing field currently has them near to the bottom?)

    Then of course, we get this.

    Some liberals - we want to end white male privilege
    other liberals - why do white males vote against their self interest by NOT voting for the liberal candidate?

    Given some of the rhetoric, a better question might be, why do so many white males continue to vote FOR liberal candidates?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The "recent article" you mention.

      http://thefeministbreeder.com/explaining-white-privilege-broke-white-person/

      Delete
    2. From the article misrepresented by 1:37

      "And listen, recognizing Privilege doesn't mean suffering guilt or shame for your lot in life. Nobody's saying that Straight White Middle Class Able-Bodied Males are all a bunch of assholes who don't work hard for what they have. Recognizing Privilege simply means being aware that some people have to work much harder just to experience the things you take for granted (if they ever can experience them at all.)

      I know now that I AM Privileged in many ways"

      Gina Crosley-Corcoran

      Delete
    3. 2:33 PM -- thanks for the link. That article seems wrong-headed. There are many subgroups who perform exceedingly well, even though they're not Main Street whites: E.g., Vietnamese, Chinese, Japanese, Indians, Pakistanis, Kenyan immigrants, Cuban immigrants, Mormons, Jews, gays. Almost all of these groups were extremely poor when they first came to this country. All suffered considerable discrimination. All are in a society where most people they see are different from them. Yet, they have excelled.

      The point is, so-called "white privilege" explains very little about why some people succeed more than others. Focusing on skin color like this is a disservice to blacks and to whites IMHO, not mention Asians, who seem to be ignored or overlooked.

      Delete
    4. Remember when gays and Mormons first came to this country?

      Me neither.

      But they all faced considerable discrimination. And some of them excelled! Problem solved.

      Delete
    5. Deadrat, do you really think it is a useless exercise to try to figure out what helps some people succeed in adversity so that others can benefit from their experience?

      Your glib "problem solved" implies that David is foolish to point out that the experiences of people in different stigmatized subgroups vary.

      Somerby poiints that out himself as he describes the different verbal abilities of his 7 year old friend and Dent, both of whom are presumably African American. Do you think David was saying "problem solved"? I think he was asking why some groups do well while others do not, despite having similar circumstances of race and poverty.

      Why not engage that question?

      Delete
    6. Tackling Asian Privilege

      http://takimag.com/article/tackling_asian_privilege_gavin_mcinnes/print#axzz31dagpLYB

      Delete
    7. deadrat's comments are always about himself, best to ignore them. David in Cal is unyieldingly dogmatic, a hopeless case.

      No other group in this country has had the tragic background of African Americans, and most of the groups David mentioned come from rich and sophisticated cultures. If David is curious why some people do better than others, he can read some Jared Diamond books. He would be better off getting more comfortable with the ideas people smarter than he is have come up with to help those who are struggling.

      Luke 1:51-53, etc

      Delete
    8. Thanks for your advice, Luke. In fact, I am reading one such book now, The Triple Package.

      I completely agree with you that the tragic background of African Americans in this country is the cause of the problem. I'm trying to look forward, to how to make improvements. The focus on "privilege" based on race seems to me to be a dead end. I think it offers blacks an excuse and it causes racial animosity.

      Delete
    9. Pardon me. That response above was to AnonymousMay 15, 2014 at 7:44 PM

      Delete
    10. Deadrat, do you really think it is a useless exercise to try to figure out what helps some people succeed in adversity so that others can benefit from their experience?

      No. Do you think that's what DAinCA was doing?

      Your glib "problem solved" implies that David is foolish to point out that the experiences of people in different stigmatized subgroups vary.

      Sorry, I didn't mean merely to imply that DAinCA is ignorant, a term I prefer to foolishness. I'm usually more explicit than that.

      Do you think David was saying "problem solved"?

      No. He's just telling us what the solutions have to look like.

      Why not engage that question?

      With DAinCA? Have you read many of his comments?

      Delete
    11. Anonymous @7:44P,

      You think my comments are always about me? Be fair, that's a fascinating topic, but your claim would still hurt my feelings, if I had any.

      I did tell a fascinating story from my biography in a comment to the blog entry "WHERE DID PRIVILEGE COME FROM: Stifling Fisher!" I guess you didn't find that anecdote on topic.

      In threads past, I've discussed (with DAinCA) the federal courts' approach to legal time limits in federal law, the ins and outs of Florida homicide law and criminal procedure (with various nutters), and the rules for 503(c) organizations.

      I don't think any of those topics is about me or that they're best ignored, but tell me how I can do better. Because, as you can imagine, I live for your approval.

      Delete

    12. How To Stop A Divorce And Save Your Marriage?(Dr Brave).


      Hello to every one out here, am here to share the unexpected miracle that happened to me three days ago, My name is Jeffrey Dowling,i live in TEXAS,USA.and I`m happily married to a lovely and caring wife,with two kids A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my wife so terrible that she took the case to court for a divorce she said that she never wanted to stay with me again,and that she did not love me anymore So she packed out of my house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get her back,after much begging,but all to no avail and she confirmed it that she has made her decision,and she never wanted to see me again. So on one evening,as i was coming back from work,i met an old friend of mine who asked of my wife So i explained every thing to her,so she told me that the only way i can get my wife back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for her too So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow her advice. Then she gave me the email address of the spell caster whom she visited.(bravespellcaster@gmail.com}, So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address she gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my wife back the next day what an amazing statement!! I never believed,so he spoke with me,and told me everything that i need to do. Then the next morning, So surprisingly, my wife who did not call me for the past seven {7}months,gave me a call to inform me that she was coming back So Amazing!! So that was how she came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and she apologized for her mistake,and for the pain she caused me and my children. Then from that day,our relationship was now stronger than how it were before,by the help of a spell caster . So, i will advice you out there to kindly email this wonderful man {bravespellcaster@gmail.com},i f you are in any condition like this,or you have any problem related to "bringing your ex back. So thanks to Dr Brave for bringing back my wife,and brought great joy to my family once again.{bravespellcaster@gmail.com}, Thanks..

      Delete
  5. Even if someone weren't working class, he or she would reject the idea of privilege because there is always someone else you can compare yourself to who is doing better or has different advantages. This is not a concept anyone wants to embrace.

    If everyone were only able to consider their own self-interest, your question would make sense and people would only be voting their own perceived interests, but people do empathize with and affiliate with others. Some people do have a concept of the greater good and a sense of shared struggle. That leads them to participate beyond their own immediate interests and join in collective action with people whose interests may even benefit at the expense of their own.

    Why do people without kids vote to increase taxes for their local schools? A better complaint about the term privilege might be that it interferes with people making common cause over shared values. That is what Somerby has been harping about when he talks about dividing rather than uniting people. If we divide those in our own base we are doing something self-defeating.

    The things we share are our human needs and our desire to be recognized and valued and included by others. Those are the goals of checking privilege but they cannot be attained by pushing some people out of the circle (those who have too much privilege or who talk about things the wrong way).

    ReplyDelete
  6. Reetu Mody, a first-year Kennedy School master's candidate who was among the activists demanding the new course, discussed privilege in terms of what one deserves. Mody said
    "If what you've been told all your life is you're really talented and you deserve what you have, it's going to be really hard to find out Maybe I don't deserve it, and all these other people equally deserve it but never even had a shot,"

    Maybe I'm quibbling, but I am not sure what the word "deserve" exactly means in this context. Deserves in whose eyes? Mine? Mody's? God's eyes? In other words, I don't think there's an objective meaning to the word, "deserve".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is that THE Reetu Mody of the Kennedy Kadre?

      The person responsible for announcing the course/session/
      which further fueled this nonsensical debate going in academia/reality-based-blogospere? You know, the source for the New York piece picked up by Breitbart which you posted about before Bob got around to it? The one Bob chose to ignore in favor of Salon with its cadres?

      That Reetu Mody? BTW, glad to see you are still speechless on this topic DinC.

      Delete
  7. I don't know if I don't understand you, or your history is all messed up.

    You wrote:
    "Speaking like a member of a northern branch of The Shining Path, the highly suggestible Dohrn self-criticized to beat the band. After that, she turned to the bombs, getting several people killed and sending Reagan to power."

    That self-criticism you cite appears to have come *after* she split with the Weather Underground. Are you confusing the May 19 Coalition with the Prairie Fire Collective? What bombs are you talking about that came *after* her self-criticism?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't expect Somerby to reply.

      Delete
    2. Of course he won't. He doesn't want to get embarrassed on his own blog like he gets his ass handed to him whenever he tries to reply to critics on Drum's blog.

      Delete
    3. Who did Bernadine Dohrn or her husband, Bill Ayers, get killed? They came out of hiding in 1980. That propelled Reagan into office? Never mind we were in the midst of the hostage crisis, inflation, rising gas prices, and an economy that was tanking.

      None of that had anything to do with Reagan's election. Nope, it was Jimmy Carter "palling around" with terrorists.

      Yep, the sins of the most radical extremes of the left must always be visited upon the Democratic Party. Sarah Palin would we proud of you, Somerby.

      Delete
    4. I thought Carter lost because he invented the Peanut Butter and Malaise Sandwich.

      Delete

  8. How To Stop A Divorce And Save Your Marriage?(Dr Brave).


    Hello to every one out here, am here to share the unexpected miracle that happened to me three days ago, My name is Jeffrey Dowling,i live in TEXAS,USA.and I`m happily married to a lovely and caring wife,with two kids A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my wife so terrible that she took the case to court for a divorce she said that she never wanted to stay with me again,and that she did not love me anymore So she packed out of my house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get her back,after much begging,but all to no avail and she confirmed it that she has made her decision,and she never wanted to see me again. So on one evening,as i was coming back from work,i met an old friend of mine who asked of my wife So i explained every thing to her,so she told me that the only way i can get my wife back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for her too So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow her advice. Then she gave me the email address of the spell caster whom she visited.(bravespellcaster@gmail.com}, So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address she gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my wife back the next day what an amazing statement!! I never believed,so he spoke with me,and told me everything that i need to do. Then the next morning, So surprisingly, my wife who did not call me for the past seven {7}months,gave me a call to inform me that she was coming back So Amazing!! So that was how she came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and she apologized for her mistake,and for the pain she caused me and my children. Then from that day,our relationship was now stronger than how it were before,by the help of a spell caster . So, i will advice you out there to kindly email this wonderful man {bravespellcaster@gmail.com},i f you are in any condition like this,or you have any problem related to "bringing your ex back. So thanks to Dr Brave for bringing back my wife,and brought great joy to my family once again.{bravespellcaster@gmail.com}, Thanks..

    ReplyDelete