The NY Times never published my letters, and the cat got bored listening to my tirades, so I started this blog lo these many years ago. Somewhere out there I sense a bored cat and a future blogger. From a reader, straight to the NY Times round file and my blog:
To the Editor: According to “Among the Wealthiest One Percent, Many Variations,” published in the NYT on January 14, “there is no doubt that the troubled economy has focused anger on the fact that the rich have grown richer and the middle class, over the last decade, has lost ground.”
Inconvenient truth: the distribution of income in the U.S. is basically the same as it was a quarter-century ago—and the middle class has gained ground over the last decade.
The CBO report only goes through 2007, despite the fact that it was released in late 2011. It tracks income distribution using a Gini index, which ranges from 0 to 1, with higher values signaling a more unequal distribution. The index indeed rose from 1979 to 2007, although almost all of the increase occurred over the periods 1979–1986 and 2002–2007.
In other words, most of the reported rise in income disparity since 1979 had already occurred by 1986, and there has been no significant trend since then.
There’s more. From 2000 to 2009, tax filers with adjusted gross income of at least $500,000, who represented the top 0.5 percent of all returns in both years (similar in spirit to the CBO report, which looks at the top 1 percent of households), saw their average adjusted gross income decline by 15 percent and their average after-tax income decline by 11 percent. All other filers—the 99.5 percent—saw average increases of 15 percent in AGI and 17 percent in after-tax income. The middle class has not “lost ground” over the last decade.
The ubiquitous references to rising income inequality—with President Obama the offender-in-chief—are erroneous and serve mainly to fan the flames of class warfare in this country. But who benefits from that?
Janice Willett
Ridgewood, NJ
We now return you to the ongoing narrative.
NOPRIZE: There is a missing "Full Disclosure" here. Five minutes sleuthing didn't solve it for me, but I already know the answer. [UPDATE: Can't hide from Sue.]
Didn't solve what?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 17, 2012 at 11:32 AM
The author is a Republican and part of the 1%:
Here's a sample clue:
"The endowed Thomas Sowell Professorship in Economics was established in 2002 through a gift from Bates College trustee Joseph T. Willett and his wife, Janice, of Ridgewood, N.J. A member of the Bates class of 1973, Willett is the former chief operating officer of Merrill Lynch for Europe, the Middle East and Africa."
Posted by: Clarice | January 17, 2012 at 11:40 AM
She is your sister? Sister in law?
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 11:48 AM
She is your former boss?
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 11:49 AM
She is married to your former partner?
I can quit anytime.
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 11:50 AM
Some say that you can tell a person is a politician because their lips are moving. I say you can tell if a person is a "progessive" because their income analysis always end in 2007.
The wealthy suffered the biggest loss from the recession in comparison to the masses. Uncomfortable fact #26743.
Posted by: T J Sawyer | January 17, 2012 at 11:51 AM
I'm going with sister.
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 11:51 AM
Janice Maguire Willett, a financial writer and editor from Ridgewood, N.J.
Sister. Come on Tom. Acknowledge I'm smarter than the average bear.
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 11:56 AM
Sue wins!
http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2632
Posted by: Porchlight | January 17, 2012 at 11:58 AM
Although, I suppose she could be a cousin.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 17, 2012 at 11:59 AM
Wow Sue (and Porchlight), folks can't hide anything from you! ha ha ha ha.
Posted by: centralcal | January 17, 2012 at 12:04 PM
Second from the left. Tom M, you gotta be very proud.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM
Sister it is. Yike.
Posted by: Tom Maguire | January 17, 2012 at 12:12 PM
TomM-- you can also add today's WSJ article and the demise of SOPA as further evidence of the declining fortunes of the 1%ers. According to the WSJ, Morgan Stanley has capped bonuses at $120K. (Sorry Andrew Cuomo and Dan Malloy, the Banker cash cows have dried up, so your tax revenues will crater.) Plus Hollywood/entertainment suffers fromt the loss of controlling the distribution of their product in the digital communication age. So 2 big drivers of the 1981-1999 inequality boom-- Wall Street and Hollywood, are no longer big wealth producers. That means no jobs for kids with college loans of course; oh well, I'm sure OWS will be happy out of 'principle.'
Posted by: NK | January 17, 2012 at 12:12 PM
Taking my bow...
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 12:12 PM
So, TM is she going to guest host this ghost like Mo Dowd gives her brother every once a while, that was a very perceptive analysis
by the way.
Posted by: narciso | January 17, 2012 at 12:13 PM
Ahhhh...I see I got my prize. Thanks, Tom!
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 12:14 PM
I know! Once I got over doing my victory lap I went back re-read what she wrote and I'm thinking she needs to be part of this crazy place. Does she post here under a different name? Makes you wonder, doesn't it?
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 12:15 PM
TomM-- so your sister is smarter than you and got a letter published in the NYT. What's the big deal? I mean are the boys at the club going to mock and humiliate you?... ok, bad example.... but you've still got JOM!
Posted by: NK | January 17, 2012 at 12:17 PM
You know Sue, 'with great power, comes great
responsibility' grin.
Posted by: narciso | January 17, 2012 at 12:18 PM
Oh no! I don't want responsibility. I don't need responsibility. I get in trouble when I'm responsible.
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 12:20 PM
As I read TM's post, the Times didn't publish it.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 17, 2012 at 12:27 PM
They didnt publish it YET. I took it to be recently submitted and there is a chance that someone there has it in for the mendacious reporter and will run it. Not betting odds but hey send it to the Post they love to tweak the Times every chance they get.
Posted by: GMAX | January 17, 2012 at 12:34 PM
So, it's not just a stupid issue based on envy, but a phony stupid issue based on envy and misperception. Nice.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 17, 2012 at 12:39 PM
How could they tell the difference? http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-huffington-post-twitter-account-gets-hacked/
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 17, 2012 at 12:47 PM
You could start her off as a guest blogger....
Posted by: Jim,MtnViewCA,USA | January 17, 2012 at 12:49 PM
I was curious when the whole achievement gap controversy popped up because it seemed manufactured and sure enough no sign of it before the late 1990s.
I started thinking about other naturally occurring gaps created by REALITY and it seems like the focus is always to insist that equity is better. Since these are real differences in ability, hard work, luck, market for skills and knowledge producing these differences in achievement, income, wealth, etc, only government can even it out. And it does so by diminishing everyone but the political class and its cronies.
I knew I was really on to something when I was reading a 1962 British poly sci book over the holidays and discovered repeated references to the industrialization gap. It was the push to close the gap between the 1st world and the 3rd world in terms of production. Coming quickly off a low base as a matter of eco policy meant of course the govt had to be in charge and planning the economy. Which it was not going to want to give back.
Gaps, like purported global enviro problems, are always ultimately about economic and political control. Because a large bureaucracy acting as parasites and the resulting transfer from the private to public sector and the producers to the grateful recipients is so much more fair.
Everybody knows the economic pie is fixed. It's calculated into the decision computer models.
Posted by: rse | January 17, 2012 at 01:03 PM
rse-
F.F.C.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 17, 2012 at 01:07 PM
Awwwww, Tom is a cat person. I knew it. I knew it.
Posted by: peter | January 17, 2012 at 01:08 PM
This is also consistent with the view that income, especially at the upper end, has become more volatile, so that the top 1% may have a lot turnover year-to-year and over the business cycle. But of course the Times wants to push this idea of a fixed "1 percent" class.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 17, 2012 at 01:10 PM
Was it related to this theory, rse;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rostows_stages_of_growth
Posted by: narciso | January 17, 2012 at 01:14 PM
jimmyk-
You have mail.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 17, 2012 at 01:21 PM
Ah-- apologies to your sister Tom; I re-read and realized only JOM had the good sense to print the truth from Mrs. Wilette.
Posted by: NK | January 17, 2012 at 01:29 PM
Uh oh...
Turkey Fires Back at Perry (Ace)
Posted by: Extraneus | January 17, 2012 at 01:52 PM
Even when Obama is responsible, to actually put the crisis at his feet, is well what's French proverb again;
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-balan/2012/01/17/cbss-rose-throws-race-card-gingrich-over-food-stamp-remark
Posted by: narciso | January 17, 2012 at 01:54 PM
Oh no! The dreaded apostrophe!
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 01:55 PM
Obama is off to Disney World on Thursday to tout "tourism and travel." Well, he does have his very own personal set of ears.
Posted by: centralcal | January 17, 2012 at 01:59 PM
This is the way Carlos Slim's cribsheet put it;
“The fact is more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history,” Mr. Gingrich said, a claim that is numerically true but ignored the depth of the recession that Mr. Obama inherited when he took office. “I know that among the politically correct, you’re not supposed to use facts that are uncomfortable.”
Posted by: narciso | January 17, 2012 at 02:02 PM
This was 14 paragraphs into the story
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/us/politics/forceful-attack-against-romney-in-republican-debate.html?sq=romney williams debate&st=cs
Posted by: narciso | January 17, 2012 at 02:04 PM
Well, kudos to Ed Henry!
edhenryTV Ed Henry
For those who've asked, I asked @PressSec the reason why the President has not released college transcripts; Carney said he'd get back to us
Posted by: centralcal | January 17, 2012 at 02:06 PM
Hmmm. The alleged long-term trend of rising income inequality began in the late 70's. I am curious as to whether anyone has ever factored in the major tax code reforms and the lowering of the top rates, which began in the late 70'IIRC,into the equation. As the tax code was tightened up to eliminate or severely restrict employment-related perks for high earners such as country club memberships, "expense accounts," etc. and personal tax rates became less confiscatory, has personal income increased because such compensation went from the corporate balance sheet to the personal income balance sheet? In other words, if we impute the value of those bygone perks to high earners pre-70's, does the alleged rise in inequality flatten out?
Posted by: Boatbuilder | January 17, 2012 at 02:07 PM
I would question why a girl has adopted the name, Tom. But whenever I get into an argument with her, I can visualize her drop-kicking her cat across the room. So before there is that nearly audible thud of a cat bouncing off of a wall, I'll bite my tongue this time.
Posted by: A Casual Observation | January 17, 2012 at 02:12 PM
Listening to Wisconsin Governor Walker on Rush's Show, 1 hour Tape Delay.
He sounds great. Why the heck isn't he up there with Newt, Mitt, Ronnie, and the 2 Ricks?
He's my guy. Go Walker!
Posted by: daddy | January 17, 2012 at 02:14 PM
Boatbuilder-- corporate perks transitioning to cash comp with tax rate changes starting in 1981? Interesting point; I think the main drivers of the inequality rise were the usual suspects, globalization of labor markets driving down US blue collar wages and the explosion of value added positions in the financial services and entertainment industries. But I think your tax code point clearly had some impact.
Posted by: NK | January 17, 2012 at 02:28 PM
Daddy, between Walker, West, Ryan, Rubio, and a few others (Sarah, of course), the GOP talent pool for 2016 and beyond looks very deep, doesn't it?
Posted by: jimmyk | January 17, 2012 at 02:30 PM
Off topic (but not as much as one might think):
The European Crack-Up
And the European Project stands revealed as what any sensible person could have seen it always was: something akin to the construction of a massive, post-Tito Yugoslavia.
And as someone who has spent a lot of time in the Former Yugoslavia (and some of that before it was Former), that is an accurate description of Europe today. The politics of victimhood and envy never ends well.
Posted by: Ranger | January 17, 2012 at 02:35 PM
Can we get to 2016?
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 02:36 PM
I applaud Mrs. Willet's use of easily available and much more current data to prick the NYT/Obama (Should that be Obama/NYT? What does Strunk & White have to say about it?) income inequality bubble.
The SECA data corroborates the cited IRS data wrt the success of the President's Complete Immiseration Policy in driving down the income of the self-employed.
2006 12,439.4
2007 13,669.0
2008 14,731.8
2009 14,405.0
2010 13,238.3
2011 12,829.9
The drop in income from the peak in 2008 to the current low point is 13% ($65.5 billion). I'm sure that the vast majority of the over 11 million self-employed will join me in a hearty 'Good For You, JEF!!' come November 6th to show their full appreciation of the President's efforts.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 17, 2012 at 02:39 PM
When will we stop hearing about what a tough situation Obama "inherited"? So he wasn't up to the task.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 17, 2012 at 02:44 PM
Ears to you, cc. lol
Posted by: Frau Ohrwurm | January 17, 2012 at 02:46 PM
When will we stop hearing about what a tough situation Obama "inherited"? So he wasn't up to the task.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 17, 2012 at 02:44 PM
I also seem to recall that Obama activly sought out the Presidency even after the economic crisis started. Seems to me that he was activly asking to be given this economy.
Posted by: Ranger | January 17, 2012 at 02:49 PM
And wasn't it Obama's own cheif of staff who called the economic situation a "good crisis" that ObamaCo shouldn't let "go to waste."
Posted by: Ranger | January 17, 2012 at 02:52 PM
Sue, you are the winnah!! Great work.
Those Maguires can count AND write.
Posted by: Clarice | January 17, 2012 at 03:01 PM
When will we stop hearing about what a tough situation Obama "inherited"? So he wasn't up to the task.
That will be easily shoved down his throat in a presidential debate. By the right candidate...
"My opponent has been whining for almost four years about the tough situation he 'inherited' [finger quotes]. Well, in thousands of ways, the situation is far worse now than when he was given the honor of the office I'm seeking. And I can assure the American people that if you elect me [look right into the camera...], I won't be complaining and making excuses for the next four years."
Posted by: Extraneus | January 17, 2012 at 03:03 PM
Jake Tapper at Political Punch says there are 3 topics Conservatives have yet to have asked of Romney:
Free Cars for Welfare Recipients...etc.
Jane, I expect you can add some first person info on Tapper's blog info.
Posted by: centralcal | January 17, 2012 at 03:03 PM
And he said if it wasn't turned around in three years he'd be a one-termer. When he now says he didn't know how bad it was, no one has yet asked him why he didn't know, and what prevented him from knowing it.
I'd rather see his law school transcripts than his college ones.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 17, 2012 at 03:07 PM
Wasn't Harvard all pass fail in those days? If not, we'll never see them, although some enterprising person could dig them out of a file at a lawfirm or from an application to Chicago. They are out there.
Posted by: MarkO | January 17, 2012 at 03:09 PM
Tom,
Hopefully you will read this request. Can I have your permission or the permission of the author to post this letter on a private, union forum? The Left.Wing.Nits are constantly yammering about income inequality, never letting facts get in the way of repeating DNC talking points. Thank you.
Posted by: MoodyBlu | January 17, 2012 at 03:09 PM
Brilliance in a glimpse
Posted by: Manuel Transmission | January 17, 2012 at 03:15 PM
And I'm sure this will go over well if it happens:
Will the IMF tap American taxpayers for a $100 billion EU bailout?
So that already huge $1.5 trillion deficit this year, will probably end up being $1.6 trillion.
Posted by: Ranger | January 17, 2012 at 03:19 PM
I want the SAT scores. Everyone should know how far AA can take a kid and a 1050 in this great country of ours.
Anyone want to guess which was worse - verbal or math?
Posted by: Extraneus | January 17, 2012 at 03:20 PM
I always enjoy Victor Davis Hanson, but i really enjoyed this new one just up:
So why Read Anymore---Is Reading Good Books Over?
Posted by: daddy | January 17, 2012 at 03:21 PM
Ext,
My guess is Math was worse, unless the student was enrolled in Ebonics, in which case both scores were totally in the toilet.
Posted by: daddy | January 17, 2012 at 03:23 PM
Ras has a poll where the generic republican beats Obama 47 to 42. That's why I think Romney can beat Obama. He is as close to generic as we can get.
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 03:31 PM
Can we get to 2016?
My thought exactly.
The cars were donated by charities, while Massachusetts taxpayers funded — as the Boston Herald reported in 2009 — “repairs, registration, insurance, excise tax, the title and AAA membership for one year.”
Romney’s Department of Transitional Assistance started the program, officially called “Transp
I vaguely remember this. I think it was modeled after Guiliani's success in NYC where he provided people free housing for a limited amount of time as long as they got jobs. According to Romney 80% of the people got off welfare.
The other 2 I don't remember at all but they don't sound good.
I wonder if Romney will get as much vetting as Obama - oh right.
Posted by: Jane | January 17, 2012 at 03:32 PM
Well seeing as he was Bernanke's thesis advisor, in the LUN, it's a virtual certainty
Posted by: narciso | January 17, 2012 at 03:32 PM
The tough situation that the Bamster inherited from Republicans?
Civics 101:
Congress, not the president, wastes our money. The economy didn't tank until a year and a half after Democrats regained control of both houses of Congress in January, 2007.
At the time of the 2008 Election, unemployment was at 4.7%, and it didn't even begin to skyrocket up to 9.5% (or 16.3% realistically) until after Obama was inaugurated (as a vote of no confidence in that empty suit, street hustler and pretentious, decadent dilletante).
Inflation didn't begin to skyrocket upwards until mid 2010, more than three years after Democrats regained control of Congress, a year and a half after Obama was inaugurated, and several months before Republicans regained control of the House.
The debt accrued during the Obama Administration is more than the total of all previous debts under all previous administrations combined.
When Bush left office, the Middle East and southeast Asia were completely stabilized. In the past three years, the chronic screw-ups in the current administration have completely destabilized the entire Middle East and southeast Asia, all to advance their insideous Greenie, Socialist agenda.
What Obama inherited? Bull. That's MSM spin.
Posted by: A Casual Observation | January 17, 2012 at 03:37 PM
Cool Map Tool: Tunnel to the other side of the Earth.
My arse, sitting on the couch here in South Anchorage, is directly over a bit of water, just off the north coast of Antarctica, and directly below the tip of South Africa.
What is directly on the opposite side of the planet from you guys?
Anybody overtop land?
Posted by: daddy | January 17, 2012 at 03:43 PM
(as a vote of no confidence in that empty suit, street hustler and pretentious, decadent dilletante)
And he's lazy, also. But that might be covered under "dilletante".
Posted by: glasater | January 17, 2012 at 03:48 PM
Was anyone listening to the Glenn Beck radio show this morning? I usually don't, but I drove out of my usual reception area, and listened to some guest who talked about how Bear Stearns was deliberately brought down by a bear attack, and how the 2008 economic crisis was a result of economic terrorism? Intriguing. want to know who his guest was in hour 2.
Posted by: peter | January 17, 2012 at 03:51 PM
D, I am over the Indian Ocean SE of Austrailia
Posted by: BB Key | January 17, 2012 at 03:55 PM
BB, Start swimming quick:)
Posted by: daddy | January 17, 2012 at 04:01 PM
"Wasn't Harvard all pass fail in those days? "
I've never heard that the law school ever went to pass/fail. That would be very surprising to me.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 17, 2012 at 04:02 PM
If anyone needs a lunch break, many good comments by our MayBee at this Althouse post: I thought there wasn't supposed to be any current controversy over contraception.
Posted by: daddy | January 17, 2012 at 04:02 PM
Google tells me they went to it in 2009.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 17, 2012 at 04:06 PM
Well seeing as he was Bernanke's thesis advisor, in the LUN, it's a virtual certainty
What's a virtual certainty, narciso? The IMF bailout? Fischer's been a better central banker than his student.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 17, 2012 at 04:18 PM
daddy,
The middle of the Indian Ocean, several hundred miles southwest of Australia.
Yes, very cool tool!
Posted by: MoodyBlu | January 17, 2012 at 04:23 PM
Quite a conversation between the Italian ship captain and a Coast Guard commander:
Transcript: Cruise captain and Italian coast guard official
Posted by: Extraneus | January 17, 2012 at 04:31 PM
This Italian captain sounds like Obama. Run the ship up on the rocks, and then run like hell for an island retreat!
Posted by: GMAX | January 17, 2012 at 04:40 PM
Ho hum...
The Alaska Board of Game authorizes Aerial Wolf Hunting for the Kenai, but nobody cares anymore because they don't need to use it as a prop to bash that heartless Sarah Palin.
"A particularly harsh winter with deep snowfall is expected to increase moose mortality, board member Ted Spraker said. Successful wolf control should boost moose hunting prospects, board members said."
Posted by: daddy | January 17, 2012 at 04:44 PM
With respect to Andrew Sullivan's nutty defense of the Bamster in a nutty Newsweek article, Chris Matthews said that Sullivan was "brilliant". Those nuts continue to lower the bar for each other. Next we'll be hearing that Al Shapton is brilliant, too.
Posted by: A Casual Observation | January 17, 2012 at 04:45 PM
Daddy: Over water slightly southwest of Madagascar.
Posted by: Sara | January 17, 2012 at 04:45 PM
Pacific Ocean, northeast of Papua New Guinea
Posted by: MaryD | January 17, 2012 at 04:54 PM
I love me some Madagascan Lemur's Sara, especially the Aye Aye Lemur, which scientists just discovered has a special ability to internally heat up it's middle finger.
Might come in useful this winter if I could do that while walking by the Occupy Anchorage bums.
Posted by: daddy | January 17, 2012 at 04:57 PM
Thank Goodness!
DoT, JiB, Captain, Rocco, MarkO, TC, Narciso, etc...
The new fashions at Milan's Men's Fashion Week gala have finally hit the CatWalk.
I don't know about you guys but I am bored to death of my old Blue Jeans and tenny's and sweat pants, and who among us isn't aching to strut around Milano dressed like a Pumpkin?
Ciao.
Posted by: daddy | January 17, 2012 at 05:04 PM
I have someone who went to Harvard Law at the relevant time and he said something about taking some classes pass/fail. I'll get the scoop, whatever it is.
Posted by: MarkO | January 17, 2012 at 05:04 PM
Ugh. Petitions in, claims of over 1 million for Walker and 850k for the Lt Gov. The head GAB guy is on TV, claims not much fraud in the past. Scanned petitions will be put online (PDFs, non searchable). Possibly by the weekend. No idea on when elections will be held -- courts will pick anyway.
Posted by: henry | January 17, 2012 at 05:05 PM
Juan Williams on the Five doubling down that Newt's comments came across as racist to Blacks.
Posted by: daddy | January 17, 2012 at 05:05 PM
Glenn might as well have lit a match in th studio this morning, yes I know consider the source, but there's little excuse for content;
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/more-embarrassing-ron-paul-newsletters-emerge-on-race-israel-more/
Posted by: narciso | January 17, 2012 at 05:06 PM
Ah, a database of names will be put online at some point.
Posted by: henry | January 17, 2012 at 05:06 PM
Over the Indian Ocean. Try Hawaii ! see where you end up
Posted by: Mark in Houston | January 17, 2012 at 05:07 PM
These are outtakes from Zoolander, right, daddy, they can't be real.
Posted by: narciso | January 17, 2012 at 05:09 PM
Years ago, in the Weekly Standard, Bill Kristol had a terrific comment about the Times' letters to the editor, something along the lines of:
"I don't know what's worse, these are the only letters they get, or these or the only ones they print."
The Caucus blog comments (moderated with a heavy hand) are pretty stunning, too.
Posted by: Tonto | January 17, 2012 at 05:10 PM
Due east of Australia in the Indian Ocean.
Posted by: Stephanie | January 17, 2012 at 05:11 PM
I am in the middle of the Indian Ocean. Due south of tip of India.
Posted by: Sue | January 17, 2012 at 05:16 PM
Here is the story,
http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/01/looks-like-wisconsin-heading-for-recall-election/
Posted by: narciso | January 17, 2012 at 05:16 PM
Maybe he was watching the soccer scrum of the last few days;
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/14/2590974/is-mitt-romneys-mormon-faith-an.html
Posted by: narciso | January 17, 2012 at 05:31 PM
daddy, I posted something about the fashion show and, poof, into the air. Somewhere over the Indian Ocean, if I guess correctly.
Posted by: MarkO | January 17, 2012 at 05:38 PM
What could ACORN want more than perpetual electioneering? Doom.
Posted by: MarkO | January 17, 2012 at 05:40 PM
daddy
I haven't dressed like that since the 70's
Posted by: Rocco | January 17, 2012 at 05:44 PM