Lone Star Democracy Builders Association

I've been slack about writing things for the Lone Star Democracy Builders blog over the last few months. However, that doesn't mean that I've not been reading some excellent writing about the upcoming election. The 2006 mid-terms are very important; if the Democrats can regain Congress, we'll have a chance at containing the power of the autocratic executive branch.

One of the most interesting writers talking about the election is the Science Fiction author David Brin. He's pro-science, and while he's got a libertarian streak, its one that's contrary with the Libertarian orthodoxy. He sees a huge value in community, personal responsibility, and progress and doesn't just want to consolidate gains for people like him.

Starting back during the summer, he made a series of posts on his blog Contrary Brin about the importance of the elections and listed some arguments that might convince rational Republicans to vote against their party this cycle. Three good articles to start reading are Time to Get to Work, Cracks are Appearing All Over and Arguments for your Obstinate Uncle, but there are more interesting ones in his archive. In the first article, he makes an interesting gambit:

But don’t just make this a one sided attack! There is one thing you Dems and Libs can offer in return. (And you had better offer something; people do not give concessions without something in return.) Please gather your own sense of honesty and courage and nonpartisan decency, to say:

"If Democrats ever have this much power in the future, and seem similarly reckless or partisan, or awash in secret deals, or as determined to lie and cheat their way into perpetually unaccountable power, I promise that you can turn this around on me. I will open my eyes, and I will listen."

Make that vow, and you might achieve the miraculous. Budge the unbudgeable. Move the un-movable. Persuade some of the millions of decent (but obstinate) American conservatives to meet you - to meet their country - halfway.

I love that sentiment. I'm a Democrat, but I'd be glad to go on the record that if the Dems become as corrupt as the current Republicans, I'll withdraw my support and work to achieve a balanced government again.

Posted by Ben at 5:24 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink

While we are all groaning from too many hours sitting in the convention center, waiting for copies of the platform (and while I've ducked into another room to charge up my laptop), I'll share some of the best communications I heard.

Best lines:

• John Courage - "Texas isn't red. Texas is for all people."
• Maggie Charleton, on why mentors are so important for new teachers - "Doctors do residencies. We wouldn't expect them to be able to cut us open and do surgery on the day they graduate from medical school."
• Glenn Melancon - "I'm a college professor, and my wife is a school counselor. We're in the future business."
• Pete Laney - "Being ethical means doing more than what is required. Being ethical means doing less than is allowed." (from the video)
• Pete Laney again - "It's amazing what you can accomplish when you don't care who gets the credit." (also from the video)

The blue ribbon winner for good lines was Chet Edwards:

• "They talk religious values, but pass mean-spirited budgets that take the most from those that have the least... can you tell me one religion in the world that teaches those values?"
• "'Leave no child behind' should not be a campaign slogan. It should be a moral imperative."
• "Tom DeLay told us he wanted to govern in the worst possible way, and that's one promise he kept."

We still have several Ds who, God love 'em, REALLY need a public speaking coach. They're either all style, no substance, or decent substance, no style. And Jesus H. Christ and his talking frog, who the heck was picking the music? "Who Let the Dogs Out?!?!?!" What year is this?! And I'm all about the Willie Nelson, sure, but "Mamas, Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up to be Cowboys?" Is this inspiring? Jeez. Let's do a better job of setting a positive tone next time, shall we?

Posted by Carrie at 8:13 PM in How To Communicate & Who Are The Democrats? | Permalink

Below is my letter to the Save Our Springs (SOS) Alliance, whose mission is to protect the Edwards Aquifer that feeds Barton Springs in Austin (a local, natural pool). They sent out a DVD this spring, I'm assuming to get folks riled up about Advanced Micro Devices (AMD, a large local employer) moving into the area and to teach folks more about the aquifer. As a supporter that's not frothing at the mouth over AMD, the whole thing left me as cold as a polar bear plunge.

Continue reading "SOS Preaching to the Choir" »

Posted by GlennM at 8:49 AM in Austin & How To Communicate | Permalink

SXSW has just put online one of their 2006 Interactive sessions called "The League of Technical Voters", featuring local State Representative Mark Strama on the panel. This session focuses on a new non-profit group that motivates and assists techies to work in politics. That sounds like this group on its better days.

You can download the session in MP3 format and listen at your leisure. More information on the SXSW podcasts is at http://2006.sxsw.com/coverage/podcasts/.

Posted by Ben at 1:33 PM in Austin & How To Communicate & Inspiration & Our Infrastructure | Permalink

I was in a fabulous graduate seminar this morning. We were talking about attitudes that we here in the US have about government. Some said that US folks are too trusting of politicians. Some said we're quite skeptical. And suddenly a very important distinction hit me.

There's a big honking difference between being cynical and being skeptical.

Cynicism is not productive. It is pessimistic and, at some level, passive. Why bother? Nothing can change. Everything sucks. People suck. Their motives are suspect and no one tells the truth. So we might as well sit here and watch TV (possibly even blog about how everything sucks ;) ).

On the other hand, skepticism, when practiced rigorously, is healthy, forward-looking, and progress-oriented. It wants evidence. It wants to understand. It wants to make things work - and it'd be nice if they worked better.

Put it this way: it's not possible to be a cynical revolutionary. Cynicism stymies action.

Lots of people are cynical about US government. Not enough folks, IMNSHO, are skeptical.

When we're the minority party, we have to be extraordinarily careful to keep our rhetoric skeptical, not cynical. This is especially true of lefty folk. We can't go around bashing government - since we believe that government can be a force for community problem-solving, it's inevitable that such linguistic indulgences will come back to bite us in the ass. And we're hypocrites if we say that Those People Are Just Bad; if we're serious about valuing community, we have to make room for everyone. That's not to say we can't vigorously disagree. We do. And the thing about our way (separation of church and state, freedom of speech, universal human rights, etc) is that it *does* leave room for everyone. We're right. No need to overplay our hand.

We have to be careful to point out that it's not government per se that's broken; it's the way we happen to be doing government right now. Rick Perry's current ads ("I'm proud of Texas. How 'bout you?") are nauseating, but brilliant. Texans are proud. We don't like to be told that we rank below some developing nations in various quality-of-life indicators. Heaven knows there's plenty to be mad about and plenty to criticize. And it's tempting to get stuck on that particular rant. But I think that what lefties would be wise to do is talk about how things could be better - the vision thing, in the language of the 1992 campaigns. Let's talk about where we're going. Let's talk about how we're going to make the society we deserve (and I'm an optimist, so I mean that in the good way). Negativity might score us points in the short run, but what fires the imagination is a positive vision of what we can make happen together, and how government can be the vehicle for that. Tons of studies in the field of education show that all things being equal, people will perform to your expectations. Hand 'em negativity, you'll get it back in spades. So let's hand 'em positivity instead. I'd love to be there when it happens.

Posted by Carrie at 10:53 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink

The author Malcolm Gladwell has a new blog, and one of his first posts was talking about how his views on universal health care have changed since the early 1990s. In writing about this, he's provided a really useful metaphor for understanding why health care shouldn't be something that's the responsibility of our employers:

"The closest I can come is to imagine if we had employer-based subways in New York. You could ride the subway if you had a job. But if you lost your job, you would either have to walk or pay a prohibitively expensive subway surcharge. Of course, if you lost your job you would need the subway more than ever, because you couldn't afford taxis and you would need to travel around looking for work. Right? In any case, what logical connection is there between employment and transportation?"

You can read the entire posting at Malcolm's site.

Posted by Ben at 7:22 PM in Health Care & How To Communicate | Permalink

I haven't been able to process the outcome of the Parental Interview Project yet. My mother didn't want to be discussed on the web, so I'm trying to figure out how to draw from what I learned from her in a way that respects her wishes. My father, on the other hand, gave me a 45 minute interview with the only condition being that no one else is allowed to hear the recording because he doesn't like his recorded voice. I can sympathize.

In the meantime, I want to point out something good: the volunteering page on the Davis Van Os campaign website. On the right side of the page, highlighted in a colored sidebar, "10 Quick Ways to Get Involved." A couple more of them could use links (how does one become a voter registrar?), but they're all specific activities with ESTIMATES of how long they will take. It's easy to get graphics for your website, signs, etc. Their email form is apparently having trouble, so they have a note posted giving people an alternate contact mechanism.

(They also have a blog, which seems to be updated regularly.)

Posted by Skye at 7:38 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink | Comments (1)

There's a lot of squabbling in the Democrat/liberal/progressive community about single issue groups, and whether they contribute or take away from the goal of winning back power from the Republican Party.

Here's an article from Andy Goodman's Free Range Thinking Newsletter (PDF) that doesn't explicitly address that issue, but which immediately brought it to my mind.

In Kansas City, a children's advocacy organization and a local marketing agency crafted a strategy around one central question used by the Hopi people: "Is it good for the children?" First, they did a poll to see if that question would resonate with people. Next, the president of the children's organization and his colleagues did 400 interviews with civic leaders to build support for the question. They didn't ask for a commitment, just a conversation. Then they lauched a campaign of 15-second television ads using recognizable community leaders to ask the question "and deliver the equally important message: 'It's your decision.'"

Three years into the campaign, over 700 local organizations had officially adopted the question:

These commitments were reflected in many ways: the city council put it on all purchase orders, religious organizations printed it on Sunday bulletins, school districts added it to their stationery. And the question kept popping up at meetings. Westbrook recalls one such meeting in 1998 in which a local CEO announced a summer schedule giving employees a 4-day week in return for working from 7:00 am until 5:30 pm each day. “A grandmother in the back asked, ‘Is it good for the children?’” says Westbrook, “and it absolutely changed the whole meeting.” The discussion turned to issues around daycare and carpools, and the proposed plan - which clearly would not be good for children - was dropped.

There isn't a whole lot in this article on the results, but their methods are striking. Instead of "We need message discipline, everybody get in line!", they took the time to build relationships. Instead of providing an answer, they provided a lens based on their values.

Posted by Skye at 7:30 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink | Comments (1)

I couldn't help myself. After getting another request for cash from the TX Democrats, I had to make some demands. What good are folks on the ground for precinct organizing if the party doesn't give voters a reason to pay attention to it? I'm sick and tired of being in the party "that isn't those bumblers." I want to be in a party that's doing things for people and is engaging people in government instead of scaring them away (note engaging them in government, not politics). My response to their fundraising is below.

Continue reading "Prodding the Democrats" »

Posted by GlennM at 10:35 PM in How To Communicate & Texas Organizations & Venting | Permalink

I am practically incapable of talking about politics with anyone who does not already agree with me.

I know quite a few people who vote Republican. Most of them are family. I should be able to calmly and cheerfully explain to them why I vote Democratic, what Democrats stand for, and why the state and the nation would be better off if they followed my example.

But I can't. When it's family, I get anxious and angry and defensive. I usually retreat and pretend it isn't happening, or I make one or two challenging statements and then ignore the conversation. Or worse, find myself trying to agree with something they're saying so we can put down the conversation on a positive note and I can calm down. When it's friends, I just smile and make noncommittal statements.

All this even though I have it easy compared to some of my friends. At least no one I know listens to Rush Limbaugh!

Since I have difficulty with the talking part, I've decided to start by listening. The last weekend of October is the International Quilt Festival in Houston, Texas. My parents live there, and I will be going to stay with them for the weekend. I am going to ask each of them to sit down with me and answer a few questions about their political views. (I'm also going to try perceiving my dad as a complex person for the sake of this attempt, rather than writing him off as a knee-jerk Republican.) Then, I'm going to go over it while I'm not in the middle of the situation and see if I can figure out their core beliefs or frames or what have you. The research design is still in progress. ;)

After that, I'm going to go back and talk to them again, but I'm trying not to think about that part yet.

To give you an idea of who I'm dealing with:

My mother is a devout Methodist Christian who has traditionally voted Republican but considers herself an Independent. I have reason to believe that she voted for Kerry. She was very worried about the impression that George W. Bush has given the world with the War on Iraq. Her Christianity tends to express itself more in the "help the poor" mode than the judgmental mode, and she got involved for a while in a church-based effort to assess the damage that Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) cuts were doing to children in Houston. She is offended by churches that make it hard for gay Christians to worship, and by the young rich families in her congregation who seem to truly believe everything is fine as long as they have what they want.

My father is a devout believer in "bootstraps make it possible." However, he reads a lot about urban development and knows the history of redlining, racial segregation, de-industrialization, and suburbanization that have afflicted many cities - and he doesn't dismiss it outright as irrelevant to the residents' condition. But also, in his oft-stated opinion, the hippies ruined everything in America. He was deeply upset about the attack in New York City, as he used to live there and is still in love with the city in many ways, but he also was deeply upset by the start of the war. He doesn't believe corporations have any obligations to help people (such as those with AIDS in Africa, which never should have come up at Easter dinner). He believes that if you are caught by the police, it's your job to prove you aren't guilty. Last time I saw him, he also said Ken Lay should be executed.

My mother reports that he went outside and hung up an American flag when George W. was declared the winner in the next presidential election. She got him to take it down before I got home. I think she believed I'd pick a fight with him about it. Hello, that's so 15 years ago!

I'm brainstorming questions for them:

• What do you think government is for?
• What do you think of politicians in general?
• What do you think of President Bush?
• What's wrong with the national media? Was it always that way?

Additional question I have for my mother: What has made you vote for Democrats when you've done so?

Additional questions I have for my father: What is the problem with energy, and what are the solutions? (He worked for an oil company for a couple of decades.) What did you see happen during the 60's that changed society?

Please let me know in the comments if you have other questions I could ask. I don't want to hold them hostage for 2 hours apiece, but y'all might have some better ideas.

Posted by Skye at 9:55 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink | Comments (2)

My co-author GlennM often notes that it would be more satisfying for him to give to various causes if they were specific about how they were using the money. Oxfam Unwrapped does just this, though it seems to be for the UK. They've set out specific amounts that would fund a first aid kit, a goat, health worker training, etc.

I would think this could be used by political campaigns as well, and here are some examples with completely fabricated numbers:

• $40 for pizza to feed volunteers for three hours of phone calls, and here are the number of calls they could make
• $25 for enough paper, ink, and postage to send out postcards to so many residents of Austin (perhaps state it as "one entire zip code" or something that feels satisfying)
• $100 for four hours of technical assistance by a computer guru who can automate our website

You see my point.

On a more ambitious scale, I also liked the strategy described in "Adopt-a-Spot: Breaking Rules to Raise Money and Awareness." The article tells the story of the October 22nd Coalition and its Adopt-A-Spot campaign, which produced PSAs and then used them to fundraise. I'm flipping the paragraphs around from the order they appear in the article:

Operating on a shoestring budget, Lindblom and his colleagues produced over twenty PSAs featuring parents of the victims of police brutality, leaders of the African American and Hispanic community, and news clips catching police in horrific acts. The emotionally potent thirty-second spots asked viewers to send in stories about police brutality and to wear black on October 22nd, a national day of protest. Traditionally, public interest groups set their media budgets first and then produce their PSAs, but the Iris Baez meeting [see below] proved that the rules could be broken.

Three years after this tragic incident, Physicians for Social Responsibility invited Iris to speak at a meeting the group was hosting in New York City. After Iris talked about her son's murder, the invited guests - about twenty doctors and other concerned community members - viewed several public service announcements produced by the October 22nd Coalition to Stop Police Brutality, Repression, and the Criminalization of a Generation. One of the PSAs memorialized Anthony's story, and the guests decided to "adopt" this spot. Money was collected specifically to purchase airtime on Black Entertainment Television (as opposed to simply submitting the PSA and hoping BET would choose to show it). This paid broadcast ensured that Anthony Baez's story and the broader issue of police brutality would be brought to 250,000 households across America.

I've noticed MoveOn using similar techniques.

Posted by Skye at 6:24 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink | Comments (1)

I would like good writing, please.

If you'd like to inspire me, these passages from the DLC's "Idea of the Week" aren't going to cut it:

In an important new report from the Progressive Policy Institute, Michele Stockwell, PPI's director of social and family policy, argues that parents, while remaining the first line of defense, need help protecting their kids from commercializing pressures and outlines a series of modest steps policymakers can take to address some of the more egregious marketing practices without unduly intervening in the market economy.

All of these measures are aimed simply at adjusting public policies to reflect rapid changes in technology and marketing techniques and giving parents the tools they need to effectively control and counter the harms associated with hyper-commercialization.

I'm obviously not the first to have issues with the DLC's lack of fire. They position themselves as "appeal to everyone, offend no one," and it shows. But is it possible that they offend no one because they put their audience to sleep?

Posted by Skye at 7:28 AM in How To Communicate | Permalink | Comments (2)

The Congressional Management Foundation, a nonprofit that provides management training and technical assistance to Congressional offices, has released the first of four reports on its study of electronic communication between constituents and their members of Congress.

What caught my eye (I'm mostly lifting from their text here):

• Half of congressional staff surveyed believe identical form communications are not sent with constituents’ knowledge or consent. [Note: As far as I could tell from the report, this seems to have spread from incidents in a few offices and turned into a general suspicion.]
• Nearly all staff surveyed (96%) reported that if their Member of Congress had not arrived at a firm decision, individualized postal letters would have at least some influence on the Member's decision, and 94% believed individualized e-mail messages would have at least some influence. 65% indicated that form postal letters have at least some influence; the analogous figure was 63% for form e-mail messages.
• Some Senate staff reported that their offices "do not count or respond to" some form communications – in essence, ignoring the messages altogether.

Continue reading "Communicating With Congress, Part I" »

Posted by Skye at 10:25 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink

If you haven't seen a link to it yet, Senator Obama's commencement address is worth reading.

It's a little long. But it covers challenges America has faced in the past and how they were solved by working together. And it challenges America to rise up to meet today's challenges, with a vision to pull us all forward. A very good example of how to speak about progressive issues.

Nods to MLK Jr and Jesse Jackson Jr are duly noted.

Posted by GlennM at 11:07 AM in How To Communicate | Permalink

George Lakoff has put online his analysis of the Karl Rove framing trick. He opened his talk in Austin last weekend with this argument, and his online remarks are an extension and elaboration of his talking points. Basically, Rove launched a provocative argument that offended a lot of Democrats, but instead of ignoring his noise and pushing on our issues, we took the bait, therfore shifting the national conversation into areas where Republican methods have power. We've got to stop doing that!

Posted by Ben at 11:58 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink

Michael Ignatieff has written an interesting article on the mantle of well-meaning Jeffersonian democratic imperialism - by which he means the notion that freedom and democracy will spread to all nations because they are everyone's birthright, as well as the notion that we should actively push the spread. He untangles some complicated stuff here, and does a good job of illuminating why Ds are so unsuccessful at arguing against the war in Iraq (and, for that matter, the war in Vietnam). How do you argue against freedom and democracy in a country where those things are at the root of our political self-concept? Of course that's a false dilemma, but it's the one the Republicans have put forth, and we have not changed the terms of the discourse on this issue. It ain't the ends, here, folks, it's the means, and it's also how well they match up.

What he didn't talk about, probably because it's slightly irresponsible, but I will, because blogging lends itself well to the sort of slightly irresponsible speculation and analysis one is prone to after enough red wine, is why the argument over the means is a tough one to make in this country.

Continue reading "Democracy, imperialism, and the good ol' US of A" »

Posted by Carrie at 9:10 AM in How To Communicate & Who Are The Democrats? | Permalink

I love Carol Lay's Story Minute cartoons, and when I was looking through her archive this morning, I found this drawing about the psychology of red versus blue on the political map. I love the ending; if only messaging for our party was that easy.

Posted by Ben at 11:55 AM in How To Communicate | Permalink | Comments (1)

The Democratic Message and Targets by Marc Campos is an interesting and very short read about his search for the Texas Democratic Party's message. Check it out.

Posted by Skye at 9:16 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink

Liberals Against Terrorism jumped all over Amnesty International's CEO for using the word "gulag" in discussing this year's human rights report, claiming:

See, Irene Khan's overreach has allowed Bush to wave his hands and distract the press...

I think this is a bit silly, but I've seen a similar claim in a couple of other blogs. But President Bush is going to wave his hands, and many people in the press is going to help him, no matter what words are chosen.

The people you're losing, though, are people like my mother. She is a self-described Republican and serious Christian who voted for Kerry in the 2004 election. She is why I felt mixed about Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism. Too many half-truths, one too many unsupported attacks ("Such and such year, Rupert Murdoch buys his first politician" in the timeline.)

My mother will vote with you, but she needs you to be professional. My mother will help us - you just have to give her someone to respect. "Gulag" is an unnecessary bit of hyperbole from an organization such as Amnesty that is supposed to be a subject matter expert. She is allergic to "the 60's," but she's very concerned about cuts to CHIP. Be a grownup, and she'll listen.

As an aside, my mother is also one of the reasons why the Enron movie didn't need to have several minutes of half-naked strippers gyrating into the camera just to make the point that one of the executives was sleazy. She would have stopped watching the film at that point. Also, it was exploitive and really f*&king annoying.

Posted by Skye at 9:12 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink | Comments (2)

The subtitle of this very small book is "Know Your Values and Frame the Debate," and I was expecting it make good on its claim that it's a practical resource for progressives. It's more of a series of essays about the concept of framing, values in politics, and the importance of thinking about identity and values more than policy and programs.

I would definitely recommend reading it - especially since it's only 118 pages - because it made me think about why I believe in the things I do, and it gave me a first step towards learning how to talk about those things without getting mad and losing all clarity of thought.

Here are a few bits that caught my eye:

Continue reading "Don't Think of An Elephant, by George Lakoff" »

Posted by Skye at 3:18 PM in Book Reviews & How To Communicate | Permalink

The article on Montana's Governor that Carrie pointed out reminded me of something Ben's Aunt Kathy shared with us when she came to visit last year. Kathy is a district judge in St. Paul, Minneapolis. Somehow the three of us ended up discussing politics - imagine that! - and the topic turned to Jesse Ventura.

Continue reading "More From Montana's Governor Article" »

Posted by Skye at 10:37 AM in How To Communicate | Permalink

TexPIRG is trying to brand clean air as a sports issue. As in the one thing that's more important than bizness to Texans: football. Damn they're good.

Posted by GlennM at 12:10 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink

The Statesman had an article today about private social security and women. Since women are more likely to leave the salaried workplace (whether permanently or just temporarily) than men, reducing the social security guarantees hurts them harder than men.

In messaging this to conservatives, one might ask "why are they changing the rules to make it riskier for mothers that work at home?"

[Ok, things get more complicated with the spousal benefits, especially if there's a divorce. But the R solution to that is to have the private accounts be part of the estate to be split at the time of divorce. And I thought the R's didn't like lawyers.]

Posted by GlennM at 10:53 PM in How To Communicate & Social Security | Permalink | Comments (1)

I recently was pointed to Scott Bateman's LiveJournal. He's a cartoonist that publishes his work online, and many of his recent cartoons are reactions to the 2004 election. Today's work is about the appointment of John Negroponte as National Intelligence Director. I like his sharp visual style, but even better is the way he just presents facts about the situation, building an argument panel-by-panel. I thought of posting this here because the discussion from this posting is all about reaching the other side; he's got frustrations that are similar to our own.

Posted by Ben at 5:42 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink | Comments (1)

It's not often that I get to combine my love of politics and my love of science fiction, but I'm excited about the presentation I listened to last night by sci-fi author David Brin. David's been writing a lot of essays about the conflict between romanticism and progress, including some scathing critiques of the Star Wars and Lord of the Rings stories, and this talk builds on those ideas. He talks about the 2004 election (held a few days prior to the talk), notes the urban/rural divide, and had some very good comments about how the Democratic campaigns focused on guilt and negatives, instead of pushing the progress that American society has seen under democratic rule. He also mentions debate framing, noting that both the left and the right are worried about concentrations of power; the left just fears power in corporate hands, while the right fears power from academics and bureaucrats.

More notes and commentary on his talk are posted here by Evelyn Rodriguez.

Posted by Ben at 5:55 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink

Marketing is going to be important. One of the best things that the Bush campaign did in 2004 was make its supporters feel like they were part of a team and that GW winning would affect peoples lives in a positive way.

One of the best writings I've seen lately about how marketing is changing is Hugh MacCloud's Hughtrain essay. He starts with a provocative statement: "THE MARKET FOR SOMETHING TO BELIEVE IN IS INFINITE". That just blows me away; it shows the space where the ideas of representative democracy and good government can grow. We need to get the "brand" of government back in the good graces of people, and help them believe in its power to help their lives and other people's lives.

Posted by Ben at 8:18 PM in How To Communicate | Permalink