Guardian Watch, latest
Comments 43

Guardian: “yes media is weighted against Trump” because he’s “rubbish”

by Catte

trumpmediabias

As a female writer I often cringe at the embarrassing collection of beaming, smooth-faced young women the Guardian fields to wrap dangerous political extremisms in lipsticky identity-politics. There’s a touch of exploitation in it, intended or not. Here’s the latest example, by Lucia Graves:

Screen Shot 2016-08-17 at 00.14.44

The article sets out the case that Trump does not deserve unbiased press coverage. The media would love to be fair to him, of course, because fairness is their watchword – but they just can’t do it, because they have to protect their audience from his lies. Censorship is actually a sort of duty, Lucia tells us in her elementary-school prose, because Trump is “rubbish”.

His campaign is indeed a place where journalistic objectivity meets its limits, but it’s not because we’re deliberately gunning for him. There simply is no fairness in presenting both sides of a story when one side is consistently rubbish, to put it kindly, or a dumpster fire, in this cycle’s parlance. Trump changes his mind like it’s the weather and tells a lie every five minutes, going by Politico’s best count.

If we get past the awkward syntax (how often does Lucia think Trump changes the weather?), we have to admit “a lie every five minutes” is quite a lot of lies. True the article doesn’t tell us what any of those lies actually are, but Politico does (well, actually it doesn’t do that, but it does run a list of alleged “lies” Trump told over a single week, some of which may seem a bit relevant). But just in case you’re still not feeling convinced of the need for wholesale suppression of open political debate based on the fact that (shock) politicians lie, here’s a little more of Lucia’s A-grade analysis:

CNN and MSNBC have taken to putting parentheticals in their chyrons to correct erroneous claims in real time. The New York Times has started including the sweep of history in even the most straightforward news stories to demonstrate breaks from longstanding political norms.

The fact-checkers, in particular, are working overtime.

Trump’s also been keeping Politifact busy. As of late June, 95% of the site’s 158 fact-checks of Trump were rated “false” or “pants on fire”, while the same could be said for just 16% of Hillary Clinton’s 120 rated statements.

Ok, who is going to argue with a collection of data like this? Trump is 95% liar and Clinton is only 16% liar! Politifact says so! If that’s not a done deal, cast-iron, knock down argument for total censorship of Donald Trump and all he stands for I’d like to know what is.

Wait, what? Do I hear you say you want to know how they arrive at these statistics? You want to see the actual claims being made so you can evaluate them for yourself? You have heard that Politifact is not an entirely objective or neutral outfit?

No, I’m sorry, you need to get with the program. Media-bias is no longer a thing to be ashamed of, because the media is only biased against bad people. Today’s censorship is just about helping us understand things – weeding out the lies and leaving only the lovely truth for us to enjoy in nice pre-packed, easily-digested soundbites. Lucia is here to tell us our lovely cuddly Big Brother is only “fact-checking” so we don’t need to.


43 Comments

  1. John says

    Reiner: You – and others who regularly read this blog – may find some of the contents of the article headed “From WW II To WW III: Global NATO And Remilitarized Germany” [ http://www.globalresearch.ca/from-ww-ii-to-ww-iii-global-nato-and-remilitarized-germany/14377 ] interesting.

    Part of the article mentions a British document from the months preceding the surrender of Nazi Germany in May of 1945 and the subsequent Potsdam Conference of July 17-August 2 called “Operation Unthinkable: ‘Russia: Threat to Western Civilization’”.

    In March of 2005 Russian historian Valentin Falin was interviewed by the Russian Information Agency Novosti website in a feature called “Russia Would Have Faced World War III Had It Not Stormed Berlin” and spelled out the details of Churchill’s plans:

    “The new war was scheduled to start on July 1, 1945. American, Canadian, and British contingents in Europe, the Polish Expeditionary Corps and 10-12 German divisions (the ones that had not been disbanded and kept in Schleswig-Holstein and Southern Denmark) were supposed to participate in the operation.” [2]’

    You mentioned US General George Patton, who is also mentioned in the article: ‘He demanded hysterically to continue the advance of American troops from the Elbe, through Poland and Ukraine, to Stalingrad in order to finish the war at the place where Hitler had been defeated.’

    “Patton called the Russians ‘the descendants of Genghis Khan.’ Churchill, in his turn, was not overly scrupulous about the choice of words in his description of Soviet people. He called the Bolsheviks ‘barbarians’ and ‘ferocious baboons.’ In short, the “theory of subhuman races” was obviously not a German monopoly. [4]’

    This all goes to show that the truth can sometimes be stranger than fiction.

    Anything – even something literally unthinkable – seemingly – is possible!

    Like

  2. Koolz says

    Do you have any idea who owns this said media, that is all the Media from the Guardian to NY Times?
    CNN BBC etc.
    Don’t worry I will tell you! The same Trash that put George Soros in Charge of creating the Black Lives Matter Bull S##t, Immigration of Islam in Europe Bull Sh##t and USA. Funding and creating of ISIS(more Bull Sh##t)
    they are Zionist Jews! Just look up the owners.
    What happens when someone goes against there agenda? Do you think Clinton or Obama are even people that have control? no! There just puppets like Merkel. Do as they are told, that is why they are given power.
    Check out some of who the Elders of Zion are http://www.bollyn.com

    Like

    • Eric_B says

      Personally I blame transssexuals. Ever since they’ve been allowed to pee in the ladies’ they’ve become too big for their Louboutins.

      Like

      • just wanted to say its great to see someone take the piss (see what I’ve done there) from all these conspiracy theorists – jesus (if he/she exists) help us.

        Like

  3. John says

    I found Frank’s contribution very thought-provoking and interesting.
    Here in the UK, the people behind the so-called and self-styled Institute of Ideas meet his criteria.
    Originally all far left, they are now unbridled and enthusiastic champions of capitalism today.
    Why is this?
    I think there are two reasons for this revised behaviour.
    Firstly, it pays a whole lot better than being on the left. These days, being a right wing ideologue pays off big-time.
    They all enjoy well-paid entrees into the corridors of power and are handsomely rewarded for what they say and do.
    Secondly, I sometimes think there may just be a vestigial degree of their former sentiment at play in that they are working to promote capitalist values to the point where they end up becoming so intolerable that the conditions will provoke a real revolution. In such an event, they – I believe – believe that they are sufficiently nimble in body and mind to be able to switch rapidly to the new winners and the new authoritarianism, thus staying in positions of power and influence under the new regime, which is what they truly crave.
    There is one other dimension which seems to link many of them too. When we talk about Trotsky and Trotskyism, we are talking about a set of ideas which date from the 1920s – almost a century ago. Since then, two key events have taken place which were not previously anticipated very widely.
    The Second World War revealed – through the excesses off Nazism – the extent to which unreason and barbarism could prevail within a modern industrialised setting. No former ideology really took into account this destructive form of ideology – it previously made no sense to think in these terms. The second key event was the formation of the illegal state of Israel in the late 1940s. Many of the neo-liberal/conservative brigade are Jewish. Prior to WW2, this fact would have had very little bearing on anything but the appalling events of WW2 and the militaristic establishment of Israel – for many of the neo-lib/con “thinkers” – has altered their natural loyalties away from perceiving themselves as assimilated into nationalist western societies into becoming covert supporters of Israel as a potential bolt-hole.
    Their loyalties have shifted away from a class they may feel betrayed them and did nothing to save them in WW2 to a sense of attachment to a state which – vile as it certainly is – offers them at least survival of some form or another.

    Like

    • reinertorheit says

      Since then, two key events have taken place which were not previously anticipated very widely.
      The Second World War revealed – through the excesses off Nazism

      Yet Nazism was brought to its knees by the Red Army. Patton was still in bed in a French whorehouse when the Soviet troops took Berlin. It was the Soviet troops who relieved the Nazi concentration camps of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Dachau. Tito’s red partisans played a decisive role in halting the Third Reich’s advances.

      American revisionist lies continue to perpetuate a pile of garbage that the USA was in some way a leading player against Hitler. It was not. America was an ally of Hitler’s until the day of Pearl Harbour, when the USA finally turned up late for WW2, and then left early at the end,

      Like

    • Randy Warren says

      Hillary: Benghazi , voter fraud , secret private server with classified material , Using the Clinton Foundation as a cover for tax evasion, Hiring Cronies, And taking bribes from foreign countries , Giving 123 Technologies $300 Million, and right afterward it Declared Bankruptcy and was sold to the Chinese , Arming the Muslim Brotherhood and hiring them in the White House , Whitewater, Watergate committee, Vince Foster, Shady Commodity Deals , Funding of neoNazis in the Ukraine that led to the toppling of the democratically elected president and to the biggest crisis that country has had since WWII , Turning Libya into chaos , Mastermind of the so-called “Arab Spring” that only brought chaos, death and destruction to the Middle East and North Africa , Leaving four Americans to die in Benghazi , Encouraging and supporting the murders of Palestinians and the destruction of their homes, towns and villages by Israel , The funding and arming of terrorists in Syria, the destruction and destabilization of that nation, giving the order to US lapdogs in Turkey and Saudi Arabia to give sarin gas to the “moderate” terrorists in Syria that they eventually used on civilians, and framed Assad, and had it not been for the Russians and Putin, we would have used that as a pretext to invade Syria, put a puppet in power, steal their natural resources, and leave that country in total chaos, just like she did with Libya? , Creation of the biggest refugees crisis since WWII , Leaving Iraq in chaos , DOJ spying on the press , HHS Secretary Sibelius shaking down health insurance Executives , Giving our cronies in SOLYNDRA $500 MILLION DOLLARS and 3 Months Later they declared bankruptcy and then the Chinese bought it , NSA monitoring citizens , State Department interfering with an Inspector General Investigation on departmental sexual misconduct , Hillary, The IRS, Clapper and Holder all lying to Congress , Threats to all of Bill’s former mistresses to keep them quiet , Stealing the White House furniture, silverware, when Bill left Office…

      But Trump is rubbish?

      Liked by 1 person

  4. michaelk says

    Taking my lead from Graves… I think the Guardian itself is, increasingly… rubbish. Not a very sophisticated analysis I know, but if it’s good enough for the Guardian…

    Liked by 2 people

  5. There seems to be a pattern emerging here. The Atlanticist elites seem to be adopting a war posture, not only against their external enemies, Russia, China, Iran, but anybody else who wishes their country to be sovereign; and also their internal enemies – the fabled ‘enemies within’ as Mrs Thatcher once termed them. Witness the Treatment of Trump, Corbyn and the Brexit Leave voters. The level of excoriation poured upon these individuals and groups has been quite unprecedented in its ferocity. More alarmingly still, quite openly and brazen anti-democratic sentiments are being espoused at all levels. Particularly by the liberal class. The liberal class to be found in flagship publications such as the Guardian and Independent in the UK, and the New York Times and the Washington Post in the US. This in addition to the variously (often lavishly funded) ‘think’ tanks and visual media. In the 1930s the liberal progressive class was infatuated with communism and soviet russia. Today’s liberal class is infatuated with neo-liberalism, neo-conservatism, and American capitalism. The switch from far left to far right of the political spectrum is not unusual. We should know that Iriving Kristol and his group of left-leaning New York intellectuals were a prime example of switched allegiances, or as Orwell put it, ‘transferred nationalism.’ Kristol himself was an admirer of Trotsky and the latter’s theory of Permanent Revolution. Only the ex-Trots switched from pursuit of world communist revolution, to the neo-con world capitalist counter-revolution. These people are ideological crusaders determined to order the world to their liking whatever the cost. I would term these people, neo-totalitarians, as dangerous as they are deluded, but not above self-serving and crass opportunism.

    Liked by 2 people

    • reinertorheit says

      Iriving Kristol and his group of left-leaning

      Neither Irving Kristol nor his dopey son (and his Weakly Standard) are anywhere on the Left at all. They are just fascists.

      Like

      • John says

        I think Frank was talking about how people like Kristol began as Trotskyists but have swung politically from the far left to the far right since. He and numerous others in the USA so-called neo-liberal or neo-conservative camp are all also invariably pro-Israel too these days – of which I will have more to say in another new posting.

        Like

        • reinertorheit says

          Kristol and his scum may have stolen the tag ‘Trotskyists’. But that piece of filth and his stinking son were and are pure facists, and utter imposters. Willliam Kristol is a sack of excrement. Filthy imposters, liars, and thieves, like all Americans.

          Like

          • The venting of hate may give a sense of personal satisfaction – but at what cost?
            Apart from feeding rage of a blind destructive denial of life – it poisons the possibility of communication – for hate does not enter into or open to communication – as it ‘already knows’ what its grievance dictates as wholly justified and therefore asserted as ‘true’.
            If offguardian comments becomes a hate-fest then any communication that may have been opened to will be coloured by the sense of its readership – in the same way as any communication about the complex nature of Jewish influence on corporate, political and other key social institutions cannot be discussed without actual anti-Semitic hate-reaction blocking and feeding the very thing it purports to be ‘against’. For hate is needed to maintain an identity of threat – while also triggering guilt in those who find themselves associating in it. For while those in vendetta feel exonerated in hate – those who desire to uncover truth tend to hate hatred and feel invalidated by it.

            Hate, fear and guilt operate a shadow ‘power’ of a wolf in disguise or a ‘hidden agenda’ beneath seeming to care. Political ‘identities’ are no different from any other identity construct and operate the same patterns of psychological defence as are vilified in extremis – but socially invisible in their more general tacit agreements.
            The presentation of persona that The Guardian and others demonstrate is a targeted appeal to an ‘identity’ – where that identity is no longer associated with its original formative movement – such as speaking truth to power and social justice – not least because the penalty for openly doing so is feared.
            When someone DOES come out in a simple but steadfast willingness for true accounting – such as Jeremy Corbyn – their own revealed self-hatred will be aimed at him – because he is illuminating something true by which a lie is revealed a lie – and this is fearful and threatening to a sense of surviving, managing or controlling their lives. They may believe the lie is a necessary evil in terms of a larger ‘good’ – such as their political ‘identity’ getting into ‘power’ on some terms of token gains or lesser evil, rather than being persecuted and powerless in an open honest communication.
            I note that I cannot make another’s choice for them – and that nor really can I judge another from a place of perfection – excepting perhaps in the sense that my life offers a perfect ‘education’ of self-knowledge and so therefore can I accept that others also learn by the outcomes of their choices as I do – if not always immediately or without significant suffering.
            Perhaps I have chosen to respond to you in error – as your proclivity to deny the humanity of others is so persistently voiced – but I feel a sense of betrayal is beneath ‘giving like for like’ – and is then also harnessed and directed by manipulators who get others to do their dirty work while retaining plausible deniability.
            But who manipulates but that they get a sense of power or identity-reinforcement from the lie? And what can this mean except they have fear of loss of power or identity? Hating others will validate and ‘prove’ their identity in denial and defence. Joining in hate will make a lie of joining without any genuine trust or intimacy occurring – and that lie will provide ‘identity’ in lie as long as the hate can be maintained through the willing sacrifice of joy in life to appeasement of self-denial or vendetta of self-righteous hate as ‘power’.

            Like

  6. Seamus Padraig says

    It isn’t Trump’s lies that bother the MSM; they’re used to lies–it’s chiefly what they do for a living. No, what really drives them up the wall is when Trump tells the truth! They hate it when he casually dismisses their phony narrative on Crimea, NATO, “free” trade, immigration, etc. That’s why they are determined to destroy him.

    Like

    • reinertorheit says

      Bindel has crossed the line from being merely a worthless crappy non-journalist who only writes about herself, to being an advocate for hate crime.

      Like

  7. Willem says

    Not sure if this observation is true (one could check), but it appears to me that journalists in the mainstream media are, on average, getting younger all the time while the newspaper is getting older.

    Same phenomenom happened with Bin Laden who got younger all the time while everybody else was getting older.

    Of course, correlation does not imply causation, but could an explanation for this remarkable observation not be that MSM journalists and Bin Laden have the same parents, Mr and Mrs Neo, Con and Liberal?

    An alternative explanation could be that I am getting older…

    So I checked internet and guess what, my observation about that journalists are getting younger is true! See your favourite newspaper, the Guardian, on this issue (and they are never wrong 🙂 https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/jul/27/irelands-journalists-get-younger-as-experienced-staff-depart

    Of course their explanation for the getting younger issue (badly payed job, lack of opportunity, hard work, not necessarily related to journalism outside Ireland), is as speculative as mine. Although I maybe wrong there since I do not know all the facts…

    Like

    • Willem says

      Hope you don’t mind that I put some more numbers down here about journalism… So I was trying to find out if journalist are getting younger in the Netherlands as well (it appears to be so, at least to me). I found the following facts:

      3200 out of 18000 journalists in the Netherlands (17.5%), are jobless 9.5% receive welfare (cross sectional date January 2016)

      Most of the unemployed are older journalists. Which confirms my suspicion that journalists are getting younger (the older ones are getting fired)

      47% (!) of those who studied journalism in the Netherlands regret their choice.

      In a way (maybe in every way) mainstream journalists are pityfull: it appears that they only get a job if they are able to write BS and report lies as if they are facts. The moment that cognitive dissonance is troubling their conscience, they are getting fired (and will be replaced by young journalists, fresh out of school). The alternative is to continue doing what they are doing as they made a wrong decision (to study journalism) when they were young, but can’t go back, and which decision is regretted by 47% of journalists in the Netherlands. But again, this explanation is mere speculation…

      Here is the article where you can find the numbers (in Dutch: https://www.villamedia.nl/artikel/data-analyse-95-procent-van-de-journalisten-in-de-ww)

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Balanced journalism can be performed without the distortion of identity politics or personal opinion. The latter can be ventured openly as opinion.
    The attempt to control the narrative IS identity politics aka mind-control – and the remedy is to be truly identified within an honesty of being – rather than engage in a struggle to assert or impose a supremacy of identity that has no basis in fact but works to undermine the worth and power in others so as to trick them into a false framing in which their identity is managed and directed by narrative control.
    The uncovering of such a false sense of identity needs to be linked to the desire for true – rather than fed to the triggering of hate and rage – which may feel self-righteous – but is no less owned and directed.
    Whatever Trump can be seen to be in himself or in political implications in the event of coming into office – there is a break in the narrative consensus that is thereby revealed AS narrative control – and all kinds of issues that have been denied communication are finding some sense of voice. This is also true of Corbyn. In the sense of narrative control he is not supposed to be in any kind of power position. While the way in which these events have occurred is very different and the kinds of approach contrast starkly – the shift that occurs in perspective as a result of this ‘break’ in the narrative’ is an opportunity to see more of what was hidden and use that to serve a similar shift in one’s own consciousness. For the narrative control starts at home.
    Giving true witness is a way of noticing and relinquishing the distortions of hate. The hatred being directed against Corbyn by the ‘establishment’ is unable to disguise itself. Yet it is not Corbyn himself that triggers this so much as Corbyn’s willingness to align with and represent the people who he feels as the basis of any power he may have for bringing a more human sense of solidarity and sanity – in place of a top-down power class to which one is expected to sell out or align with in order to survive or avoid significant penalty.
    The idea of opening relationship in which honest communication arrives at honouring outcomes is inconceivable to identity manipulation – and heretical to a false sense of a right to power over others – by guile.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. rtj1211 says

    Lucia Graves is so laughable as to be beyond parody. The Guardian has for years printing uniquely lies about climate change, which anyone who applies the principles of scientific evidence to the subject takes to be self-evident.

    Who defines what is ‘rubbish’? Is it idiots like Lucia Graves? Why?? Does she have any qualifications to stand in judgement? Has she ever had a real job in her life? (Being a journalist is not a real job, it is being a scribbler). Has she ever created anything, uncovered truly new insights, built a business? Of course she hasn’t, she’s a Guardian luvvie who thinks she can tell the world what to do and think because she’s a right-on, leftie feminist who believes in climate change because she read about it in the Guardian.

    Dear oh dear oh dear…….

    Liked by 1 person

    • reinertorheit says

      because she’s a right-on, leftie feminist

      Make that a pseudo-leftie. Nothing she writes (or that any of them write – Barbara Ellen, Marina Jekyll, Nuttery NewGayRead, Suzanne Moore, ad nauseum – is in the slightest left-wing. It’s a simulacrum of leftism, aimed at recruiting the dimwitted for neocon causes. Everything from Russia-hating to slagging off avocados.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Yeah, and because Trump is such rubbish, it’s only natural to call him and his associates ‘Putin agents’ at every opportunity…

    Like

    • Eric_B says

      Yes that’s just journalism. The more times Trump and Putin can be put in the same sentence for whatever sketchy reason the better.

      Never mind that love him or hate him, Trump is about as American as it gets.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. John says

    The conceptual lens that applies to The Guardian is that it is predominantly a pro-zionist publication.
    Always start from that perspective and everything else fits into place.
    They want Hillary to win because that is better for Israel.
    They are anti-Putin because he is blocking the Eretz (Greater) Yisrael Yinon Plan by supporting Syria.
    It all starts and ends with analysing what is best for Israel – then everything fits for The Guardian.
    Another “player” with questionable loyalty: Israel First and – maybe – Britain and the US Last.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Captain Kemlo says

      I’ve tried to say that a few times. Mostly modded. Nowadays such posts get ‘disappeared’, as do whole threads that make mention or discuss this matter.

      But you’re right: viewed through that particular lens everything falls into place. Especially the onslaught (no other word fits) against Corbyn.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. michaelk says

    Here’s more from the frightfully talented… Luke ‘Houdini’ Harding, who can read Putin’s mind across continents… what a… guy.

    He’s terribly confused though, calling the incompetent Yanukovich, a ‘strongman.’ So, Yanukovich is ‘pro-Russian’ but was actually put into power in Kiev by… the Americans. How does that stack up? Oh, now I understand. By Americans who really work for the Kremlin… like Trump himself. Good to get that cleared up.

    The Guardian really isn’t all that different from the Sun or the Daily Mail. It just has different targets, loves and hates. But the journalistic rhetoric and style is, remarkably similiar; the low methods employed against perceived outsiders who don’t, for whatever reason, share core liberal dogmas and conceits.

    Now they are actually defending and proud of their blatant bias and partisanship, because it’s aimed a ‘bad politicians.’ Unlike Obama and Hillary who are so ‘good’, it hurts.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/16/donald-trump-campaign-paul-manafort-ukraine-yanukovichhttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/16/donald-trump-campaign-paul-manafort-ukraine-yanukovich

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Ha! I enjoyed this. Good you pick up on her plodding style. Lucia may have inherited a yen to pen from a dad who gave us White Goddess, Goodbye to All That and the magnificent I Claudius – but the quality gene passed her by.

    Her schoolgirl tone maps neatly to equally adolescent content in the form of gushing adulation for Hillary. Back in April Graves & Graun saw fit to put us straight on just how thrilling a Clinton the Second presidency will be: “she’ll put women’s rights (read: human rights) at the center her presidency. And that should excite you whether you’re a man or a woman, or just a sentient creature with a heart”.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Captain Kemlo says

    Interesting and scathing comment there, Catte. You’re right, of course. Most people, I’m sure, would want their news as unfiltered as it gets because where do you draw the line? ‘Not reporting this because I don’t like his attitude.’ ‘God, I think she must be racist so I’m not writing about that!’ ‘What a sexist comment, I’m not reporting that!’

    Unfortunately, the Guardian is already knee deep in this particular paddy. Which is why it simply isn’t trusted as a newspaper any more.

    Like

  15. Does anyone seriously believe the Graun or the Odserver any more? Remember the Panama Papers, that NSA hack which was selectively leaked? Poured over for a year by CIA spooks, sorry investigative journalists. One of which was Luke Harding and his sensational Putin’s Panama Scandal, supposed corrupt investment links that quickly turned out to be all lies.

    There were no links to Putin just a fatuous connection to an old friend who had nothing to do with Russian politics and no connection to Putin having used him as a intermediary at all.

    There were links to Cameron and other political crooks like Poroshenko however, but these were never seriously followed up or focused on. They didn’t fit the intended narrative. A narrative that turned out to be nothing but fabrication by Harding and the Guardian.

    Yes the corporate media is weighted, because it usually spouts political lies – dressed up as truth. Unfortunately the Guardian is now a fully fledged PC member. PC here meaning the Prestitute Club…

    Liked by 1 person

    • Brian Harry, Australia says

      “Like”……The Guardian has gone down the toilet in my opinion. If I’m looking for bullshit, I’ll visit a local farm and collect it.

      Like

.....................

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