Pete’s Problems and Good Luck Chuck

Almost certainly, Pete Ricketts is going to be the next governor of the state of Nebraska.

Image

Hold on, brb…

Okay, just had to gargle a bit of mouthwash to get the barf taste out of my mouth after typing that. I’m better now. Anyway, before we get to the point where we swear in Governor Ricketts… brb again…

I just brought the bottle of Scope in here with me to save time. Okay, so Ricketts is predicted by everyone everywhere to win because of the letter “R.” Not the one at the front of his last name, but the one in parentheses that follows it. Since 1861, when people clapped hard enough for the territory of Nebraska to become a star on the American flag, this crimson state has had 39 governors. Honestly, seems like it should be more than that, but that’s beside the point. Only 12 of those governors were Democrats. So, it matters very little that Ricketts should not be liked by any Nebraskan, even conservatives, because he’s with the party that wins 70% of the time.

I am aware that this post is not going to likely be read by nor change the minds of most (or any) Nebraskans planning to cast their vote for Petey. I mean, even if I provided incontrovertible evidence of pure villainy, people probably wouldn’t switch their votes. Like, not even if I CONCLUSIVELY SHOWED THAT HE ONCE USED MIND CONTROL POWERS TO CAPTURE THE GREEN LANTERN AND SUBSEQUENTLY THE ENTIRE JUSTICE LEAGUE (this is a thing). But hey, it’s worth a shot.

Reasons Nebraskans should NOT vote for Pete Ricketts

1.) He literally has no idea what he’s doing – How many people out there actually know what Pete does “for a living?” I put that last part in quotation marks because his family is gob-stoppingly, grossly rich. Seriously, they’re “Scrooge McDuck swimming in gold coins” rich. So what Pete does for a living is serve as the president and director of the Platte Institute for Economic Research. It’s a “free market think tank” designed basically to ensure that his great-great-great-grandkids also get to Scrooge McDuck it. On issues of health care, education, and social well-being, the “institute” is one of the wave of “think tanks” that basically make up stuff that helps political candidates. Yes, democrats have these too. I’m not a fan of those either for the most part. The other thing that Ricketts has done in his life is work for his dad at Ameritrade. Those are the things that Pete Ricketts has done. He has worked for his father and led a group designed to invent stuff for GOP candidates to use in elections. Clearly, governor material, am I right? He has held exactly zero public offices. He has won exactly zero previous general elections. He has never run a business of his own. He has never been responsible for anything that would even modestly suggest that he is qualified to lead a state. Notice, this isn’t digging into politics. This isn’t some “liberal bias.” These are just facts: At no point has this man done anything that would qualify him to hold the highest office in our state.

2.) He is nothing like you, whoever you are – You remember how your dad took you to that baseball game? He told you stories of how his father and his father’s father did the same thing, as you sat in the nosebleed section while your dad bought you a program from the game so you’d never forget it? Pete’s dad bought the Chicago Cubs. Not tickets. The team. He bought the team. Now, I’m not the world’s biggest believer of the “you have to be like a candidate to support a candidate.” I know lots of people nothing like me who I am thrilled are in office. But when it comes down to representing the people of a state, how exactly would Pete even know what our lives are like? Since birth, dude had whatever he wanted. In a state where the vast majority of the economy (23 billion) is derived from agriculture, Pete’s family made their money in a decidedly non-agrarian way. Among the biggest issues that our governor will face are things like farm taxes and expenditures, reactions to natural phenomena that impact crops, and farmer assistance. And we want a guy who has never had any association with that way of living to guide us? He goes on television with ads that proclaim his “Nebraska values.” In what way does the son of a multi-billionaire who never had to work for anything in his whole life embody “Nebraska values?” It’s a false bill of goods sold by a party that knows what buttons to push in a state predisposed to vote a certain way. Pete Ricketts cares about wealth, not you. Now, I understand that the Republican party has done a bang-up job convincing average Americans that they DO have things in common with millionaires and billionaires. Why, one day YOU TOO will be one of them! Except, they tell you that you can achieve that dream while actively working to ensure you never will, limiting educational opportunities and government assistance that may actually make social mobility possible. That’s Pete. He’s going to tell you that he wants you to succeed and then set an agenda to prevent that. People who have money do not want other people to have their money or to have money that they themselves may have. For the life of me, I cannot understand how smart, average Americans refuse to think that businessmen who are wealthy want to stay that way at all costs.

3.) He’s wrong…a lot – Here comes the explicitly liberal part. Hey, I saved it for third, okay! He doesn’t care about the environment. Part of what the Platte Institute does is work to dispute policies designed to prevent climate change. In a state where, again, 23 BILLION dollars rides on the weather, Nebraska has a CONSERVATIVE reason to give a shit about the earth. Droughts, floods, violent storms, all things made worse by man-made climate change directly takes money from the pockets of farmers. Shouldn’t our governor be working to, I don’t know, STOP THAT?! Socially, the dude is openly anti-gay. That’s not surprising. But what makes that ugly is this: His sister is a lesbian. I can’t pretend to know the degree of Pete’s anti-LGBTQ stance. It could be for show just to fit in with the party, I don’t know. What I do know is that Nebraska “values” don’t include telling your own sister she’s worth less than other people. Again, without even making a moral appeal, without telling you all the reasons why being respectful to fellow human beings no matter what is important, let’s just leave this here: Pete Ricketts tells people his sister doesn’t deserve to be protected because of how she was born. His association with the Tea Party also has to give even conservatives pause. The group is falling out of favor. The guy who spearheaded the government shutdown that hurt so many people, Ted Cruz, is an active supporter of Pete. So is Sarah Palin. Why would Nebraska want to associate itself with a faction so divisive the party it is associated with is working to distance itself from it?

With all this, why? Why would anyone in this state vote for Pete? Especially when there’s someone else…

Why you SHOULD vote for Chuck Hassebrook

Image

That’s Chuck Hassebrook up there. You should want to vote for him, even if you’re not a democrat. See, he’s the anti-Pete Ricketts in all the best ways. You know how Pete doesn’t have a lick of experience dealing with the agricultural issues? Chuck Hassebrook has worked with the Center for Rural Affairs for 36 years. He has directly worked on farming tax laws, helping to ease the burden on family farms. He has helped provide assistance to 10,000 small businesses, mostly in sparse rural communities (the kind that make up the majority of our state). He lives in Lyons. Google it. Pete’s family bought the Chicago Cubs and take private jets where they want to go, Chuck’s family lives on a farm. You want to talk education? He served for 18 years as a Regent in the University of Nebraska system. And while there, his focus was on getting poor kids from rural areas into college and creating an institute designed to revitalize small towns. Nebraska values?! This guy is like the epitome of what this state is and should be about.

Again, Pete’s two jobs were working for daddy and running a propaganda center. Chuck served on the board of the USDA North Central Region Rural Development Center. That experience, working with the Department of Agriculture, yeah that’s gonna come in handy as governor of an ag state. Socially, he was on the board of Bread for the World, a Christian ecumenical anti-hunger organization. You read that correctly. Chuck isn’t running around trying to insure future wealth; he’s trying to use our state’s food supply to do the actual Christian thing and help feed the needy.

The problem, of course, is the narrative. Chuck will be called an “Obama liberal,” whatever that is. Pete has already refused to limit negative ads like Chuck proposed. The conservative groups will try to rile people up about Obamacare. When they do, ask yourself this: It’s been FOREVER since that bill passed…have I PERSONALLY suffered like they said I would? Has the country suffered (we are at the lowest unemployment and the biggest economy in a decade)? Has literally anything they said would happen actually happened? The only thing that is hurting Nebraskans with Obamacare was our governor’s decision to not get money that would help us. It will be the same song and dance over and over again, wherein the vast majority of the state is sold a false bill of goods, promising a candidate whose “conservative values” make him “one of you.” He isn’t.

Chuck has all the qualifications, all the life experience, and (by all accounts) the temperament to lead this state. Pete has zero qualifications, is nothing like you, and will do a piss-poor job. And he’s almost certainly going to win anyway.

Advertisements

13 thoughts on “Pete’s Problems and Good Luck Chuck

  1. In July 2008, I was at some indie show at Memorial Park when one of the warm up acts tried to get a cheer for “turning Omaha blue in November”. Being the political sophisticate that I was told my then girlfriend, “Like that will ever happen.” Everybody knows what happened a few months later. I was proud to have joined other Nebraska Democrats in canvassing and turning out the vote for Obama in 2008. I also was a poll watcher in south Omaha. The point is that once you put aside the defeatist attitude, Nebraska Democrats can win. Just ask Pete Ricketts about what happened in 2006. Rasmussen has Chuck down only by 7 points. Chuck has raised money and has built an impressive campaign. You can either be part of the problem or the solution for Nebraska Democrats. Being part of the solution is volunteering and giving money to candidates or the party. Being part of the problem is writing blog posts about how Democrats can’t win in Nebraska and spreading them all over social media..

    • Hey Jon! Please don’t confuse frustration and depression with a lack of effort! This blog is me actually trying to do something good for Dems in the state (please feel free to read the first post). I do volunteer, give money, and have worked (do work) with campaigns small and large in the state! But, I don’t think you can be a democrat in Nebraska and not be a bit frustrated and/or down. We are excited about Chuck being down “only” 7 points to a completely unqualified, wholly non-Nebraskan candidate just because he’s Republican. That’s maddening. But at any rate, the blog is new and I’m still finding my voice writing on these. I’ll probably never be the “sunshine and roses” optimistic voice, but the content of this last post was CLEARLY designed to persuade people to not vote for Petey and to vote for Chuck. So, at least know my heart is in the right place!

  2. Those are all assumptions made upon concepts of wealth and success. I met Pete and his family in Crawford Nebraska at the Ranch House restaurant 5 years ago. He was there with his family staying at Fort Robinson. He didn’t fly a jet out there nor did he drive a big SUV, he drove a mini van and was one of the most down to earth people you will ever know. He does know what he is doing as he ran a very successful business and that is exactly what Nebraska is, a business that all of the residents need to be very successful.

    • I appreciate your reading, Justin! And they’re not assumptions, or at least I don’t think they are.

      1.) Pete Ricketts has never held elected office and would like his first position to be the state’s highest.
      2.) Pete Ricketts has only ever had 2 jobs. He worked for his dad, and he worked at a think tank. His other siblings started their own ventures. Pete Ricketts has never done so.
      3.) Pete Ricketts has limited experience in rural communities (which make up most of the state) and has never dealt with farming and agricultural work.

      I don’t doubt that you found Pete to be a nice guy. For all I know, he is. Although, the part where he turns his back on his sister for her sexuality is a problem for me. But the truth is he did NOT “run a very successful business.” He ran his DAD’S very successful business. And Nebraska is not a business. It’s a state full of unique challenges and individuals that Pete Ricketts has almost nothing in common with.

      • I wont waste any more of your time, I always enjoy discussing opinions with those who take the time to write them down and put them out there. I personally don’t think that holding an elected office should be criteria for any office, I think its time to have some doctors and business leaders in office not a group of lawyers. He has always been well regarded in the business and yes the agriculture community regardless of the number of jobs he has held, again not a criteria for election in my opinion. My family has ranched and farmed in Dawes County since 1883, my father was skeptical and now is a firm believer in Pete and his vision for agriculture. I have no opinion of his sister as that is best left for the family to handle. But I will challenge you on Nebraska being a business, Its high time that someone stepped in a ran the state like a business. I am a dental implant surgeon and I have unique challenges and individuals that I deal with on a daily basis, my office is 100% a business with patient care coming first and foremost. Enjoyed your blog. Take care

  3. Yes, I am indeed suffering from Obamacare. Did your premiums decrease? Is it now “affordable” health insurance for you? Did you get to keep your doctor? I think if you research personal testimonies from the general public, you’d come to find frustration of the masses. Food for thought, when was the last time you had a positive and efficient experience with anything that is government run? I’ll list a few common places we probably can agree are not fun to deal with:

    1. DMV- if it’s not bad enough to sit and wait for 30 minutes to an hour to begin testing, you’re treated as an animal or some sort of number. Quite agitating when we’re the ones paying their bills. The customer/client is always right, unless of course you’re in government. Think if we the people were regarded as such by the people working for the DMV! I know I take care of my clients in my career because I understand that treating them right is vital to keeping them as a client! If I don’t have clients, I don’t receive a paycheck. It’s quite simple but this seems to be forgotten in just about every aspect of government.

    2. Department of Education- In regards to student loans, another train wreck. If someone could explain to me why we are accepting 7-8% interest rates on student loans along with next to no financial advice as the norm, I’d appreciate it. How is it I have a credit card and a home loan that best that interest rate?!?!?! This is supposed to be a hand up in helping individuals achieve a level of knowledge and skills that make them workplace savvy and ready for life. Then we fail to educate them on how to properly use this money and we throw kids thousands of dollars in rebate checks where they go blow the funds on late night runs to DeLeon’s, high end clothing, booze, etc.! Rather than investing this rebate back to the loan, the uneducated young adult will more than likely spend it on what’s trendy. Now, I’m all for personal responsibility and dealing with the consequences of your decisions, but when this behavior is seemingly encouraged I question the motives behind it. How do we expect our kids to ever get ahead in life if they graduate college with 50-75K in debt at 7-8%? It’s a trap from the second they graduate. Anyway, to get back on track, dealing with the customer service from these people after they’ve lent you the money is not a fun experience. They’re so polite when you’re filling out your applications but once they’ve hooked you, you’re just another number in the system.

    3. EPA – I should have to say no more after emitting the acronym that is the environmental protection agency. If you’ve ever dealt with them, you likely had an experience that would make you feel like a piece of scum off the side of the road. When I think of the EPA, I think of the movie V for Vendetta. Mob rule, censorship, and camps; all in the name of protecting our earth. The very system that’s been created for these conquistadors to rule over us is directly responsible for more harm to our environment than we could ever do on our own. I think the regulations on wood burning stoves is probably what trips my trigger most. If the people can be self sufficient and use a natural resource to heat their home, or cook their meals, in their eyes that is not good because they can’t control that aspect of our lives should we need to be controlled. As long as they can take control if need be, we are allotted the resource, but if we can survive on our own using a different resource, that is not under their control, it is more than likely either made illegal or you have to jump through loops to get it.

    Solutions? Hint, it’s not in programs that the bureaucrats will run with and ruin like they do every other program. The solution is unfortunately next to impossible. It would require a systematic shift from all aspects affected by the very system we should despise. This starts with education in the root of the future, our youth. Raising them to know that life is about more than working for a paycheck to buy the things that enslave them. Raising them to be independent and self sufficient because who WANTS to be dependent on the very things that are necessary to survive? Water falls from the sky, why should I pay hundreds of dollars per month to simply use this resource that has been tainted by regulations that contradict themselves? This branches out to almost every aspect of our lives. If we ever hope to reverse this course we are on, it’s got to start with our children. We are responsible to teach them the values and common sense that has not been taught to the past two generations. To restore a small government that works FOR the people and does not seek control of the people. Unfortunately, neither candidate seems up to this task, and you’ll likely never see a candidate that makes it to a ballot with these ideas. If they aren’t silenced, they will be discarded as far out, insane, loony, or whatever else the rats in the media can think of to demonize them and keep the system afloat.

    • Hey Chris! Thanks for reading!

      A ton of questions for you:

      1.) You PERSONALLY are suffering from Obamacare? Your premiums went up like the GOP said? You personally couldn’t keep your doctor? The problem is, we hear these stories of those things happening…and then can’t actually find people that they happened to. Are you saying you’re one of them?

      2.) This analogy of the government as a business keeps perplexing me. The point of a business is to make money. That’s not the point of government. The point of government is to provide essential services for the public. If you take the part where a business tries to make money out of it…you are literally not talking about business anymore. We’re not the “clients” of the DMV. That’s a service designed to make sure that drivers are certified to drive and that they pay for the services they use (like roads).

      3.) I agree with you on education, though I don’t think you mean quite what I’d hope you mean. Senator Warren is leading the charge to lower interest rates on student loans to at least what we offer banks to borrow money. Seems to me like that’d be a good start!

      4.) We’re going to have to agree to disagree on the EPA. Sure, they don’t get everything right. But the purpose of the agency is important. We’re straight up earth-murdering right now. And it’s having a DIRECT impact on farming and our communities. The EPA is the only agency in place to fix it or at least help.

      5.) I don’t fear the government because the government is (A) not one thing and (B) not alive. It’s a tool. We make of it what we want. The size of the government has become this crazy buzzword, despite the fact that the original government when the country was founded was way more hands on and despite the fact that citizens tend to do better and have more when the government is more protective and restrictive of corporations than not. I could care less how much or little we spend, how many or few laws their are, provided that it WORKS as it should and that we all benefit.

      Thanks for the comments! I will be tackling the fallacy that “both parties” are to blame right now down the road, by the way!

  4. Hi Ryan,
    See responses inline.

    Hey Chris! Thanks for reading!

    A ton of questions for you:

    1.) You PERSONALLY are suffering from Obamacare? Your premiums went up like the GOP said? You personally couldn’t keep your doctor? The problem is, we hear these stories of those things happening…and then can’t actually find people that they happened to. Are you saying you’re one of them?
    -Let me be the first to say that I’m not trying to play devil’s advocate nor am I a member of the wretched GOP. I may generally take the lesser of two evils and cast my vote their way, but they disgust me almost as much as the sinister current majority leader in the senate. Back on point now, my premiums did indeed increase, at a % rate that was fairly more than years prior. Don’t get me wrong, the healthcare system needs to be fixed. I just think that the people can achieve this on their own. Dr. Ben Carson’s HSA account idea has some potential. The argument that this won’t work because what about children whose parents aren’t responsible and do not put any money in the account is playing devil’s advocate IMO. Since we already waste crazy amounts of money on healthcare each year, why not allocate some of those funds to the welfare portion of these HSA accounts for children at a disadvantage? This is my idea; take the people in government positions that are spending time regulating the private sector, and spend more time regulating what is given out to ensure that fraudulent waste is accounted for. This is a win-win. The people who want accountability in the welfare state, the right wing, are appeased that the funds are not being wasted and the left gets to keep their welfare state. I’m only speaking in the political dialect for illustrative purposes and yes, some assumptions are made 🙂 . Here is where I get to the good stuff. This is going to change up the system in a whole new way because it will foster a culture where people really research what is wrong with them before they go running to get the healthcare that they need. I have personally been raked over the coals when it came to getting treatment for a leg injury and I partially blame myself for not informing myself well enough before I let the orthopedic surgeon open me up. Long story short, a broken bone was the cause for an injury that was believed to be a tendon wrapped under the bone. Surgeon went in, realized he was wrong, and I ended up eating a deductible because of this malpractice. Looking back, if I had researched this more, possibly gotten second, third or fourth opinions, I would have been much better off! I’m sure you have heard of testimonies where malpractice has resulted in extra and unnecessary expenses; so putting the responsibility back in the hands of the people could reduce the amount of fraud that takes place in the healthcare industry. Bottom line of this response is that yes, universal healthcare should be available for everyone, but giving a bunch of bureaucrats the keys to control this system should frighten every American.

    2.) This analogy of the government as a business keeps perplexing me. The point of a business is to make money. That’s not the point of government. The point of government is to provide essential services for the public. If you take the part where a business tries to make money out of it…you are literally not talking about business anymore. We’re not the “clients” of the DMV. That’s a service designed to make sure that drivers are certified to drive and that they pay for the services they use (like roads).
    -You missed my point here homie. I was only using this analogy in terms of the mutual respect that should come from understanding that every citizen is your client and should be treated as such. If the citizen/client does not agree to have a DMV, DMV employee has no job. Just think how delightful our experience could be at the DMV if this was the attitude they kept! I know, I know, wishful thinking…

    3.) I agree with you on education, though I don’t think you mean quite what I’d hope you mean. Senator Warren is leading the charge to lower interest rates on student loans to at least what we offer banks to borrow money. Seems to me like that’d be a good start!
    -N/A

    4.) We’re going to have to agree to disagree on the EPA. Sure, they don’t get everything right. But the purpose of the agency is important. We’re straight up earth-murdering right now. And it’s having a DIRECT impact on farming and our communities. The EPA is the only agency in place to fix it or at least help.
    -Missing my point again homie. I may be one of the most anal people you’d ever meet when it comes to preserving our earth and environment. Literally, my wife and I go round and round about this one. If it can be reused, I reuse it for anything under the sun. See, conservatism isn’t just a political view to me, it’s a way of life. I’m all about conserving our natural resources! The EPA has another agenda unfortunately and is not consistent in carrying out their mission statement. If they were true to their existence, they would hold the lobbyists in check. That’s my biggest issue with the EPA. The idea of the EPA is great, but one cannot push side agenda’s and successfully manage an agency. Again, it goes back to the very systematic process that has coerced us into giving agencies like this the power they possess. I can’t believe I didn’t mention the IRS or the Fed, but for sake of time and keeping my self composed I won’t even start.

    5.) I don’t fear the government because the government is (A) not one thing and (B) not alive. It’s a tool. We make of it what we want. The size of the government has become this crazy buzzword, despite the fact that the original government when the country was founded was way more hands on and despite the fact that citizens tend to do better and have more when the government is more protective and restrictive of corporations than not. I could care less how much or little we spend, how many or few laws their are, provided that it WORKS as it should and that we all benefit.
    -Feel good rhetoric, but it doesn’t actually work. Case in point, are we all benefiting? I’m sure you would not disagree that the gap only keeps widening between the rich and the poor, right?

    Thanks for the comments! I will be tackling the fallacy that “both parties” are to blame right now down the road, by the way!

    – I’m confused by this, so I guess I’ll just wait to hear you out.

    What I will say is that we’re at a crossroads as a country. If you appreciate your privacy and the freedom to do as you please, so long as you are not negatively impacting any others in the civil society, you should be very concerned with where we are headed. I challenge you to very seriously ponder events like the IRS targeting, the motives of the NSA, the PC(political correctness) attacks, and that’s just the tip. You cannot tell me that we are more free than we were decades ago. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that technology has undoubtedly brought new challenges to this thing we call freedom. However, it does not change the fact that we have seen a vast increase in regulations and laws telling us what we can and cannot do. One should need to look no further than the history of the world to see that with power comes corruption and greed. It is in our very nature as humans. So when I see a politician as electric as obama, for example, I get incredibly worried when lies about supporting homosexuality and that movement are traded in exchange for your and my freedoms. At a certain point, you have to realize that if we keep electing the power mongers like the Bush’s, Obama, Carter, Reid, Graham, McCain, King, Schumer, etc. we are never going to see a return to simplified and efficient governing. For kicks, how do you peg me, politically speaking?

  5. Let’s start from the bottom:

    I’d put good money on you being a Libertarian.

    I appreciate the thorough response. You are clearly a nice guy with a different worldview. These epic blog posts are consuming my time, so I can’t really keep up point for point, I’ll just say this:

    In order for your positions to hold, all people would have to be (A) good people, (B) competent people, (C) slightly selfless people, and (D) not corporations. You can’t let health care work to fix itself, because of the greed. You can’t let people treat the DMV (even in a metaphorical sense) like they “don’t need it.” You can’t group all politicians and parties in together. The gap is opening up between the rich and the poor BECAUSE of a lack of regulations, not despite it. Less government = more concentrated wealth, that’s just an economic fact.

    To put it another way: I hope you keep reading. I’m going to be tackling as much of this as I can going forward. I have a lot of friends who consider themselves libertarians, and I tell them the same thing- The reason I’m not a socialist is that socialism only works in theory. Same is true for libertarianism.

  6. Close! I’m best defined as a Libertarian-Conservative. I won’t keep this thread dragging on any further as it sounds like you’d like to move on to other topics. I will ask you to reconsider this statement or to perhaps ponder it a little more; “The gap is opening up between the rich and the poor BECAUSE of a lack of regulations, not despite it. Less government = more concentrated wealth, that’s just an economic fact. ”
    -If this was entirely true, why does the gap continue to widen? We’ve added more regulations in the last two decades than ever and the gap continues to get further and further divided. This statement assumes that the people are greedy people and though I will say that in our nature we indeed are greedy and selfish, I think that we as a civil society have always taken care of our fellow man. I know plenty of wealthy individuals that give back to charitable organizations by choice, and they are as far right as it gets, which tells me the compassion for fellow man is indeed there, despite the general message from the media that all right wingers have zero compassion for anyone but themselves and corporations 🙂

    Take care,
    Chris

  7. Thank you for this post from another blue dot in a very red state. I am gratified that I will have the chance to vote for Chuck Hassebrock as the best qualified candidate, R or D. He just is. I have been a member of Bread for the World for many years, advocating on behalf of those who have benefited from the work that Chuck does. God bless him in his work!

  8. Pingback: Rage against the dying of the light | Feeling Blue in a Red State

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s