Arnold Schwarzenegger has been the Governator of California since 2003, but that was not when he launched his political career. There was a movie released a decade before he was elected that predicted his rise into government, even up to being President. That move is Demolition Man and it has been one of my favorite cult films of the 90's since around the late nineties. I was pretty amused when Schwarzenegger ran for governor, and won, as he began following in the footsteps of the "prophecy" set out for him.
Before I go any further let me summarize the premise of the movie. Silvester Stallone was an amazing cop in the 20th century, The Demolition Man. He has an enemy, Simon Phoenix, played by Wesley Snipes, Phoenix is the self proclaimed drug lord of neo-apocalypic south LA (this is what the director thought LA was like in the 90s...). Stallone apprehends Snipes, they get cyrogenically frozen as their prison sentence, but something goes wrong. In the year 2032, both of them are unfrozen and duke it out in a future world, reminiscent of Mr. Rodger's house. In the future Stallone is reinstated as a cop to apprehend Phoenix again, which is how he meets another cop, played by Sandra Bullock. Now, I will give you the scene this post regards, as you have the proper context to make sense of it without seeing the movie.
In this scene, Bullock is trying to catch Stallone's character up to date on all the happenings since he was frozen. To quote the scene in Demolition Man:
Stallone: "Hold it! The Schwarzenegger Library?"
Bullock: "Yes, the Schwarzenegger Presidential Library. Wasn't he an actor in your time?"
Stallone: "Stop! He was President?"
Bullock: "Yes. Even though he was not born in this country, his popularity at the time caused the passing of the 61st Amendment…"
Remember, this movie was released in 1993, which means it was probably filmed mostly in 1992. That means a full decade before Schwarzenegger ran for office. I am left with a few theories: Theory 1, Schwarzenegger has known for YEARS that he wants to be involved in government, and this was a tongue in teach reference to it. Theory 2, they were taking a complete stab in the dark, and make a funny joke about someone Stallone probably knew from making other action movies. Theory 3, the film makers had no idea Schwarzenegger wanted to run for office, but inadvertently set a prophecy in motion, which will only end when Schwarzenegger is President.
Who knows, either way I am greatly amused.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
Your Privacy Rights At Risk
President Obama has met with other world leaders recent about many important issues. The global economic crisis has overshadowed most of the other talks going on, but in the background, a very important legal battle is being ignored. I am referring to the government attempt to give border police the right to search and seize your computer, for no reason other than they "suspect there is pirated material on it. This is a gross abuse of personal privacy, and also a VERY inefficient way to combat Internet piracy. To be frank, there is no way to combat Internet piracy, because the Internet has no nation and thus should not be subjected to the laws of any one nation. The only way I could think of would be if an international UN tribunal, or something to that effect, was established to regulate the Internet. The video I linked mentions that China, Russia, and Brazil abstaining from the treaty. Russia and China are two of the main countries that many piracy websites operate out of, precisely because the Russian and Chinese government don't want to regulate it. Ironically, China has one of the most invasive government policies with the internet with regards to the spread of information, going so far as to ban wikipedia.
I look at what the Chinese government has done with their webspace and I worry that American legislators will try to do the same thing. I think the best response to Internet piracy is to embrace it, if people want media as direct digital downloads, give it to them. If people want cheaper music, because $1 a song is ridiculous, give it to them. It's a very profitable business model for a new band to get started online, self promoting and distributing music. By cutting out the record label a band can cut out the main tax on their revenue. One of my favorite bands of recent years is The Legion of Doom. They're a couple of DJ's that make mash up songs, and they are some of the most talented remixers I have ever listened to. Their debut album was first released as an internet download, that they encouraged people to share via peer to peer software. After a couple years the band made a limited issue CD, and it sold out almost instantaneously. I bought a copy even though I already legally had all the music on the CD, I wanted to support a band I loved. I feel this business model could be emulated by many bands, if they were smart enough to try it.
I look at what the Chinese government has done with their webspace and I worry that American legislators will try to do the same thing. I think the best response to Internet piracy is to embrace it, if people want media as direct digital downloads, give it to them. If people want cheaper music, because $1 a song is ridiculous, give it to them. It's a very profitable business model for a new band to get started online, self promoting and distributing music. By cutting out the record label a band can cut out the main tax on their revenue. One of my favorite bands of recent years is The Legion of Doom. They're a couple of DJ's that make mash up songs, and they are some of the most talented remixers I have ever listened to. Their debut album was first released as an internet download, that they encouraged people to share via peer to peer software. After a couple years the band made a limited issue CD, and it sold out almost instantaneously. I bought a copy even though I already legally had all the music on the CD, I wanted to support a band I loved. I feel this business model could be emulated by many bands, if they were smart enough to try it.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Capitalism?
A couple weeks ago I went to the War in Iraq 6th year anniversary protest, in San Francisco. I was there strictly as a photographer this time, with no intent to join the protest. I got some amazing shots, I saw a man that looked like a hippie Jesus, I saw another claiming Obama was a Marxist. I was particularly fond of the man dressed as a wall street banker, throwing blood-soaked money at police. My favorite thing all day was probably the giant Obama effigy, dressed as Uncle Sam and asking for "you" to die for him in Iraq and Afghanistan. While I was at the protest I saw something that was somewhat depressing for the radical in me, something I can only describe as "the end of Capitalism."
I was amused by the juxtaposition of the person selling peace beads surrounded by people calling for the heads of wall street bankers. At the same time though, we're in America, we're capitalists here. So what's to stop the anti-war hippie from selling their peace beads? Beads which were undoubtedly made by Chinese sweat shop labor, for a fraction of the cost they are being sold at. Simply put, there is nothing to stop that hippie, they have the right to rip off their compatriots, though I feel it's somewhat counter productive.
Counter productivity seems to be the ever increasing norm of capitalism today. I look at the wall street banks that engaged in risky lending, of questionably legality. I have to wonder, did they think that would help their long term business? In the short term they have record profits, but at the cost of alienating some of their clients in the long term, and overall hurting their business. As a country, we could invest in new technologies that would make things easier and cheaper, like cellulosic ethanol. Instead, we are suckered into fallacies like clean coal. Americans are greenwashed into following whatever they are told is for the best. Very few people truly question the nature of facts anymore, I'm saddened by the demise of the Socractic method.
I highly recommend that everyone watches the Southpark episode Bailout!, a.k.a. Margaritaville, in the current season. Thanks to contractual obligations, it won't be online again until April 25th, but on the 25th it will be available again legally and for free here. I feel this episode of Southpark aptly demonstrates the kind of ridiculous monetary practices have been going on, and how confusing the legality of it has became. This episode not only takes on banks, it also addresses the issue of how easy it is for someone to get a credit card these days. Kyle, one of the four main characters of Southpark, all children in elementary school, obtains a platinum credit card without a limit. This is pretty unrealistic, but at the same time based in truth. The credit card companies are trying to get them young these days, like the tobacco industry. I saw an ad on Myspace, the other day, for a Myspace Visa card, and I almost choked. My step-niece is in the 8th grade and has had a Myspace page for about four years, which means she probably got it when she was around 8 or 9. I personally have a problem with kids a decade too young to even own a credit card being exposed to the corrupting influence of credit cards. The proliferation of credit cards has lead directly to the proliferation of debt in this country, and I have a problem with that. Especially when responsible taxpayers, like my mom and myself, will have to pay for these debts in the end. I still do not own a single credit card in my name, only one my mother gave me to pay for school expenses, and emergencies.
My main opposition to credit cards is because of the shocking example of my father. My dad has a half dozen credit cards and thousands of dollars in debt, I think that is ridiculous. There is no reason for someone to have that many cards, and to be allowed to get that deep in the hole. It's really his own fault, there is no denying that. Debt starts when someone is forced to live outside their means, either by spending frivolously or by not being paid a livable wage. My father's case is a combination of the two, he is 73 and on social security, but he still works. Despite this it is not enough for him to live, so he ends up charging a lot of his expenses to his credit cards.
In contrast to people like my father, we have people in this country that feel they have enough money to spend $20 on a plastic bottle of water. The very premise of H2O Bling is disgusting, like all bottled water. Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of mineral water, like San Pellegrino. Morally, I think the idea of selling someone normal water for outrageous prices is repugnant. It's a matter of extremes, selling a bottle of water for 50 cents or a dollar might be reasonable, but there is no way to say $20 for a bottle of water is reasonable.
I was amused by the juxtaposition of the person selling peace beads surrounded by people calling for the heads of wall street bankers. At the same time though, we're in America, we're capitalists here. So what's to stop the anti-war hippie from selling their peace beads? Beads which were undoubtedly made by Chinese sweat shop labor, for a fraction of the cost they are being sold at. Simply put, there is nothing to stop that hippie, they have the right to rip off their compatriots, though I feel it's somewhat counter productive.
Counter productivity seems to be the ever increasing norm of capitalism today. I look at the wall street banks that engaged in risky lending, of questionably legality. I have to wonder, did they think that would help their long term business? In the short term they have record profits, but at the cost of alienating some of their clients in the long term, and overall hurting their business. As a country, we could invest in new technologies that would make things easier and cheaper, like cellulosic ethanol. Instead, we are suckered into fallacies like clean coal. Americans are greenwashed into following whatever they are told is for the best. Very few people truly question the nature of facts anymore, I'm saddened by the demise of the Socractic method.
I highly recommend that everyone watches the Southpark episode Bailout!, a.k.a. Margaritaville, in the current season. Thanks to contractual obligations, it won't be online again until April 25th, but on the 25th it will be available again legally and for free here. I feel this episode of Southpark aptly demonstrates the kind of ridiculous monetary practices have been going on, and how confusing the legality of it has became. This episode not only takes on banks, it also addresses the issue of how easy it is for someone to get a credit card these days. Kyle, one of the four main characters of Southpark, all children in elementary school, obtains a platinum credit card without a limit. This is pretty unrealistic, but at the same time based in truth. The credit card companies are trying to get them young these days, like the tobacco industry. I saw an ad on Myspace, the other day, for a Myspace Visa card, and I almost choked. My step-niece is in the 8th grade and has had a Myspace page for about four years, which means she probably got it when she was around 8 or 9. I personally have a problem with kids a decade too young to even own a credit card being exposed to the corrupting influence of credit cards. The proliferation of credit cards has lead directly to the proliferation of debt in this country, and I have a problem with that. Especially when responsible taxpayers, like my mom and myself, will have to pay for these debts in the end. I still do not own a single credit card in my name, only one my mother gave me to pay for school expenses, and emergencies.
My main opposition to credit cards is because of the shocking example of my father. My dad has a half dozen credit cards and thousands of dollars in debt, I think that is ridiculous. There is no reason for someone to have that many cards, and to be allowed to get that deep in the hole. It's really his own fault, there is no denying that. Debt starts when someone is forced to live outside their means, either by spending frivolously or by not being paid a livable wage. My father's case is a combination of the two, he is 73 and on social security, but he still works. Despite this it is not enough for him to live, so he ends up charging a lot of his expenses to his credit cards.
In contrast to people like my father, we have people in this country that feel they have enough money to spend $20 on a plastic bottle of water. The very premise of H2O Bling is disgusting, like all bottled water. Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of mineral water, like San Pellegrino. Morally, I think the idea of selling someone normal water for outrageous prices is repugnant. It's a matter of extremes, selling a bottle of water for 50 cents or a dollar might be reasonable, but there is no way to say $20 for a bottle of water is reasonable.
Friday, March 27, 2009
My First Appearance on CNN
I'm sure many of you have been reading and liking my essays on the legalization of marijuana and hemp. It would seem that CNN also liked what I have to say, because on Wednesday the 25th, I had the pleasure of being a featured webcam comment on CNN's Headline news. Originally they told me I would have about 20-30 seconds, but they ended up leaving my comment at it's full length of just over 40 seconds. I was responding to questions asked about Mexico's cartel wars, namely "Should the US send more troops to the boarder?" Please go view the video here.
I have also entered into CNN's current I-Report contest, on the same topic I spoke on the other day. The winners of the contest will have their clips shown on CNN, I can only hope to get more air time for my side of the issue. I have made a second installment of my argument for legalization to submit to the contest, it can be viewed here. I would appreciate it if you all go view the videos, and share them around. The more people that can see these the better, people should be informed.
I have also entered into CNN's current I-Report contest, on the same topic I spoke on the other day. The winners of the contest will have their clips shown on CNN, I can only hope to get more air time for my side of the issue. I have made a second installment of my argument for legalization to submit to the contest, it can be viewed here. I would appreciate it if you all go view the videos, and share them around. The more people that can see these the better, people should be informed.
Monday, March 16, 2009
March for Higher Education
I am very new to protesting, my first protest was against proposition 8, right around the time of the election back in November. Monday I went to my first march, and last weekend was my first excursion to Sacramento. I really enjoyed it, both the city of Sacramento itself and all the people I met there, as well as the March. In fact, I am considering going into SF for the Iraq War Anniversary protest this weekend. Not so much because I want to protest the war, I will have a sign I imagine, but my main goal would be to take pictures. I've realized that I really enjoy taking rally/protest pictures. The first pictures along these lines I took were on 4/20 2008, at the big celebration at UCSC. The UC tried to lock down the campus by not allowing any traffic on unless by special permit, and not letting the buses on either. This meant that for the majority of the people going to 4/20, we had to walk from over a mile away. I personally walked nearly 2 miles from my parking spot to the Porter field, where the celebration takes place. That wasn't so much a rally or a protest, as people trying to have fun and facing harsh opposition, but I digress.
Monday was very different than 4/20, today was a formalized march with police enforcement. Having all of those police around was a little unsettling for me, I kept expecting someone to do something stupid then a fight to start and escalate to police brutality. It was a pretty tame protest all things considered. I ran out of the group to throw my coffee cup away as soon as I could, which happened to be in front of a hotel. One of the guys that worked at the Hotel moved over to intercept me, as if he expected me to do something "radical." When I got to the trash can before him, and he saw I was just throwing something away he nodded nervously, then moved away when I got back into line. That was probably the closet thing to "radical" behavior I saw.
I felt a little lost at first, since I went there on my own, instead of with the rest of SJSU. I had been in Sacramento since Saturday, for a friend's birthday party. When I first got to Raley field I was pretty confused, I didn't know why we were protesting at a baseball field. I heard the SJSU group coming, joined up with them, and my friends from political science filled me in on the details, namely the fact that a march implies marching somewhere. It had not previously occurred to me that "March for Higher Education," was in fact a double entendre, it was a march in march. Up until this point I thought the name simply meant it was in March.
The March itself was pretty uneventful, I made a lot of jokes about protesting and collective action, tasteful and not demeaning. After passing countless police and security professionals, we finally got to the steps of the capital. The energy was pretty high for a while, but it died off when the speakers started. Some were better than others, and it's hard for me to pick a best speaker since many were quite good. There was an obvious worst speaker though, and that was the lieutenant governor. All he managed to do was parrot our own slogans back to us, in a 5 minute speak he must have used the phrase "doors of education" at least two dozen times. He actually managed to break John McCain's "Joe the Plumber" record, which is pretty amazing.
On the walk back to my car, I noticed a homeless camp along the banks of the river we crossed while marching. I stopped to take a picture of it, because it was touching for me. I was there to protest budget cuts, that keep kids out of college, when kids can't get into college what options do they have? Menial jobs, crime, or homelessness, at least those are my feelings on it. After I took my pictures a nearby man approached me, and asked if I was a writer. I said yes, since I already expected to blog about my day, and the man began to tell me a bit about himself and his two friends. The three of them were the homeless men living at the camp I just photographed, and they were there watching and supporting the students. He told me to "tell the people how we feel." I'm assuming he meant to tell either the students or the legislators, and I'm sure the we referred to the homeless. I will do my best to keep my word to him, because people need to know, about the plight of the homeless, the plight of the students, and the impotence our of legislators. This blog is only the beginning of my involvement. After the march I really want to be more involved in student protesting, against the budget cuts and prop 8 namely, but I will undoubtedly find more projects to work on.
See pictures I took of the protest here.
Monday was very different than 4/20, today was a formalized march with police enforcement. Having all of those police around was a little unsettling for me, I kept expecting someone to do something stupid then a fight to start and escalate to police brutality. It was a pretty tame protest all things considered. I ran out of the group to throw my coffee cup away as soon as I could, which happened to be in front of a hotel. One of the guys that worked at the Hotel moved over to intercept me, as if he expected me to do something "radical." When I got to the trash can before him, and he saw I was just throwing something away he nodded nervously, then moved away when I got back into line. That was probably the closet thing to "radical" behavior I saw.
I felt a little lost at first, since I went there on my own, instead of with the rest of SJSU. I had been in Sacramento since Saturday, for a friend's birthday party. When I first got to Raley field I was pretty confused, I didn't know why we were protesting at a baseball field. I heard the SJSU group coming, joined up with them, and my friends from political science filled me in on the details, namely the fact that a march implies marching somewhere. It had not previously occurred to me that "March for Higher Education," was in fact a double entendre, it was a march in march. Up until this point I thought the name simply meant it was in March.
The March itself was pretty uneventful, I made a lot of jokes about protesting and collective action, tasteful and not demeaning. After passing countless police and security professionals, we finally got to the steps of the capital. The energy was pretty high for a while, but it died off when the speakers started. Some were better than others, and it's hard for me to pick a best speaker since many were quite good. There was an obvious worst speaker though, and that was the lieutenant governor. All he managed to do was parrot our own slogans back to us, in a 5 minute speak he must have used the phrase "doors of education" at least two dozen times. He actually managed to break John McCain's "Joe the Plumber" record, which is pretty amazing.
On the walk back to my car, I noticed a homeless camp along the banks of the river we crossed while marching. I stopped to take a picture of it, because it was touching for me. I was there to protest budget cuts, that keep kids out of college, when kids can't get into college what options do they have? Menial jobs, crime, or homelessness, at least those are my feelings on it. After I took my pictures a nearby man approached me, and asked if I was a writer. I said yes, since I already expected to blog about my day, and the man began to tell me a bit about himself and his two friends. The three of them were the homeless men living at the camp I just photographed, and they were there watching and supporting the students. He told me to "tell the people how we feel." I'm assuming he meant to tell either the students or the legislators, and I'm sure the we referred to the homeless. I will do my best to keep my word to him, because people need to know, about the plight of the homeless, the plight of the students, and the impotence our of legislators. This blog is only the beginning of my involvement. After the march I really want to be more involved in student protesting, against the budget cuts and prop 8 namely, but I will undoubtedly find more projects to work on.
See pictures I took of the protest here.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Cinequest Film Festival: Review
A friend of mine was working for the Cinequest film festival that's been going on in San Jose for the past week or so. This weekend was unfortunately the last of the festival, the two films I saw were so amazing, I wish I had the time to go see more.
The film I saw was a documentary called Witch Hunt. It will be airing on MSNBC on April 12th, but I do not know at what time. Witch Hunt focused on Bakersfield, Kern County California, in the mid 80's they elected a new district attorney with a tough on crime platform. He was so tough on crime, that he began fabricating child molestation cases. He based convictions on the testimony of 6 year old children, browbeaten into following leading questions to convict their own parents of the most horrible falsehoods. It began with one man John Stoll, in 1984 he was recovering from a messy divorce with a vindictive ex wife. His wife wanted sole custody of their child and was willing to destroy their son's life to get it, so she lied to him about being molested and got him to lie to the police.
This process went on for years, in total about three dozen people were convicted, most were working class or middle class parents, most had no previous criminal records. Eventually, after rotting in jail for a almost a decade, the first of the convictions was overturned, and paved the way for the rest of the innocents to be released. John Stoll, the first to be jailed, unfortunately was also the last one out, serving a total of 20 years out of a 40 year sentence. Other parents had obscenely long sentences, some set a new record for the highest sentence ever in Kern county, at 373 years. All of the parents were innocent from the beginning. Most of the kids have come forward to tell the truth about the situation as well, and despite all this no one has pressed charges against the authorities for any of it.
The second film I saw was Johnny Mad Dog and it was one of the best films I have seen in a long, long time. It was a fiction about child soldiers fighting for freedom in Liberia, but it was very realistic and very gritty, using ex-child soldiers as actors in the movie. This movie is not for the faint of heart, it is most realistic depiction of what life is like for these kids. Or at least I think, no one in America really knows much since we aren't involved in the conflict, even through our UN participation. The only things America sends to Africa, since Somalia, are condoms and money, but I digress.
If you liked Full Metal Jacket, you will love Johnny Mad Dog, as there are many parallels in the plot of both movies. At the end of the movie I felt depressed yet inspired, happy to be alive, and very happy not to live in that kind of a world. I couldn't cut it, I'm too used to life in "civilized" American society. At the same time, I doubt they could survive in America, without being jailed at least. All those child soldiers are taught, from the youngest of ages, is killing, rape, and looting. It's a horrible thing to conscript children as young as ten to do these acts, as was the case for Johnny Mad Dog, the main character of the film.
The film I saw was a documentary called Witch Hunt. It will be airing on MSNBC on April 12th, but I do not know at what time. Witch Hunt focused on Bakersfield, Kern County California, in the mid 80's they elected a new district attorney with a tough on crime platform. He was so tough on crime, that he began fabricating child molestation cases. He based convictions on the testimony of 6 year old children, browbeaten into following leading questions to convict their own parents of the most horrible falsehoods. It began with one man John Stoll, in 1984 he was recovering from a messy divorce with a vindictive ex wife. His wife wanted sole custody of their child and was willing to destroy their son's life to get it, so she lied to him about being molested and got him to lie to the police.
This process went on for years, in total about three dozen people were convicted, most were working class or middle class parents, most had no previous criminal records. Eventually, after rotting in jail for a almost a decade, the first of the convictions was overturned, and paved the way for the rest of the innocents to be released. John Stoll, the first to be jailed, unfortunately was also the last one out, serving a total of 20 years out of a 40 year sentence. Other parents had obscenely long sentences, some set a new record for the highest sentence ever in Kern county, at 373 years. All of the parents were innocent from the beginning. Most of the kids have come forward to tell the truth about the situation as well, and despite all this no one has pressed charges against the authorities for any of it.
The second film I saw was Johnny Mad Dog and it was one of the best films I have seen in a long, long time. It was a fiction about child soldiers fighting for freedom in Liberia, but it was very realistic and very gritty, using ex-child soldiers as actors in the movie. This movie is not for the faint of heart, it is most realistic depiction of what life is like for these kids. Or at least I think, no one in America really knows much since we aren't involved in the conflict, even through our UN participation. The only things America sends to Africa, since Somalia, are condoms and money, but I digress.
If you liked Full Metal Jacket, you will love Johnny Mad Dog, as there are many parallels in the plot of both movies. At the end of the movie I felt depressed yet inspired, happy to be alive, and very happy not to live in that kind of a world. I couldn't cut it, I'm too used to life in "civilized" American society. At the same time, I doubt they could survive in America, without being jailed at least. All those child soldiers are taught, from the youngest of ages, is killing, rape, and looting. It's a horrible thing to conscript children as young as ten to do these acts, as was the case for Johnny Mad Dog, the main character of the film.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Women Sues UC Berkeley Over Evolution
Recently, a devote literal christian sued UC Berkeley for having a web page endorsing religion, and stating that religion and evolution are compatible. The women suing, Jeanne Caldwell, says that Christianity and evolution cannot be compatible, and has appealed her case to the US Supreme Court, after being rebuffed by the lower courts. The courts say she has no case because the web page hasn't done real damage to her, in a legal sense, so she has no grounds to sue. Even more than that, the establishment clause prevents the government from endorsing religion, not scientific doctrines. In fact the constitution is silent on the grounds of which scientific doctrines to endorse. I'm shocked and appalled that this frivolous case has gotten so far, it makes light of our legal system. Some people might call her actions being a real American, fighting in defense of the ~60% of American's that do not believe in (evolution). I would call her actions ludicrous, and I would call her a damned busy body. I'm all for free speech, and free expression, but when it comes to wasting everyone's tax dollars in court to do it, I say screw that.
If you want to know more, go here to read the story on this lawsuit in detail.
I know I have some Christians that read this blog, what are your opinions on this? I feel people have a right to believe whatever they want, for this case evolution OR creation, or both. I tend to think god(s), in its/their ever abounding wisdom would create beings with the capability to evolve. I hate it when people like this woman try to force their opinions on other people, and attempt to set back civilization by dismantling science.
If you want to know more, go here to read the story on this lawsuit in detail.
I know I have some Christians that read this blog, what are your opinions on this? I feel people have a right to believe whatever they want, for this case evolution OR creation, or both. I tend to think god(s), in its/their ever abounding wisdom would create beings with the capability to evolve. I hate it when people like this woman try to force their opinions on other people, and attempt to set back civilization by dismantling science.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)