AmeriCAN-DO Attitude

Are you an AmeriCAN or an AmeriCAN'T?

How the Left Views Disease Prevention

UPDATE 05/05/20: Kylee Zempel is on the same page:  “It’s Hard to Take the Left’s Abortion Arguments Seriously When They Betray Them for COVID-19

It is interesting to think about our reaction to the spread of disease.

Think of STDs (Sexually Transmitted Diseases)…

How does the Left react to the common sense prevention of the spread of STDs of abstinence and saving sex for marriage?

Think of AIDS (Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) and HIV (human immunodeficiency virus)…

How did the Left react to the common sense prevention of the spread of HIV of abstinence and saving sex for marriage?

Think of how the Left views an “unwanted pregnancy” as a “disease”…

How does the Left react to the common sense — 100% effective (save for rape) — prevention of “unwanted pregnancy” of abstinence and saving sex for marriage

Meanwhile, think of the attitude of the Left when it comes to dealing with “unwanted pregnancy”…

They not only support, but actually promote and are proud of the mass murder of babies in the womb.

The Left promotes killing babies in order to not have their lives “inconvenienced”.

Think of the actress Michelle Williams’ Golden Globe speech where she stated that in order to continue living the life she wanted, she was proud to have killed her baby.

Now think of how the Left is reacting to SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Corona Virus-2)…

Suddenly, they are all about destroying the livelihoods of every American “if it saves one life”.  The complete opposite of their argument in favor of killing with abortion, and taking one life, in order to keep their livelihood.

(Not to mention, the complete opposite of their actions during every other virus outbreaks in recent history:  (H1N1 in 2009, SARS in 2003, MERS in 2012, etc.))


In fact, they are 100% in favor of government-mandated and government-enforced “abstinence” from public life.  Not to mention, mandates to wear masks in public, in stores, in restaurants and in work offices.

And no longer does “my body, my choice” come into play.

Except of course when they continue to deem the mass murder of babies as “essential” business.

Interesting how that works, eh?

Did you know that in 2017, women in Michigan chose to have 26,594 abortions?

That comes to 2,216 dead babies per month.

At last count, Michigan had 4,020 deaths due to COVID-19. Over 3 months, that comes to 1,340 per month.

In other words, on average, more babies are killed in the state of Michigan per month than have died per month of COVID-19.

Let that sink in…

May 3, 2020 , 10:11AM Posted by | Abortion, Abstinence, Democrats, Healthcare, Liberalism, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

I Have Never Been So Depressed about the State of Government in My Life

This pretty much says it all:

I’ve been pretty much ignoring this fucking sideshow. Why? Because either it will pass, and thus confirm the fecklessness, cowardice, and moral vacuity of most of our elected officials; or it will fail by the narrowest of margins, which simply means that the thieves couldn’t agree on how to split up the booty. Tax-paying citizens protest outside in their thousands; inside the chamber, the Representatives dismiss them as “tea-baggers” and chortle to themselves how they can make up their own rules.

I have never been so depressed about the state of my government in my life, not even during the worst moments of the Iraq War. At least then I had the sense that our concerns were being listened to (if not agreed with). Now? Our nation is being led by three people — Obama, Pelosi, and Reid — who seem to feel that the 2008 vote granted them the power to act by imperial edict and bureaucratic fiat.

My gloom isn’t founded in this particular bill, per se: it is another outrage piled on top of many others, but life will go on. But something has been broken during this process that won’t go together again. It’s not simply the urge of many democrats towards the institution of tyrannical rule by “soft” despots; it’s not simply the inability of our political system to react to the will of the people rather than pressure by victim-groups. No, it’s a breaking of a belief I’ve always had that Americans mostly want the same things, that whatever the means we want pretty much the same ends — a ‘good life’, and an ability to control our own destinies and profit from the fruits of our own labors. To make our own way in society as our desires and skills allow.

The past couple of years have broken that implicit contract Americans have always lived by. Democrats will insist that it was done in the name of brotherhood and mercy for the poor and sick, but the reality is that it was done for the usual reasons: greed, fear, arrogance, and the will to power. Oh, there will be a thin wallpaper of process and rules over the filthy lies and deal-making, but it will fool no one. The murder was committed in broad daylight, and in front of millions of witnesses.

At some point the breaking-strain will be reached. I don’t know when — people are able to delude themselves for a long time that things aren’t really as bad as they are. Tyrannies can persist for years, even decades. However strong they look on the surface, though, the rot once begun is very hard to reverse. It eats away at the foundations until the whole structure topples.

Americans are divided so fundamentally on basic issues that I don’t see how we can continue as we are indefinitely. We are not a “people” united by a common set of beliefs. We are a huge collection of warring factions, interest-groups, and ideological philosophies. Our main point of cohesion in times past was our Constitution, but even that is now broken. A house divided against itself cannot stand, as both Jesus and Abraham Lincoln understood.

It will come to bloodletting, I think; there can be no other way. The tyrant’s final legacy is always coercion and force, and a free man’s response to such a thing is — it must be — to resist that force by all means necessary.

Posted by: Monty at March 21, 2010 11:31 AM


Hell even I,pessimist and cynic that I am allowed myself to believe healthcare was dead.

Not me. The Democrats will not have another opportunity like this for another generation at least: supermajorities in both House and Senate, and a far-left Democrat President. That’s why they’re trying to run the table now; they know full well that they may not ever have another chance like this one to push the liberal wish-list into law.

This is what conservatives didn’t understand until recently. Many on the left are completely willing to take a drubbing in 2010 as long as the liberal apparatus is set up, because while political fortunes may wax and wane, entitlement programs are forever once enacted. And when the wheel turns in 2012 or 2016, liberals will come back to the fold to find their favorite programs still in place.

This is called “the liberal ratchet effect”.

I suspect that only a huge and systemic social/ecnomic failure would motivate the people to reverse these programs: Medicare, Medicaid, public pensions, and now (apparently) a public health system. But the costs of that kind of collapse are grievous; it’s possible that America as a political entity would not survive it.

Posted by: Monty at March 21, 2010 11:56 AM


The first internecene war I forsee in the coming years is the old against the young. Retired Americans are going to be drawing far more, per capita, from the various entitlement programs than they ever put in. Medicaid will bankrupt the states as inevitably as the sunrise (and the current bill actually makes that problem worse by increasing the state funding for Medicaid). Medicare and Social Security will gobble up ever increasing percentages of the US GDP. The only answer is to reduce the entitlements or somehow manufacture an enormous amount of new wealth. And since the latter option is highly unlikely, that leaves only cuts to benefits and higher taxes.

Grammy and Grampy are going to fight like demons to keep their entitlements. Politicians are scared of them because they vote. Companies like them because they tend to have money to spend. But to keep the money-train moving, that means that Junior is going to have to work like an indentured servant for years and years to make sure Grammy and Grampy can keep taking the RV down to Arizona every winter. It means living on beets and boiled eggs so Grammy can get her hip replacement for only a $100 co-pay; it means living in a 2-room apartment with a balky toilet so Grampy can buy his Viagra and still afford to pay for the charter fishing-boat. And since Grammy and Grampy didn’t save nearly enough money of their own to last for 25 or 30 years of retirement (given the longer lifespans now common in the West), they’ll continue to draw down Social Security for many years longer than the actuaries thought they would.

This war is going to be a very ugly one, way worse than the “generation gap” stuff of the 1960’s. Basically, younger workers are going to be asked to support retirees but without any real assurance that they themselves will be supported in their own retirements (because the system will be bankrupt by then).

Posted by: Monty at March 21, 2010 12:13 PM


But the costs of that kind of collapse are grievous; it’s possible that America as a political entity would not survive it.

Monty I think we are breaking new ground here. I have NEVER in my life seen the average citizen stirred up as they are now. Even during the turbulent 60s they liked to make out that the country was under severe upheaval but it was only a very small minority that was causing the problems then. All that upheaval was really nothing more than press hype.

Truly the last time we had this level of animosity towards Washington was the months leading into the War Between the States. The difference is this time it is not sectional. It is economic and urban vs rural so it makes things even worse.

All that being said, I don’t think that it necessarily leads to bloodshed or a civil war. This IS new ground so the outcome is up in the air. The elections this year are what I think will be the determining factor. This country simply can not stand another two years of communist control of all three branches of government.

If the Republicans fail to take at least one of the houses of congress it will be all over. We will collapse economically. That will happen when the Chinese quit buying our debt (already starting) and Moody’s downgrades our paper.

If the Republicans take a house and stop the left drift we still may be able to save it, particularly if they follow up in 2012 with the Senate and the President. Perhaps they can actually turn some of it back.

Posted by: Vic at March 21, 2010 12:16 PM


The next war is going to be the private-sector workers versus the public-sector. If you aggregate all the various city, county, state, and federal workers, they account for more than 20% of the entire workforce. In some states — like California — the percentage is even higher. But here’s the thing: those employees don’t actually create wealth. They are supported by tax dollars, and thus are a drain on wealth. And almost all of them are making more than their private-sector peers, with pension and health benefits that are often guaranteed by law.

Private-sector workers are now living in an environment where they make less money, have to fund their own retirements via 401(k) type programs, labor under an increasingly-onerous tax burden, and face a government that is objectively hostile to a free-market philosophy that would improve their future prospects.

The latter group — getting poorer every year in absolute terms — is going to be jawboned into paying higher taxes to the former group — getting richer every year in absolute terms — as a result of laws passed years and sometimes decades ago by the very people who stand to benefit from them now.

California is the bellwether here, followed by Michigan, New Jersey, and Rhode Island. People will either vote with their feet, or will riot in the streets when taxes push the quality of life to an intolerable level. Either way: social unrest and bitter enemies that used to be fellow-citizens.

Posted by: Monty at March 21, 2010 12:25 PM


Not necessarily true. I am looking at what I put in vs what I am likely to get out and it is much lower than what I put in.

Vic, you are one of the wise ones, then. Statistically, Baby Boomers as a group will retire with less than $60K in the bank. Medicare and Medicaid expenses are going to skyrocket as Boomers age because the bulk of any medical expense in any person’s life clusters in the last ten years of life. And Boomers (as a demographic) are used to having everything — they will demand every test and procedure possible to keep going for as long as possible. And no politician who values his job is going to tell them, “No, Mabel, we’re not going to pay for that hip replacement because you’re 85 years old and it doesn’t make any medical or financial sense.”

I don’t mean to suggest that all Boomers are narcissistic spendthrifts — but they are a huge demographic, and they more than any other demographic formed the core of the “consumer culture”. They tend overwhelmingly liberal in political outlook, which makes the prospect of substantial reform very remote indeed.

Posted by: Monty at March 21, 2010 12:35 PM


These clowns are simply Catholics of convenience.

I have many disagreements with Catholic thought on health-care. The major disagreement is the Catholic belief that health-care is a “human right”. I don’t think that health-care is any more a natural “right” than the “right” to a pedicure or a haircut. Health-care is a service, one that is expensive to provide and does not have unlimited resources available.

Catholics (sincerely, for the most part) consider health-care to be bound up in notions of human dignity. I’ve always disagreed with this. Yes, illness is often undignified and debilitating. But this is true of so many things, and is often the results of poor personal choices. If you choose to be a lifelong smoker, then you also “own” the COPD and emphysema and lung cancer that will ensue. If you eat two Whoppers and a large fries every day, you “own” the obesity and heart-disease that will come after. It is unethical to expect the rest of society to subsidize your bad decisions. (But it is also unethical for society to demonize your choices; if you choose to smoke and accept the consequences of that decision, then hey: smoke away!)

This is why socialized medicine is inevitably a much less humane healthcare structure than a market-driven approach. Only you can make the best decisions regarding your own health: your motivations are your own, not that of some bureaucrat you’ve never met. You will always care more about yourself and your family than the government ever will.

Posted by: Monty at March 21, 2010 12:50 PM


Monty, don’t bash the baby boomers so much.

It’s not bashing to speak the truth. I’m not making a value judgement about every single person born between 1945 and 1960 — I’m simply saying that demographics at this level are obvious and inevitable. The only possible way to solve the coming medicare/medicaid/SS disaster is for old folks to accept benefit cuts… which they (as a group) will never, ever do.

It’s a problem of basic fairness, and goes back nearly sixty or seventy years to promises made by FDR and other politicians since: how much societal support do you deserve versus how much do you need? How much of that expense should be born by generations who come later, and who will have to accept a considerable reduction in quality-of-life to honor those promises made by politicians all those years ago?

Civilization should not be a lottery, where you can get an award simply for successfully growing old. It should not penalize the young to benefit the old because it is the young who keep civilization on a paying basis. We owe our older folks dignity and respect, and I’ve always felt that an essential component of dignity and respect is to treat people like adults. To maintain this entitlement fiction for older folks is to treat them like children; that we will continue to lie to them because a lie is easier than the truth.

Posted by: Monty at March 21, 2010 01:06 PM

March 21, 2010 , 12:20PM Posted by | Barack Obama, Democrats, Economy, Healthcare, Liberalism, Socialism | Comments Off on I Have Never Been So Depressed about the State of Government in My Life

Obamacare has Gone from a Mere Political Debacle to a F#cking Outrage

Could not have expressed it any better:

This ObamaCare thing has gone from a mere political debacle to a fucking outrage. This is some shameless shit. I cannot understand why people aren’t standing around the White House this very momemt threatening an uprising if the Democrats pull this shit.

The so-called “Slaughter rule” is the most blatantly unconstitutional (in spirit, if not the letter) congressional act I have ever heard tell of. This is the act of a political party and political philosophy that no longer even gives lip service to constitutional government. It is the act of tyrants.

Now that is has become obvious that Democrats are resolved to take this hill or die trying, the question then becomes: what do we do about it? What do you do when the political process no longer works? Indeed, when the political process has been bent and twisted to such a point that it longer even serves the people for whom it ostensibly exists? It won’t help to send Republicans to Congress this fall because a) I have no confidence that they’ll be able to roll back this health-care calamity even if they wanted to, and b) their demonstrated incompetence and corruption in office is only slightly less blatant than that of the Democrats they are replacing.

There has got to be some point where a citizen can stand up and say, Enough is enough. Fire them all, every single one of them, and start over.

Posted by: Monty at March 14, 2010 02:10 PM

More good analysis from Monty:

Driving around, I still see Obama bumper stickers, and I wonder, who the hell could still possibly be a supporter?

I know some black musicians who are still totally ga-ga over Bammer, and I asked them the same question: looked at objectively, what has this jug-eared douchebag ever done for you? Democratic political philosophy in fact can be seen as incredibly hostile towards males in general, and minority males in particular. Their job prospects are vastly lower, their contributions to society are denigrated; their position in the family is usurped by the government via welfare programs and societal feminization agenda; their votes are taken for granted by a political apparatus that uses them more shamelessly than a john uses a $20 whore. And still they sing his praises.

I have (reluctantly) come to the conclusion that Black americans are still light-years away from joining any conservative/libertarian ethos. There are complicated reasons why this is so, but I think at base it is simply that blacks view big government as a good thing, not a bad thing — not irrationally, given the reality of American history. But in evolutionary terms, this adaptation is no longer healthy but is in fact killing them. Illigitimate births now number around 70% of all live births among blacks, and marriage is almost unheard-of for those under 40. The women are the de facto heads of the family, with the Government filling the role of the father. Meanwhile, black males continue to be marginalized and infantilized.

Unless things change, much the same might become the case for Hispanics. Their demographic shares many of the same characteristics of the black families of the 1920’s and 1930’s: strongly religious, well-estabished families where marriage was encouraged and supported, a strong work-ethic, and a culture of striving and work rather than grievance and victimhood. But that is also changing as the newer generation takes over from the old.

It’s not a race thing any more, I don’t think. Lower-class whites are suffering from the exact same pressures as lower-class blacks and hispanics. The issue now is that of a culture that disdains the very thing that makes families and cultures strong — family life, religious belief, a strong work ethic, and a spirit of self-sufficiency and civic-mindedness. The Democrat party of today stands pretty clearly against all those things — objectively so, given the policies they pursue.

Posted by: Monty at March 14, 2010 02:36 PM

I would add that it is not just the Democrat Party which stands against those things. So too does Hollywood, the “entertainment” industry, the mass media, the Teachers unions (and thus our grammar and high schools) and our nation’s universities and professors. Our nation is getting hit with this despicable mentality from every single direction — from government to mass media to our “entertainment” industry to our school system. America-hating, Capitalism-hating and morals-hating liberals have successfully taken over this nation and are working to destroy it from within. Do we have enough Americans left who are willing to fight to stop this?

March 14, 2010 , 2:48PM Posted by | Barack Obama, Democrats, Economy, Healthcare, Liberalism, Marriage, Media Bias, Morals, Public Education, Socialism | Comments Off on Obamacare has Gone from a Mere Political Debacle to a F#cking Outrage

All Americans Should Not Have to Pay for Some Americans’ Misdeeds, Bad Habits or Stupid Choices

Good post by “zombie” regarding the debate over whether or not America should implement universal, single-payer health care: Why America Hates Universal Health Care: The Real Reason

An excerpt:

A built-in false assumption with the health-care debate is that sickness is always no-fault sickness. It’s never socially acceptable to assign blame for people’s medical problems — especially blame on the patient.

But I’m not afraid to confess that I’m a judgmental person. And I’m pretty confident that most Americans who oppose socialized medicine share this same judgment: that some people are partly or entirely to blame for their unwellness.

I’m perfectly willing to provide subsidized health care to people who are suffering due to no fault of their own. But in those cases — which, unfortunately, constitute perhaps a majority of all cases — where the unwellness is a consequence of the patient’s own misdeeds, bad habits, or stupid choices, I feel a deep-seated resentment that the rest of us should pick up the tab to fix medical problems that never should have happened in the first place.

I’m speaking specifically of medical problems caused by:

• Obesity
• Cigarette smoking
• Alcohol abuse
• Reckless behavior
• Criminal activity
• Unprotected promiscuous sex
• Use of illicit drugs
• Cultural traditions
• Bad diets

Now, I really don’t care if you overeat, smoke like a chimney, hump like a bunny or forget to lock the safety mechanism on your pistol as you jam it in your waistband. Fine by me. And as a laissez-faire social-libertarian live-and-let-live kind of person, I would never under normal circumstances condemn anyone for any of the behaviors listed above. That is: Until the bill for your stupidity shows up in my mailbox. Then suddenly, I’m forced to care about what you do, because I’m being forced to pay for the consequences.

What I don’t like about the very concept of universal health care is that it compels me to become my brother’s keeper and insert myself into the moral decisions of his life. I’d rather grant each person maximum freedom. I’d prefer to let people make whatever choices they want, however stupid or dangerous I may deem those choices to be. Just so long as you take responsibility for your actions, and you reap the consequences and pay for them yourself — hey, be as foolish or hedonistic or selfish or thoughtless as you like. Not my business.

But if the bill for your foolishness shows up in the form of higher taxes on me, then I unwillingly start to care what you do. And, trust me on this, you don’t want me turning my heartless judgmental eye on your foolish lifestyle. Because I’d have no qualms criticizing half the stuff you do.

Do you want that? No. Do I want that? No. And that’s the point. [ … ]

Also, a good comment left in the comments section:

stuiec on Dec 15, 2009 at 3:57 pm:

Hmmm. Isn’t your doctor supposed to tell you frankly about how you can improve your present health and avoid future disease? I prefer having my doctor tell me to lose weight than to have my city ban trans-fats or tax soft drinks: I can take or leave my doctor’s advice based on my own judgment but the actions of my city (or state, or national) government reduce my freedom.

One of the related problems our society has is the inability to accept any bad outcome, regardless of cause or fault. For example, I would be fine with a law that said that ambulance crews have the right to refuse treatment to motorcyclists who are injured while riding without a helmet – but apparently either I am in a tiny minority or my elected representatives think that I am, and so every motorcyclist has to relinquish the freedom to choose to go without a helmet.

If you prohibit someone from doing something stupid that they really want to do, even though you do it for “their own good,” they aren’t going to thank you for saving them from something that might never happen – they’ll resent you for not letting them make their own damn mistakes.

This also applies to seat-belt laws. Instead of allowing people to decide for themselves whether or not to wear a seat belt — and then deal with any consequences which come from that decision — we are (1) forced by law to wear a seat-belt and (2) punished by law with a ticket and fine of ~$100 (depending on the laws of the locality) for not wearing one.

Another good point made by “zombie”: universal single-payer health care leads to fascism:

[ … ] As above, under normal circumstances I would sigh in mystification and let other people go their merry way, killing themselves with bad food. Yet once I start to ponder the overwhelming society-wide medical costs of keeping millions of unhealthy people alive for decades and decades, my anger grows. I want to ban advertisements for unhealthy foods on TV. I want to outlaw donuts. I want to tax McDonald’s to cover the full environmental cost of their products. I want to do all sorts of quasi-fascistic things that normally I would never advocate.

Because that’s what socialized medicine does: it turns each of us into a little fascist. A nagging nanny who tells other people what to do and how to live.

Do we want that kind of society? I don’t. If you look at other countries with socialized medicine, Great Britain being the most glaring example, these invasive and oppressive government dictates have already started to circumscribe people’s freedom, with every kind of potentially dangerous activity or unhealthy comestible being declared forbidden — for the good of society as a whole.

We call it “socialized medicine,” but in the end it pushes us toward fascism.

Yep. And if you don’t believe that these fascistic law would be next in line after Obama and the Democrats implement universal single-payer healthcare, you haven’t been paying attention. Just look at one example of what they are doing as a result of their believe in the AGW hoax: giving energy companies control over people’s thermostats. You can be damn sure there will be more where that came from.

Another great comment. And a principle which I do not think most proponents of Obamacare even understand: you lose your freedom when someone else owns you. And that is exactly what happens under Obamacare: others are paying your bill, thus, they own you and your lifestyle choices. It basically becomes a parent-child relationship. Think of the “so long as you live under my roof, you will follow my rules” rant of a parent to a rebellious child. The same principle applies here. In this analogy, all Americans are the parents and every other American are the children. Unfortunately, we don’t have the luxury of simply cutting off our children’s allowance or kicking them out of the house if they refuse to follow our rules. Universal single-payer health care basically mandates that we are parents-for-life, whether we want to be or not.

Mike T on Dec 17, 2009 at 10:31 am:

That said, I agree with you about the busybody ramifications here. I personally applaud the British NHS for having the integrity to start telling the public that if the chavs want their healthcare paid for by the tax payers, the NHS will be moral-bound to start regulating their pleasures so that it can control costs. Once you make others foot your bills, you lose your right of self-determination.

December 18, 2009 , 3:14PM Posted by | Conservatism, Fascism, Healthcare, Liberalism, Socialism | 2 Comments

What Do You Do When You Find Out Your Daughter Married a Communist?

Wow. I can’t imagine having to deal with this situation. My first thought, though, is wondering why on earth would my daughter marry such a person? I honestly would start questioning the worldview and political ideology of my daughter in this situation. I mean, it’s one thing to simply be a Democrat or be liberal, but to be full-blown Communist — which is anti-Capitalism and anti-American at its core — is quite another. That’s serious business and I don’t blame this guy one bit for throwing him out of his house. I wouldn’t want to share company with someone who proudly is against everything for which America stands.

All that said, does anyone have any advice for this poor guy? I can’t imagine having to put up with this situation.

How can one not become an emotional wreck upon finding that the man who married his daughter is not just a little to the left, but indeed a full blown communist? I have argued the facts, made case by case analysis, and actually thought I was getting through to him… all the time thinking he was little more than a “dumb kid” with idealistic tendencies. A smart dumb one at that. (if you know what I mean..)

I am at this time truly distraught at this “discovery..”

I threw him out tonight. Thanksgiving.. Family present, daughter objecting to my treatment of him, and now I am possibly losing contact with her, after she and he made the trip to visit for the holiday from Oregon. Doing so in a near apoplectic fit, and raising my voice unfortunately as much as I ever have.. in all likelihood.

In my eyes he is real piece of work.

He hid this from my wife and I.. Saying only that he thought health care was a “right.” I am not a monster.. I know people are under this misconception. At the time where I point-by-point explained the logical consequence of how enforcement of that perceived “RIGHT” relinquishes others of theirs, also questioning him about whether he believes in private property rights, he finally admitted his “permanent position” with three words; “I’m a communist.” Embellishing with “you are not changing my mind..”

As if that statement makes it OK. I reminded him that communism, under Mao for example has killed more than 23 million (I was wrong.. it was 65 million) didn’t faze him, didn’t matter, not wavering and frankly didn’t care.. drove me over the edge.. My anger and disgust for such an ignorant belief set didn’t allow me to continue on any measure of civil discourse, and he was told to leave, upsetting my wife, my daughter, and I am sure him.. to some extent.

He’s trying to grapple with what to do regarding his relationship with his daughter. I honestly have no idea what I would do in this situation. Hopefully there are others out there though who could offer him some good advice?

November 27, 2009 , 1:30AM Posted by | Communism, Healthcare, Marriage, Relationships | Comments Off on What Do You Do When You Find Out Your Daughter Married a Communist?