“Today the word “transparency” is haunting all spheres of life—not just politics but economics, too. Wherever information is very easy to obtain, as is the case today, the social system switches from trust to control. As total communication and total networking run their course, it proves harder than ever to be an outsider, to hold a different opinion. Transparent communication is communication that has a smoothing and leveling effect. It leads to synchronization and uniformity. It eliminates Otherness. Compulsive conformity proceeds from transparency. In this way, transparency stabilizes the dominant system. Transparency is a neoliberal dispositive. It forces everything inward in order to transform it into information. Under today’s immaterial relations of production, more information and communication mean more productivity and acceleration. In contrast, secrecy, foreignness, and otherness represent obstacles for communication without borders. They are to be dismantled in the name of transparency. Transparency makes the human being glassy. Therein lies its violence. Unrestricted freedom and communication switch into total control and surveillance.”1
------------------------------------------
Transparency is the order of the day. It is a term, a slogan, that dominates public discourse about corruption and freedom of information. Considered crucial to democracy, it touches our political and economic lives as well as our private lives. Anyone can obtain information about anything. Everything—and everyone—has become transparent: unveiled or exposed by the apparatuses that exert a kind of collective control over the post-capitalist world.
Yet, transparency has a dark side that, ironically, has everything to do with a lack of mystery, shadow, and nuance. Behind the apparent accessibility of knowledge lies the disappearance of privacy, homogenization, and the collapse of trust. The anxiety to accumulate ever more information does not necessarily produce more knowledge or faith. Technology creates the illusion of total containment and the constant monitoring of information, but what we lack is adequate interpretation of the information. In this manifesto, Byung-Chul Han denounces transparency as a false ideal, the strongest and most pernicious of our contemporary mythologies.
58 comments:
BS. That is what people themself desire.
Ordinary people -- fear freedom. ;-P
It's better seen on the history of China.
Which like to celebrate having LONGEST continuos and uninterrupted history line.
From the very beginning... like in 5th or 6th century before Christ.
People later colled "legalists" came to power -- and with promice to "eradicate corruption" -- installed exactly that -- rule of total control.
In foul try to *prescribe* to people what to do.
And then... it became recurring theme.
Last two waves to mention -- Maoism... and now, what would be called... Xi-ism???
See... it looks pretty different, if some historical perspectives added. ;-)
"Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"
T. S. Eliot
You know... that I em poeticly blind. ;-P
Well... I have an idea to call it "male" and "females" types of politics. ;-P
active vs. passive?
I did a male-female kinda post earlier this am...
I suppose that not everyone can be as enlightened and reality centered as you and the Dalai Lama, a jet-setting monarch who fancies himself a simple monk. :(
Dasein. Being in the World. A world of pure imagination...
Wanna know what living in some other person's "dasein" is called?
Vid 1... vid 2... vid 3...
...nightmare, and the death of your own subjectivity and self to become a character in some other person's fantasy narrative. Yours? Good luck trying to "enforce" it, Scotty (Frank).
...your male, on-to-the-other imposed, "parental authority" of global warming, green energy, and an ever dominant corporate globalism.... your "obstacle" to achieving Green Nirvana, "Republicans" (especially TRUMP), externalized. It's not your own impotence that prevents Nirvana... it's "evil Republicans" (deplorables) preventing it. lol!
Nietzsche, "The Gay Science" (110)
The thinker is now the being in whom the impulse to truth and those life-preserving errors wage their first conflict, now that the impulse to truth has also proved itself to be a life-preserving power. In comparison with the importance of this conflict everything else is indifferent; the final question concerning the conditions of life is here raised, and the first attempt is here made to answer it by experiment. How far is truth (aka- your fantasy dasein) susceptible of embodiment - that is the question, that is the experiment.
Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others.
- Ambrose Bierce
Like that is only one that dichotomy possible. ;-P
Well, I mean like "legalism" VS "favoritism". ;-)
\\it's "evil Republicans" (deplorables) preventing it. lol!
You know. NMP. ;-P
\\Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others.
- Ambrose Bierce
Yap. Bierce is good.
But.
As I have had stated -- wisdom of ancient wiseman... prone to grow unprecise with time, or even full well obsolite. ;-P
Another word -- that definition was good for his times... maybe.
But not for today...
When conmervatives became most fervent shakers and rule-changers (wannabe ;-P like liliPut).
And so-called "progressives" are happy to drown into deeps of "stop this moment... you are beautiful". ;-P
So... Chinese with their Ying-Yang cought some truth... maybe. ;-)
....the conversation extended a bit. I don't think he understood my comments on "evolution" as well as you might...
"...That you still believe THAT (enlightenment is possible) proves that your research has been both defective and delusional.
You can't escape the absurdity in "The Fall" (from the so-called real world of your body into the fictional/symbolically mediated imaginary world of your head and the "castration" that accompanies it). So show some humility. Forgiveness is something that we should all (not just some specific identity groups) be asking for.
Please forgive my bluntness. And I wish you well on your journey into the undiscovered country of the future.
ps - I agree for everything in your original statement but for the phrase "many if not most people" I would simply substitute "all people". There are no "superior enlightened souls". We're ALL delusional and effed. But have no fear. Eventually, evolution selects for the most helpful delusions, as Nietzsche calls them above..."life preserving errors", that go by the misnomer of "human intelligence". And humans do have an advantage in this... an external inter-generational collective memory commonly called "books". In this sense, we are all "cyborg", but it also means that "forgetting" the things we should forget in order to achieve social harmony and mutual cooperation, is difficult, and a certain "healthy skepticism", of their contents is, at times, warranted in order for evolution to do her work. Ecclesiastes 3."
You know... I'm interested to know *mechanism* of evolution.
Not some superficial whataboutism. ;-)
And for that... movie I watched yesterday. About some race horse.
And it looks like giving more insights.
Like -- would that newborn colt would like to be a race-horse??? Maybe.
But he can be -- because of pre his birth circumstances:
like old... well, seasoned housewife suddenly decided to take rancho of his farther under on control, and to rise that colt into race-horse.
Plus, some "teacher of race-horses" acted by Malkovich, that pecular dude, decided that that is good bet, for a such a sore looser.
Plus, pure chance, decided that that housewife would actually HAVE that colt as her own... decided by a coin flip. ;-P
Plus, good jockey was needed.
Plus... the very culture of rasing race-horces.
And etc, and etc, and etc.
It's similar to that what JFK said: "We'd go to the Moon. Not because it is simple, but because it's hard".
But... was that HIS plan, HIS idea??? No.
He was just playing with his face.
For "adding importance" to idea of some unknown NASA beaurocrat. (Verner von Brawn?)
But also... that would not be possible, if not that Rocket Race happening in that time...
Again. Chinese seems like groked that thing. Of "ever changing times".
Not like europeans was too dumb for that. Though they was too mundane and wordy. Up to incomprehensability. Wiuth their "dialectics".
But still... that is USA showed... ability to give a birth to ideas from elsewhere... only suitable nudge needed. ;P
So? What race-horse you would bet on. In this (never ending actuall) evolutional race? ;-)
The anti-science one, of course. The Black Swan.
Dunno.
What "anti-science" should mean??? Scence -- do nopt attack anyone.
It even more innocent and unharmful than a baby kitten. ;-P
While "black swan" that is Evoliution. O.K.
Still... I don't get it -- your attitude toward Evolution.
Are you anti-evolutionist?
Trying to throw it aside by the means of willpower alone... even if that willpower instilled in you by Evolution and nobody/nothing elde? ;-P
In economic, you understand the "division of labour"?
Nietzsche, "THE FUTURE OF OUR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS"... from the end of the 1st lecture.
"In all cultivated circles people are in the habit of whispering to one another words something after this style: that it is a general fact that, owing to the present frantic exploitation of the scholar in the service of his science, his education becomes every day more accidental and more uncertain. For the study of science has been extended to such interminable lengths that he who, though not exceptionally gifted, yet possesses fair abilities, will need to devote himself exclusively to one branch and ignore all others if he ever wish to achieve anything in his work. Should he then elevate himself above the herd by means of his specialty, he still remains one of them in regard to all else,--that is to say, in regard to all the most important things in life. Thus, a specialist in science gets to resemble nothing so much as a factory workman who spends his whole life in turning one particular screw or handle on a certain instrument or machine, at which occupation he acquires the most consummate skill. In Germany, where we know how to drape such painful facts with the glorious garments of fancy, this narrow specialisation on the part of our learned men is even admired, and their ever greater deviation from the path of true culture is regarded as a moral phenomenon. `Fidelity in small things,' `dogged faithfulness,' become expressions of highest eulogy, and the lack of culture outside the specialty is flaunted abroad as a sign of noble sufficiency.
"For centuries it has been an understood thing that one alluded to scholars alone when one spoke of cultured men; but experience tells us that it would be difficult to find any necessary relation between the two classes to-day. For at present the exploitation of a man for the purpose of science is accepted everywhere without the slightest scruple. Who still ventures to ask, What may be the value of a science which consumes its minions in this vampire fashion? The division of labour in science is practically struggling towards the same goal which religions in certain parts of the world are consciously striving after,--that is to say, towards the decrease and even the destruction of learning. That, however, which, in the case of certain religions, is a perfectly justifiable aim, both in regard to their origin and their history, can only amount to self-immolation when transferred to the realm of science. In all matters of a general and serious nature, and above all, in regard to the highest philosophical problems, we have now already reached a point at which the scientific man, as such, is no longer allowed to speak. On the other hand, that adhesive and tenacious stratum which has now filled up the interstices between the sciences--Journalism--believes it has a mission to fulfil here, and this it does, according to its own particular lights--that is to say, as its name implies, after the fashion of a day-labourer.
(cont)
"It is precisely in journalism that the two tendencies combine and become one. The expansion and the diminution of education here join hands. The newspaper actually steps into the place of culture, and he who, even as a scholar, wishes to voice any claim for education, must avail himself of this viscous stratum of communication which cements the seams between all forms of life, all classes, all arts, and all sciences, and which is as firm and reliable as news paper is, as a rule. In the newspaper the peculiar educational aims of the present culminate, just as the journalist, the servant of the moment, has stepped into the place of the genius, of the leader for all time, of the deliverer from the tyranny of the moment. Now, tell me, distinguished master, what hopes could I still have in a struggle against the general topsy-turvification of all genuine aims for education; with what courage can I, a single teacher, step forward, when I know that the moment any seeds of real culture are sown, they will be mercilessly crushed by the roller of this pseudo-culture? Imagine how useless the most energetic work on the part of the individual teacher must be, who would fain lead a pupil back into the distant and evasive Hellenic world and to the real home of culture, when in less than an hour, that same pupil will have recourse to a newspaper, the latest novel, or one of those learned books, the very style of which already bears the revolting impress of modern barbaric culture--"
The tendency towards ever narrower scientific specialties is turning genius' into naive simpletons.
I believe in anti-fragility. Narrow specialization exemplifies the utmost in fragility. When this civilization collapses, and it will, it will take more that Asimov's "Foundations" and his "Seldon Plan" to bring her back.
Evolution will then "try again".
\\Evolution will then "try again".
To say something like that, one should base it on Theory of Evolution.
But there is NONE... still.
Another word -- we still do not know the *mechanism* of it.
\\The tendency towards ever narrower scientific specialties is turning genius' into naive simpletons.
That is... separate question. You know. It is not structure of science... well, scientific comunities and all... that is structure of Nature.
Which defines -- which scientific discoveries possible.
\\In economic, you understand the "division of labour"?
It's the same as "speciation" in Evolution.
\\For the study of science has been extended to such interminable lengths that he who, though not exceptionally gifted, yet possesses fair abilities, will need to devote himself exclusively to one branch and ignore all others if he ever wish to achieve anything in his work.
That is...
not a news.
Multi-disciplinarity is a common place for a long time already.
After which technologisation of science happened -- scientists just became addition to a hight-rech scientific device.
And after that computer-modelling happened.
And now... AI in a form of NNs...
Well... as Lem have had predicted. ;-)
\\ Imagine how useless the most energetic work on the part of the individual teacher must be, who would fain lead a pupil back into the distant and evasive Hellenic world and to the real home of culture, when in less than an hour, that same pupil will have recourse to a newspaper, the latest novel, or one of those learned books, the very style of which already bears the revolting impress of modern barbaric culture--"
Today... in the age of TikTok... it is even MOAR hopeless. Yawn. :-)
I understand what you doing.
Short cryptic comments.
As I have said long ago.
Not because I anyhow smarter, but because I have similar experience(s?) -- short cryptic comments -- do not work.
And that is problem I strugling myself. Here too.
And on this base can share my observations.
First.
It seems like so nifty thing -- to summarise own observations in short, seems like cracking open the case in hand -- comment.
But problem is... there'd be no discussion about it. As I found long ago.
Thats why I tryed more rich approach -- discussion of Lem's works here.
Not that successful, visibly.
Second.
My "theory". More like hypothesis -- that is need of suitable context.
But regrettably, that is much bigger problem than I have phatomed before.
That is not only cultural context (as between natives and peer2peers) matching is not enough. Some very special matching must happen...
Dunno which and how... never have had something like that in my experience.
PS So... this is the limit of my "wisdom" :-((((((((((((((((
:P
Perhaps you should take a less Apollonian view of "evolution" and explore its' more Dionysian aspects.
Are you familiar with the three metamorphoses.. the camel, the lion, and the child? This is similarr to the Dionysian "progression" from his poem of Ariadne's Lament.... his "theory of evolution".
Ahhh, but perhaps you are, as you claim, "too non-poetical"...
Evolution is merely the will to power. Just search the link for those three words.
from WtP 1067...
this, my Dionysian world of the eternally self-creating, the eternally self-destroying, this mystery world of the twofold voluptuous delight, my "beyond good and evil," without goal, unless the joy of the circle is itself a goal; without will, unless a ring feels good will toward itself--do you want a name for this world? A solution for all its riddles? A light for you, too, you best-concealed, strongest, most intrepid, most midnightly men?-- This world is the will to power--and nothing besides! And you yourselves are also this will to power--and nothing besides!
Dionysus... the unknown god, subject of Euripides Bacchae.
“I would believe only in a god who could dance. And when I saw my devil I found him serious, thorough, profound, and solemn: it was the spirit of gravity - through him all things fall.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche, "Thus Spoke Zarathustra"
In ancient Athenian culture, the Dionysia was observed, and concluded after three days with the presentation of "tragedies" and a satyr play (comedy). An outburst of creativity intended to "redeem" the three days of debauchery, and return to civilized normality. The Christian adaptation of the Roman "saturnalia' (Christmas), hardlycompares with the magnificense of the gladiatorial/ funeral Games played in the Colleseum, celebrations of the "power" of Rome.
\\For Nietzsche, evolution is the correct explanation for organic history but it results in a disastrous picture of reality, since evolution (as he saw it) has far-reaching truths for both scientific cosmology and philosophical anthropology: God is no longer necessary to account for either the existence of this universe or the emergence of our species from prehistoric animals. In fact, this philosopher held that Darwinian evolution led to a collapse of all traditional values, because both objective meaning and spiritual purpose had vanished from reality (and consequently, there can be no fixed or certain morality).
BS.
Most modern overview of it -- Universe as a sandbox in a computer.
That is... pecular type of gawd. Not vhristianic for sure. (or not?)
But... with that idea "there is no gawd" -- is totally busted.
As well as idea of "collapse of all traditional values".
What is "traditional values"??? Isn't that how people lived in this or that times?
But... there always was people who a queer or quirck, crackpots and idiots.
And it always was decided on "per case" basis, not on some general ruke of thumb.
That there is some "rules of thumb". Given by gawd. Or etc.
That is ALWAYS was just a propaganda. ;-P
\\Furthermore, he held that it is nonsense to think that the fact of evolution can ever be taught as if it were a religion (since the process of evolution contains nothing that is stable or eternal or spiritual).
Hah... he have not meet Derpy. ;-P
\\his own discovery of the individual-struggle of a few for selfcreation and excellence.
Well... I would ask to elaborate. If I would not be sure so there is nothing to elaborate. Or, it based on some bogus explanation. Or... outdated.
Like... one of the latest "revolutions" in scientific exploration of Evolution -- was rediscover of epigenetics. ;-)
Which changed whole landscape of it.
And there was many such changes. And will be more.
Evolution Theory -- it's not Classical Mechanics for you. It still far from completness.
\\it is a vitalistic force that increases the quality of life forms throughout progressive biological evolution.
Yap.
Unscientific nonsense.
To which NO mechasnism can be devised.
Yawn.
\\it is the ongoing striving toward ever-greater complexity, diversity, multiplicity and creativity.
Naah.
Imagine a book. In a library. Compact and cosyly placed on it's designated shelf in the library.
Then. Imagine that library blowed up.
Book throwed high and away. It's pages torn out. With dirt and ash there's new marks appera on that sheets.
Does it have more:
Complexity? -- Yeah
Diversity? -- Ough, yes
Multiplicity? -- for sure
and
Ccreativity? --- well, you can say so too.
Well.
THAT is how Evolution "works". ;-P
In it's "creative destruction" way.
Moscows's May Day parade pales in comparison. A revival of St. Tammany's Day... my tribute to the "American" celebrations of their own, "native" powers. Are you "getting" any of this?
No... you're stuck in Apollonia... :(
\\ An outburst of creativity intended to "redeem" the three days of debauchery, and return to civilized normality.
Punctuated equilibrium - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Punctuated_equilibri...
In evolutionary biology, punctuated equilibrium (also called punctuated equilibria) is a theory that proposes that once a species appears in the fossil ...
\\This world is the will to power--and nothing besides! And you yourselves are also this will to power--and nothing besides!
@@
Whatever.
That is a game phylosophers playing from ancient time.
Like.
The base element for everything in the Universe?
Fire, says one phylo.
No, It's WIND!!! screams another.
No, you are both dumb logs -- true UNIVERSAL and base element of the ALL is... ah... oh... burp... in agony of death screaching yet another "most wise". ;-P
PS That's why I do not call myself phylo. ;-P
;p
The "tragedy" of "power's surrender".
\\No... you're stuck in Apollonia... :(
Well. Yeah. Because fun and delight of createion -- is inaccessible for me. :-((((((
To make tings I described here -- possible through my idea.
\\Moscows's May Day parade pales in comparison.
I dunno what you refering to.
I know TOO MANY "Moscows's May Day"...
And they all different.
To understand to what exactly you are refering to.
Well... they do not do parades on the 1st of May anymore, lately.
\\ A revival of St. Tammany's Day... my tribute to the "American" celebrations of their own, "native" powers. Are you "getting" any of this?
Hardly. :-(((
You do not "love". THAT is "philo". LOVE of wisdom. Not for "profit". But for "play". A play of one's own "power".
Sorry, got to go. I've a full day. :(
\\But, through the will to power, superior individuals have the potential to master their lives (overcoming nihilism and pessimism) and the intellect to actualize creative activity.
Well.
That is what I (tryed to) demonstrate here... with my (and Lem's) ideas.
Was I successful???
\\According to Nietzsche, our biological species is the meaning and purpose of the earth so far, because it is the arrow pointing from the past ape to the future overman; this exalted but unimaginable being will be as intellectually advanced beyond the present human animal as our species is biologically advanced beyond the lowly worm!
And?
Did he have an idea of TECHNOLOGY of how to achieve it???
\\For Nietzsche, the aesthetic evolutionist as sculptor, the coming overman is like an ideal image sleeping in a crude rock. In carving this superior being, the philosopher was guided by its shadow, although he remained indifferent to the destruction resulting from his intense creativity: “Fragments fly from the stone; what is that to me?”
Oh. Yes.
He just planned to smash a rock. Aimlessly.
With a hope of some result??? :-)))))))))))))))))))))))
:)
Sisyphus is happy in his labour.
\\You do not "love". THAT is "philo". LOVE of wisdom. Not for "profit". But for "play". A play of one's own "power".
I have no toys... to play with. (wheeping)
Unlike the silenced priest Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, a geopaleontologist and Jesuit mystic, Nietzsche did not foresee a final end-goal or an ultimate omega point for human evolution. Instead, his metaphysics is grounded in the eternal recurrence of this same universe, i.e., an infinite series of identical cosmic cycles. As such, there is no progressive evolution from universe to universe. Consequently, Nietzsche’s process cosmology represents being as becoming, and its teleological evolution to the overman within each cycle is strictly determined.
Whatever you'd say. But I see it as toom boring. ;-P
Nietzsche did not speculate on life or intelligence or exoevolution elsewhere in this universe. Furthermore, this philosopher could not have imagined mass extinctions, nanotechnology, genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, and human space travel to other planets. Clearly, continuing advances in science and technology will offer awesome possibilities for neolife and overbeings in the ages ahead.
Yap.
\\Sisyphus is happy in his labour.
And what he'd do... if there'd be NO stone? ;-P
:P
there are Sisyph too ;-P
Watched? ;-)
Thing is.
I am spoiled brat. Ruined by sci-fi. ;-P
Where.
You can have delight reading about Taran.
But then, if that is not enough, you can read about John Carter on the Mars.
And if that is not enough... mutlitude adventures in space -- at your service?
Still not enough... there is adventures EVEN beyond space. ;-P
Means. Plurality is everything to me.
World with many doors. Beyond each of which opens even more doors. And higher and higher.
Means. It is near to impossible to sway me into feeling delight from the ONE.
Cause... I would not see it as daunting. Onmly as one of many.
Even if you'd think that Lem is like that ONE to me.
That'll be wrong. I see him as mere mortal. That, yes, able to open many doors... but still, he is just doorway servant.
PS I think... that was poetic, from my side.
But still, hardly it'll be in sync with how you feel.
But... do I see a problem in it? Naah. Plurality. ;-)
I watched 2/3 of it...
...and I, much like you, have varied tastes. Sci-Fi isn't really my thing though. I prefer history. The best books ever written over the past 2 millenia are available, free for the Googling, but you won't catch me reading the Nobel Prize winners (awarded on "novelty" grounds). I'd rather read Rousseau's "julie" or even deSade's "Justine" than anything on the NY Time's best selling author's list. Because THEY, the authors, interest me, not the written books themselves.
I had a blogging friend named FreeThinke (who died recently) and would only listen to music created before 1950. My taste in books was once very like his in music... but I have come to appreciate a few modern Philsophers who I ignored previously
\\I watched 2/3 of it...
Till that moment with Sisyph, I hope. :-)
Because that was that point I tryed to point to.
\\...and I, much like you, have varied tastes. Sci-Fi isn't really my thing though.
Not like I tryed to persuade you to know more sci-fi.
Still... you know quite enough, for our understanding to intesect. I hope.
Like in case with Azimov.
\\ than anything on the NY Time's best selling author's list.
And for me... that thing pretty much unexistant. ;-P
Whozzat I would say. :-)))) To even bigger dismy of Derpy. ;-P
Though I lurking your USAians social hideouts for quite a while -- I have met NOTHING of what you and Derpy refering to.
That much it is important for an average Joe... well, not that average even -- social networks that still not a place for regular lumberjacks/rednecks. :-)))))))
So... like 10% of your most enlightened people -- do not talk about such things AT ALL. ;-)
\\I had a blogging friend named FreeThinke (who died recently)
Yeah, I spotted it.
My condolences. :-(
Still, I do not know a culture that found some decent way of treating such an emotional wounds. :-(((
\\ and would only listen to music created before 1950.
Well... I myself found that my taste in music formed by 1980th.
But still... there is all time classics too. Like, Synatra? ;-)
\\My taste in books was once very like his in music... but I have come to appreciate a few modern Philsophers who I ignored previously
Dunno.
Waterfall of information is so big today.
So I forgot when it was last time when I was reading actual book. :-((((
Well... yeah, that was Lem... but that was ausio book, anyway.
Yeah, my eyes aren't what they once were. Audio books may be my future... :(
Bookshelves at home? Or library? ;-)
Well.
About History.
What do you think about modern stream of historical researches?
Like that that uses modern equipment -- to make 3D copyes of historica structures?
Or... I like that research of who historical King Arthur was (spoiler: roman legioner) ;-P
I prefer to read the original accounts and imagine. PRIMARY sources.
...lest you start chasing "ancient astronauts".
Short cryptic comments :-(
How do you like disruprion of Derpy? ;-)
He can sometimes entertain...
All opf the time... one just need to fry him, properly.;-P
Well... he found successful tactics against me, at last.
COMPLETE DENIAL. Even about content of comments just above his word.
Dunno what to do with it. :-((((
He lives in denial. Despite overwhelming evidence, he'll stick with the party line/ talking points.
Yeah... like all religious people. Ordinary. Yawn. :-)
Post a Comment