jump to last post 1-21 of 21 discussions (115 posts)

Fact vs. Hyperbole Crime in Arizona

  1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago

    A factual account

    The fear mongering diatribes of Brewer and Arpaio don't square with the facts.  Thankfully we have a judiciary equipped and willing to stop this madness.

    1. wilderness profile image98
      wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Factual, huh?  In the very first sentence the article states that Bolton declared the Arizona law unconstitutional - not true.  It may not survive a court case, which is why it will now go to court, but Bolton cannot make that decision without a trial.

      It also states that Bolton said it infringes on federal jurisdiction - same thing.  As usual in such articles facts are twisted, spun and generally distorted to the point they no longer have any value.

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
        Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        You have misquoted the article.  Facts win again! smile

        1. wilderness profile image98
          wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          "When U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled on Wednesday that key provisions of Arizona's new anti-immigration law were unconstitutional, she could have also declared them unnecessary"

          Misquoted?  At most you could quibble about the term "provisions", but if part of it is unconstitutional it makes the whole thing unconstitutional.

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
            Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            No, you're not paying attention to well reported FACTS.  The bill was written with seperate, independant provisions that each must be ruled on seperately.

            Read the FACTS and show me where they are wrong.

            1. wilderness profile image98
              wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              I have read the bill.  It is one bill, passed with one collective vote.  Yes, the courts will probably rule on separate clauses separately as a method to indicate just why it is wrong and perhaps to help Arizona make a different one.

              That does not change the FACT that Bolton can not make such a declaration without a trial.  Your article is just more spin.

              1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                You seem to be making the point that the hyperbole (rampant crime caused by an invasion of the dreaded Mexican horde) is true; and the FACTS - reduced violent crime and illegal crossings, are just spin.

                ...Have you considered hosting a show on Fox?

                1. wilderness profile image98
                  wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  You misunderstand the thrust of my comment, Ron.  When an article presents obvious falsehoods to help the spin on what they are presenting it throws the entire article in doubt. 

                  Has the number of police officers increased during the period in question?  What is the percentage of illegal aliens vs citizens in the jails or deported for violent crime?
                  It is well documented that illegals are leaving Arizona after the passage of the bill - how much of the decreased illegal crossing is due to increased efforts by various law enforcement?

                  All questions that are germane to the article, but never presented.  The whole article is an effort to present only one side and to emotionally convince the reader that that side is correct.  It is well disguised by so-called facts, figures and statistics, but all those facts are really thrown into serious doubt with the use of so much spin and falsehood.

                  1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    Show a falsehood.

                    The claim made by Fox and friends (and blind followers) is that the situation is getting worse and it's Obama's fault.

                    That argument crumbles when it encounters the FACTS

  2. TMMason profile image70
    TMMasonposted 7 years ago

    This topic will not even be discussed in full and with a correct eye toward what is going on in AZ.

    Since anything one posts in relation to crime and its true  brutal nature in AZ.. Will probrably get me, or any other, suspended from here.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
      Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Opinions based on fact don't demonstrate a "correct eye".

      Fearful ignorance is the correct basis?

      Do you understand HP policies and the circumstances that lead to banning?

      Brutal crimes happen in all 50 states, but less so in Arizona than say...

      Florida.  They are also much more likely to be committed by US citizens than undocumented lettuce pickers.

      1. TMMason profile image70
        TMMasonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        I garauntee you I could post articles with facts... and in minutes I would be gone for a week if not more.

        And that, is just a fact.

        The admin here are biased as to what part of this story can be shown. As with some other topics.

        That, is just another, "fact".

        As what happened when I posted the, "facts", about beheadings at the border. One side is allowed to be shown on here... so?... you can continue your propaganda, ron.

        We all know the real facts... at least those of us who do not limit our knowledge of the situation to the Leftist MSM.

        I cannot even post a link in regards to this topic for fear of the censorship axe falling from the admins on my neck.

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
          Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          I've been banned twice for the exact same reasons you have been banned.  Neither time involved a posting of facts, but rather letting things get personal and out of hand.

          You get banned for violating the rules, not for stating your case.

          1. TMMason profile image70
            TMMasonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            BS...

            I was banned for posting a link they didn't like.

            That is just a fact. I bet if I posted it right now I would be gone.

            Jim was there... he saw the censoship first hand.

            Bias.. is what that is called.

            Also... I have been banned for telling someone "they were playing stupid".

            That is pointing out a tactic used by the left in debates... and they didn't like that I would point it out.

            You get to close to the truth... and your gone.

            1. Jim Hunter profile image62
              Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              Where was I?

              What happened?

              1. TMMason profile image70
                TMMasonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                The mexican beheading thread...

                1. Jim Hunter profile image62
                  Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Oh yeah, you got banned for that?

              2. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                Jim wasn't there as you claim?  Did it even happen?

                1. TMMason profile image70
                  TMMasonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/48811

                  Yes Jim. I got suspended for that.

                  1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    Read the forum rules.  Your violation was obvious and the banning was legit.

                    That's a FACT

            2. Ron Montgomery profile image61
              Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              "They were playing stupid" is a personal attack and will get you banned.

              1. Jim Hunter profile image62
                Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                How is that a personal attack?

                Playing stupid is way different than being stupid.

                1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  The full quote in context will provide an explanation.

                2. TMMason profile image70
                  TMMasonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Cause they say so, Jim.

                  1. Jim Hunter profile image62
                    Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    I guess.

                  2. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    Show the entire post.  It will demonstrate why you were rightfully banned.

                    If you can't follow the rules go to a different playground.

  3. Jim Hunter profile image62
    Jim Hunterposted 7 years ago

    Why is Phoenix called the Kidnapping Capital?

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
      Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      John McCain invented this term for political reasons and of course it spread like a virus among the throngs of reactionaries who are too lazy to research things for themselves.

      Anyone who wants the FACTS of the matter can begin their research with the article I posted.  I can't do all of the work for them, but I can get them started. smile

      1. Jim Hunter profile image62
        Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        So it doesn't have anything to do with the fact that kidnappings have gone up 200%plus?

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
          Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          From the article:


          It is true that Phoenix has in recent years seen a spate of kidnappings. But in almost every case they've involved drug traffickers targeting other narcos for payment shakedowns, and the 318 abductions reported last year were actually down 11% from 2008. Either way, the figure hardly makes Phoenix, as Arizona Senator John McCain claimed last month, "the No. 2 kidnapping capital of the world" behind Mexico City. A number of Latin American capitals can claim that dubious distinction.

          Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article … z0vBbcZ7R7


          mmmmmmmmm, FACTS

          1. Jim Hunter profile image62
            Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Here's a fact.

            Committing crimes against criminals is still a crime.

            Here's another.

            kidnapping has surged from 48 reported cases in Maricopa County in 2004, to 366 in 2008 and 359 the year before.

            I really don't trust an article that downplays who a crime victim is.

            1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
              Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              And 318 in 2009.  Reductions in violent crime show progress, not an out-of-control situation as the fear mongerers claim.

              FACT vs. hyperbole

              1. Jim Hunter profile image62
                Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                318 kidnappings is not a serious matter?

                Really?

                Thats not an out-of-control situation?

                I wonder how many kidnappings in Duluth Minnesota?

                1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  319

                  1. Jim Hunter profile image62
                    Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    Must be the Canadians sneaking across and holding Americans hostage for some Moosehead beer.

                2. TMMason profile image70
                  TMMasonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  As long as they are criminals kidnapping each other... then it wouldn't matter about Deluth.

                  huh!... Hahahahaha

                  Ah the logic is mind-boggling

                  1. JBeadle profile image81
                    JBeadleposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    Nothing to do with the thread really TMM but how do you manage to post so much but hang around 1-15 for hubscore?  Is it one of those quantity doesn't equal quality things?

        2. AEvans profile image79
          AEvansposted 7 years agoin reply to this




          I reside in Arizona and honestly I have not heard much about kidnapping in Arizona. It still appears to be minimal to me.

          1. Jim Hunter profile image62
            Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Its in the news.

            1. reed3915 profile image60
              reed3915posted 7 years agoin reply to this

              My brother lives in Phoenix and he says it is out of control and the news media does not report the truth to all of the country nor all of the facts.  My brother says it is very scary to live in Phoenix. His wife will not leave the house, and she panics when he leaves which he has to do daily, he works in security for a major hospital, so I beleive him over any others especially the above who is down playing this major invasion of criminals.  When did we give preferential treatment to law breakers?  Does it really matter if there are more than 5 or more than 300 kidnappings up 1% or 5%, fact is any kidnapping for any reason is one too many!  A lady I know and her daughter had to run from Arizona and hide because the daughter "messed" with the Mexicans!  They had actually kidnapped her and she escaped after the guard fell asleep, barely getting out in time because they were ready to execute her and another female.  I can assume what she did but I don't have that fact so I won't bother, but isn't it enough that these Mexican thugs are using 3rd world tactics on our soil and no fear of retribution, does that alone not open some of your eyes to the future if we don't stop the flow of these criminals and send back the worst of the worst at least make it harder for them to move about and run amok? Seriously it will be in your town tomorrow if not already there.

  4. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    Jim Hunter said: "
    Its funny how facts differ from other facts.
    One of the differing facts has to be fiction."

    Not necessarily. Two people can look at the same situation, or experience the same experience,and report it differently. My reality (and to me, it IS reality) may not be the same as your reality. Just as your reality is 100% authentic to you, but may be only partially authentic to me.
    Both of our realities may (or may not be) based on facts.
    Who is to say my facts are fictionalized? Or that yours are?

    Besides, how can we trust any information coming out of any media or the government (federal, state or local) to be factual?

    1. Jim Hunter profile image62
      Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I agree that we may perceive facts differently.

      But one set of 'facts' is correct and the other wrong.

      Facts is facts.

    2. Misha profile image77
      Mishaposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      We can't. But cross-checking may reveal the facts and expose lies. smile

  5. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    Ah. But who is to decide which facts are the "fact facts" and which set are the "non facts"?

    1. Jim Hunter profile image62
      Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I am as a matter of fact.

  6. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    That would be a capital idea, if we could really trust that our fact-checked sources were any more truthful!
    Do we not tend to rely on sources that reinforce what we already believe to be facts? How many "fact-checkers" among us truly search a broad cross-section of sources vs. amassing "proof" from a limited set of sources we know to see things like we do?

    1. Misha profile image77
      Mishaposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Surely public education went to a great extent to train us to trust the sources without cross-checking. There is only one correct answer to every question, right? All other answers are heresy. Just choose the right source, and you have all the right answers. smile

      And yeah, it seems natural for us to cherry pick facts that support our opinion and to "not notice" those that don't smile

  7. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    This could quickly turn into a Seussian rhyme!

    My name is Jim and I pick facts.
    Who picks facts?
    Jim picks facts!
    How come only Jim picks facts?
    Why not Mighty, or Misha, or Moe?
    Can't they pick facts like Jim, we aks?
    They can't because they are not Jim.
    All the facts belong to him.
    Not to Mighty, Misha or Moe
    But only to him, the him named Jim.

    1. Jim Hunter profile image62
      Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Is that a fact?

      1. Flightkeeper profile image73
        Flightkeeperposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Okay, Jim, what did you do? First TMM got them attacking him on his low hubber score?!

        And now you got them trying to insult you in rhyme...

        You guys...!

        KEEP IT UP! lol

        It's very funny!

        They can't attack you on your POV with real facts as wilderness has shown so they pick on something else.

        And that's a fact! big_smile

        1. Jim Hunter profile image62
          Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Its my sunny disposition.

        2. Ron Montgomery profile image61
          Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          As Wilderness has shown? 

          lol lol  lol

          1. Flightkeeper profile image73
            Flightkeeperposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Hyperbole!!!

            1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
              Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              Agreed.  Her posts were fine examples of parroting hyperbole.

              Glad we agree. smile

              1. Flightkeeper profile image73
                Flightkeeperposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                Well, I'm not sure Mighty Mom would appreciate that. big_smile But hey, it's your call.

                1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  I'm sure MM would in fact appreciate that I agreed with your asessmeny of Wildrness's posts.

                  See?  We can agree on so much.

                  Stop hatin'

                  1. Flightkeeper profile image73
                    Flightkeeperposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    Hyperbole!!!

                    lol

              2. Jim Hunter profile image62
                Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                I have to defend Mighty Mom Ron, very undemocratic of you to throw her under the bus.

                Obama, is that you?

                1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  She isn't even paying attention.  The picture of the mini-sombrero got her all hot and bothered.

                  1. Jim Hunter profile image62
                    Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    I saw that, think he was a cartel member?

                2. Flightkeeper profile image73
                  Flightkeeperposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  OH NO YOU DIDN'T!

                  lol Yeah you did! lol

  8. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    That's right.
    There is only ONE right answer.

  9. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    Why are you aksing me, Jim?
    You are the declared declarer of facts.
    I don't know what is a fact and what is not.
    You do.
    Is it a fact???

    1. Jim Hunter profile image62
      Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I have to check my sources.

      I'll get back to you.

  10. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    Righteo, Jim!
    See you later... much!

    1. Jim Hunter profile image62
      Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Do you need a hug?

  11. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    Nah, I'm good. Thanks, tho!!!

    I will eagerly await your return with a full investigation -- including credible sources cited -- of the facts.

    1. Jim Hunter profile image62
      Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Which facts do you mean?

      That I am the one who decides the facts?

      Its a fact.

      Source Me.

      Link to this post.

  12. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    So when you say you are going on a fact-checking mission, do you really mean you are going to have a conversation with yourself?

    1. Jim Hunter profile image62
      Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Yes.

  13. Ron Montgomery profile image61
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago
  14. Ron Montgomery profile image61
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago
  15. Ron Montgomery profile image61
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago

    http://images.paraorkut.com/img/graphics/a3/20071206010314_9.jpg

    This guy's happy. smile

  16. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    Ohhh... THAT'S what they mean when they say to put a little hat on your thingy!

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
      Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Might be kinda scratchy.

      Which is cool if that's what you're into.

  17. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    I can picture the marketing campaign now:
    woven straw... for your pleasure... and hers.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
      Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The red band is actually a very effective spermicide. smile

  18. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    http://www.politifact.com/texas/stateme … ital-worl/

    The vast majority of stories on this are from 2009. If you look at 2010 stories they refute the claim. Some even go so far as to call the AZ governor and Senator McCain "liars."

    1. Jim Hunter profile image62
      Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      "The Los Angeles Times more specifically reported that Phoenix "police received 366 kidnapping-for-ransom reports" in 2008 and that they estimate "twice that number go unreported," according to a Feb. 12, 2009, article."


      Seems the dispute is whether or not Phoenix is the kidnapping Capital.

      None of you seem to notice that in 2004 there were 48 reported cases of kidnapping, in 2007 there were over 300, 2008 more than 300, 2009 more than 300.

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
        Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        I thought you were more worried about Duluth.

        1. Jim Hunter profile image62
          Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          I'm sure the Swedes and Norwegians can handle the Canuks.

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
            Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Canucks.

      2. Flightkeeper profile image73
        Flightkeeperposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Well you know, we can't compare Arizona's kidnapping rates with other states, we have to compare it with Latin American countries...?! roll

      3. Doug Hughes profile image60
        Doug Hughesposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Fine - we are all for going after the drug cartels that work across the border. Do you think this law will discourage them?

        If the problem is drug gang violence, why are you going after undocumented lettuce pickers?

        What Ron showed with his post is that GENERALLY crime is down in AZ - and has been going DOWN  while the population of undocumented workers rose. Now you want to make the discussion about drug & gang violence, which the bill won't even incidentally address.

        1. Jim Hunter profile image62
          Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          It will address it if the bad guys are illegal, which most of the Mexican drug cartel members in the US are.

          Glossed right over that didn't ya?

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
            Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            The feds are targeting the cartel members and other violent offenders.

            WHICH IS   WHY   VIOLENT CRIME IS   DECREASING

            Wasting resources to keep migrant crop pickers and landscapers out is what Brewer tried to do before a sensible person (Bolton) stopped her.

            1. Flightkeeper profile image73
              Flightkeeperposted 7 years agoin reply to this



              Hyperbole!!!

            2. Jim Hunter profile image62
              Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              What federal agency are you referring to?

              1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                ICE,  the ones actually trained for the job.

                1. Jim Hunter profile image62
                  Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  ICE, yeah, doing a bang up job.

                  Since when did immigration agents handle major crimes?

          2. Doug Hughes profile image60
            Doug Hughesposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Jim said -"It will address it if the bad guys are illegal, which most of the Mexican drug cartel members in the US are.

            Glossed right over that didn't ya?"

            Lacks critical thinking skills..

            Example - If we stipulate that all the guards at Auschwitz were Christian - then it stands to reason that all Christinas are mass murderers.

            Even you can see the falicy in that (I hope.)

            If you were prosecuting the genocide of Auschwitz, you would target the specific offenders. In this example,  the offenders by class  were Nazi SS soldiers stationed at Auschwitz. In the same manner, if you identify that you are trying to prevent kidnappings in the US done by Mexican  drug cartels, you target that group - to obtain the greatest benefit for the lowest cost.

            The problem the wingnuts claim to be solving (crime) doesn't exist as they describe. Where it does exist - the kidnapping issue - isn't going to be addressed by the bill they wrote. Think about it - the cartels are sophisticated and they have money - they can produce phony documents for their memebers. After devoting endless resources on chasing hispanics with no papers - who are not the problem - the only group unaffected will be the most violent and best funded group - the cartels.

            1. Flightkeeper profile image73
              Flightkeeperposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              Wow. Where do you even begin?

              Oh I know...

              Hyperbole!!!

              1. Jim Hunter profile image62
                Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                Auschwitz,Nazis and concentration camps.

                Just trying to deport illegals, why do they have to make it harder than it really is.

                If they are illegal then wave bye bye.

                If they are legal wave hello.

            2. Jim Hunter profile image62
              Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              "The problem the wingnuts claim to be solving (crime) doesn't exist as they describe. Where it does exist - the kidnapping issue - isn't going to be addressed by the bill they wrote."

              The crime exists unless you are going to tell me illegals in Arizona are not killing,raping, or committing some other heinous crime.

              Your answer is to take away any tool at all to identify and deport the illegal.

              Your fear of a poor innocent ILLEGAL non member of the cartels being captured and removed from the country he/she illegally entered is bizarre.

              Why are Americans supposed to foot the bills illegals are creating?

  19. Doug Hughes profile image60
    Doug Hughesposted 7 years ago

    Thanks for posting this, Ron. A lot of what AZ is doing is a solution in search of a problem. The real motive is building a (hysterical) base for tea-baggers. President Obama (and President Bush) have tried to get everyone together to  address a comprehensive solution. That makes sense. However, it doesn't serve the purposes of the wingnuts who would have to COMPROMISE in some areas in order to get agreement in other areas.

    The actual answer - addressing the problem rationally - is DOA in DC.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
      Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The bill has always been about politics, not an actual problem.  Scroll up, I provided local news links showing the Governor running away from her mistake.

      1. Jim Hunter profile image62
        Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        I read the links, it seems she is wondering if she should basically reword the bill.

        Seems a rational thing to do.

        And answering a stupid question isn't a mandatory thing.

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
          Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          When challenged to support her outrageous views, she runs and hides...

          Reminds me of someone...

  20. Jim Hunter profile image62
    Jim Hunterposted 7 years ago

    I wonder if maybe the bad guys are dumping the bodies further in the Desert than ever before.

    Maybe they are being taken back into Mexico to be killed.

    Just wondering.

  21. Mighty Mom profile image86
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    *Help, I've been thrown under a bus, and it's heading to Phoenix, and I'm afraid I'll get kidnapped, or beheaded, or something... Somebody, please help me. Please....*

 
working