On this special day, we honor veteran Lieutenant Colonel Michael Strobl, our military parents, siblings and friends, and all those who served.
Odds are you don't know the name Michael Strobl. But you may have heard of the essay he wrote, A Marine's Journey Home, which was subsequently turned into the moving film Taking Chance. Occasionally, there are "reality" stories that should be told. This was one of them.
Wrote Strobl: "I didn't know how to express my sympathy for their loss and my gratitude for their sacrifice. Now, however, they were repeatedly thanking me for bringing their son home and for my service. I was humbled beyond words. I told them that I had some of his things and asked if we could find a quiet place. The five of us ended up in what appeared to be a computer lab -- not what I had envisioned for this occasion.
After we had arranged five chairs around a small table, I told them about our trip. I told them how, at every step, Chance was treated with respect, dignity, and honor. I told them about the staff at Dover and all the folks at Northwest Airlines. I tried to convey how the entire nation -- from Dover to Philadelphia to Minneapolis to Billings and Riverton -- expressed grief and sympathy over their loss."
Taking Chance is available around the web including on Netflix, Amazon, and HBOgo.
1245 sediments (sic) from readers:
«Oldest ‹Older 1201 – 1245 of 1245 Newer› Newest»I was wondering about that, too. It says "guardian," but does not specify "legal guardian." However, when the terms are mentioned, it does define "guardian" as legal guardian,
&&&
What exactly does it say in the definitions?
If guardian is just short for legal guardian, then guardian means legal guardian.
So the anonymous sheeple fighting last week was wrong I guess, a parent or court appointed legal guardian is required on set. In less than 90 days, Ashley won't cut it anymore.
mamaK 91, You said it perfectly. That is the point I was trying to get across. Say a classmate never saw the show, but heard that one of the Gosselin children used to be on a TV show. It's only a matter of them either viewing a DVD or watching a YouTube video. I can see it now children gathered around laughing as a classmate shows them the YouTube video of the show with those very scenes. It's not in the past by a long shot, it's still out there. Meanwhile, Kate is out spending the money earned from those episodes on herself while the children bear the repercussions and if Kate had her way it would continue - disgusting. Oh, and there's plenty more recent examples - how about the vomiting episode on the ship?
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 150
It's important that no one forgets the potty training debacle. There is no reason to talk about it all day every day, but forgetting it is not acceptable. The history of child exploitation in the entertainment business unfortunately includes that moment. If you let it be buried in the past, you do a disservice to future children who could be exploited in similar fashion.
We will soon, this Sunday, begin what I'm sure will be a great discussion of The Dust Bowl, as we view the PBS documentary together Sunday and Monday night. That was a bad, sad, terrible time. We did not do enough to help those poor people. Heroes will emerge in that documentary, especially women. Women photographers, journalists and social workers tried to help. It wasn't enough. But that doesn't mean the right thing to do is take a "the past is the past" attitude. We MUST discuss it. That is the whole point of history, to understand and appreciate exactly where we came from, to learn from the worst and the best moments, and to grow and evolve into something better. The Ken Burns of the world help us process our past, even if much of it is shameful. I salute him.
====
I'm so looking forward to the PBS documetary.
For the last year or so I've been a frequent visitor to a website abundant in photographs of the history of the America starting from the Civil War onward. It is loaded with photos taken by the great photographer of that era Dorothea Lange and her peers. It has hundreds of pics of the Dirty Thirties. The tent towns of rural America and especially the photographs of migrant workers and their families are heart breaking testament to the severe conditions of the time. Also hundreds of Lewis Hine photos of child laborers standing near the places where children were forced to work at to help support their families.
Be warned if you go there, you won't get to bed early. It's that addictive.
http://www.shorpy.com/
Bearswife-- There are several blogs and newsletters that you can subscribe for that will notify of Kindle freebies/cheapies. The best, IMO, are ereaderiq.com (daily email you can sign up for, plus a website), books on the knob (website/blog), and dailycheapreads.com (blog and daily email). There's also free kindle books and tips, which is a blog/book/multi-email.
Parent, I took another look at it, and sadly I'm going to have to stand by my original statement. Why? Because other parts of the law refer to LEGAL guardians. Legal guardians may set up the trust account for the kids, legal guardians may sign the work permits, etc. They clearly are separating legal guardians versus just a general "guardian."
I am not seeing a definition list in the version I'm reading. I am reading this one, which says on their site is the latest version:
http://legiscan.com/gaits/text/665462
I see there were a slew of reps sponsoring the bill. Like literally 100. Wow, Kate. HAHA!!
On another note, I'm not seeing whatsoever that both parents need to consent to filming per this law. In fact it specifically says PARENT, singular, may sign off, set up the trust account, be on set, all of that. Parent, just one. I think people who have healthy relationships with their children's father tend to naturally assume both parents are required to make decisions for a child but that simply isn't the case. One parent can do PLENTY with the other parent not in agreement, from school decisions to medical to signing contracts for the kids, and the only thing the parent can do to stop it is spend money and drag them to court.
unless there is more than one "Milo" tweeting and they tweet in shifts
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Bingo.
mamaK and What's Next? -- I can just imagine how Hannah's going to feel, when she's in high school and "Hannah pooped in Hannah's unnerwears" follows her down the hall. And you just know that it will.
What's Next what's scary too is how quickly these kids will be able to pull them up. These kids could be tortured with old footage for years. They can pull it up on youtube but it's all streaming on netflix too, can be pulled up instantly on their iphone, ipad, on the TV, computer, and surely most of these kids have all or some of that too.
This isn't LA or NY where every kid has done a commercial or episode of Law and Order at some point and no one cares. I grew up in that general area, and it would have been one big freaking deal if my classmate was on TV. I certainly would have looked them up, no question about it. Heck even when I got to college I had a classmate who was in an Oliver Stone movie as a child, and I looked him up.
By the way even my Oliver Stone friend, who was in the movie for all of about 15 minutes (he played a "young" version of the star) was teased by us. Now for him he didn't do or say anything all that embarrassing so it was mostly a "awww you were so adorable, what HAPPENED?" type teasing. But he was still teased. Can you imagine if he actually did something embarrassing like pooped his underwears? Geez, he was just trying to go to college.
Thanks readerlady. You're always so helpful. Sorry to pester you (yet again)! I downloaded a couple of new books tonight, including one entitled: My Bipolar Manager (hopefully it's helpful).
~~
I am sad to say that I do think the G kids will be teased by peers down the road. There are too many private moments available for public consumption.
Kate's already said on National TV that she doesn't understand why Jon should be allowed to have any say in the children's lives. Unless a judge orders her to consult with him, she's going to exclude him as much as possible. For that matter, I wouldn't put it past her to try to circumvent a judge's order if she thinks she can get away with it.
Parent, I took another look at it, and sadly I'm going to have to stand by my original statement. Why? Because other parts of the law refer to LEGAL guardians. Legal guardians may set up the trust account for the kids, legal guardians may sign the work permits, etc. They clearly are separating legal guardians versus just a general "guardian."
----------------
If I get a chance tomorrow, I'll find out and report back. I hope they didn't slip up on this one. Other than a "legal" guardian, what other kind is there? Can anyone just step in and declare themselves a guardian? No disrespect to Ashley, but I doubt that she's a legal guardian. She's a babysitter, and I can't imagine that a sitter on the set would qualify as a guardian. It might be that the law implies a guardian be a legal guardian. I don't know.
I'd also like to know about the work permits which would apply to this filming. The requirement of a guardian wouldn't be applicable here because this bill hadn't yet been signed into law.
Bearswife -- You're welcome. No pester. I love to talk books. Those websites and blogs are so helpful. On a good day, I've downloaded 30 or 40 free books. If it looks at all interesting, I'll download it. If it turns out to be garbage, I can always delete it and I haven't lost a thing. A lot of the authors are indies, but some well-established authors are acquiring the rights to their backlists and releasing them in e-format. Many of them release as freebies or very cheap. I've acquired nearly the entire backlist of one of my favorite authors (Julie Smith) for free. You have to be alert, though, because, as I said, sometimes the books don't stay free for very long.
Auntie Anne there was a screening of The Dust Bowl in Long Beach on Saturday but I was double booked. Gosh darn it all. I guess I'll have to wait to watch it with the rest of the mediocre. I really cannot wait, I am in dork/history nerd overflow this week what with Lincoln coming out AND this. Reboot reboot!
But I was able to see some previews on Youtube and Dorothea Lang's photographs are in it, not surprisingly.
This interview with her is remarkable, though long.
http://legiscan.com/gaits/text/665462
She was one humble young photographer. She basically worked EVERYTHING at a portrait studio from sweeping the floors to answering phones until she learned her way around a camera. The Depression began and she said she just really felt this need, this calling to get out of the studio and go out there and take photos of it. She says, and I think sincerely, she didn't do it to try to make it big, she just wanted the story of what was happening to be told and she felt there was something more important and compelling about this than taking portraits in a studio. She would hang her photos in the studio and people would be confused, why are you taking these, what will you do with these? Nowadays street photography is so popular, back then it was weird and she was doing something people didn't DO. People started noticing how good her photos were and eventually she attracted notice of the state of California which paid her to document what was going on in farm country. I have to say, for the times, it's surprising a state would be so open to the truth being told about how bad it was out there. Dorothea Lang was a state employee and truth teller.
I don't think you can have a legal guardian without stripping away the parents' rights to make legal decisions for them. That is the whole point most of the time of a legal guardian, to step into a parents shoes. In California you are legally entitled to contact with the child and entitled to file to terminate it if you see the need but that's IT, beyond that you cannot do a thing. It's the next closest thing to adoption.
So assuming it's the same in PA it would make no sense to give the kids a legal guardian. It would strip Jon and Kate of most of their rights.
Guardian to me sounds like a rep, someone authorized (by who? the parent? The law is unclear) to be on set and oversee the production. However, I'm not all that bent out of shape about it because this doesn't change the fact that a set teacher is on set. If Ashley is on set with Kate buzzing in her ear not to say anything the show must go on at all costs, at least in a perfect world the set teacher will.
Lancaster, laws can be amended and clarified, don't worry. This is not the first provision in this law that made me pause with uncertainty and confusion. It's long and complicated and they're only human, there's bound to be confusing moments.
Yes, Dorothea's job blossomed into a fascinating career. She was a real trailblazer.
(I think you mistakenly posted the wrong link to the interview in your comment, Admin)
Ashley, but I doubt that she's a legal guardian. She's a babysitter, and I can't imagine that a sitter on the set would qualify as a guardian.
&&&
Anyone can be a legal guardian if they are 18 as long as they are appropriate. I've actually seen several situations where adult siblings who are only 18, 19, 20 years old take in their siblings as LGs.
Reminds me of that great series in the 90's Party of Five. That was about a big brother being guardian of his siblings.
I don't think a 22 year old should be charged with such a responsibility, but given that Ashley is college educated and on sets before, I find it hard to believe she wouldn't qualify. And since the law doesn't even say who qualifies, there's nothing to stop her.
You know in thinking about this, a lot of this law may need to be clarified at the apellate level. This is pretty par for the course. A law is written, people get confused and interpret it more than one way, the person who didn't get their way appeals, and the appellate court explains and clarifies what they think it means. Going forward, their interpretation is how it goes. Simple example, a law says no eating ice cream. Guy gets sentenced for eating frozen yogurt. Case goes to the appellate court, does frozen yogurt count as icecream? It's certainly debatable! Appellate court decides what they meant. Guy either goes free or serves his time.
The way we do things is a bit roundabout, but then again, I wouldn't have work if we didn't do it this way lol!
. It might be that the law implies a guardian be a legal guardian. I don't know.
*&***
Like I said I don't think this is the case because in other parts they were very clear to say LEGAL guardian. You don't put in legal guardian in the important parts about contracts and trust accounts only to get sloppy and just say guardian in other parts. It doesn't happen. Guardian means representative, and legal guardian means legal guardian. They were careful to use both terms where they did.
The general rule in reading laws is to read the "plain meaning." For instance if it says man, it means man. It doesn't mean boy just because they are also male. But if it says male, it means everyone, men and boys.
If it doesn't say LEGAL guardian, it's not a legal guardian.
Like I said I don't think this is the case because in other parts they were very clear to say LEGAL guardian.
-------------
I'm not disagreeing with you. That's exactly what I want to find out. If it is shoddy writing of the law, this needs to be clarified. Otherwise, anyone can claim to be a "guardian."
Sorry that was the bill link!
Here is the Lange interview:
http://www.aaa.si.edu/collections/interviews/oral-history-interview-dorothea-lange-11757
She was a real hustler and worked her darn butt off. I can't imagine hauling all that equipment into that godforsaken wasteland and being a woman going in there too.
However, there is some disturbing information about her mothering, a lot of it written in Dorothea Lange: A Photographer's Life. She left her five kids in foster care while she worked. She was reportedly authoritative with them and had the nickname Dictator Dot. Although the book also says she would try to come home weekends and they would go out to eat and to the movies together. I wonder if she was a narcissist.
I'm not disagreeing with you. That's exactly what I want to find out. If it is shoddy writing of the law, this needs to be clarified. Otherwise, anyone can claim to be a "guardian."
&&&
You're forgetting something. They may have intended that anyone can be a guardian. They may not have wanted to restrict the law such that a parent cannot ever leave set.
It looks pretty darn intentional to me. You don't put "legal" in the very important parts like contracts and trust funds and leave it out elsewhere. Too much of a coincidence.
We have to remember too they had a balance to strike too. Leave the law too terribly restrictive and no production will ever want to come to PA again. Think about it, if Dad lives in Idaho and mom gets the flu for a week and cannot come to set, production would have to shut down. Enter the guardian, perhaps a friend or relative, to step in. There is a lot of balancing to do here. Like I said, with the set teacher as the backup pair of eyes on them, I'm ok with it. I still think you'd be nuts as a parent to ever leave that set even for a second, but not all parents feel that way.
You know in a strange way, it's almost more respectable when a woman says look I'm not cut out for motherhood and voluntarily puts the kids with people who DO care about them, than it is to be a mother who clearly STINKS at motherhood fiercely hanging onto it desperately trying day in and day out to be something she is not such that it's so bad they have to turn to a bunch of strangers on Twitter during their custodial time to numb the pain.
To: retired prod asst. said... 25
Loved reading your posts. Thank you for explaining how all that stuff works.
KG doesn't appear educated enough to know that she is being mislead by many people, and could soon be flat broke, maybe even living on welfare with her children in the future.
Think it was singer Toni Braxton, and Mohammed Ali plus several others, including very famous, wealthy at one time, established rappers who all lost their homes this year due to foreclosure, and some filed for bankruptcy. They had much better CPA teams than KG.
Perhaps if KG reads comments like yours, she may come to realize her money and future may be in jeopardy with such reckless investments, tax write off or not.
__________________________
Is Singer and his firm representing KG for free in exchange for free publicity?
_____________________________________
Why won't JG tell anyone who cares to know where Shoka is, or if the poor dog is even alive?
He and Robert H. talk every day. There is no logic as to why they both should keep this a secret, since they want everyone to believe they are in the know on everything happening at the katepound.
Why carry on such a secret for so long, when so many caring people have inquired as to the where about's of Shoka?
______________________
To The Gosselin Children-You are all in a lot of people's prayers.
You know in a strange way, it's almost more respectable when a woman says look I'm not cut out for motherhood and voluntarily puts the kids with people who DO care about them, than it is to be a mother who clearly STINKS at motherhood fiercely hanging onto it desperately trying day in and day out to be something she is not such that it's so bad they have to turn to a bunch of strangers on Twitter during their custodial time to numb the pain.
-------------
That's one heck of a long sentence, but I agree (I think)! :)
Parent In Lancaster County said... 1
----------------
If I get a chance tomorrow, I'll find out and report back. I hope they didn't slip up on this one. Other than a "legal" guardian, what other kind is there? Can anyone just step in and declare themselves a guardian? No disrespect to Ashley, but I doubt that she's a legal guardian. She's a babysitter, and I can't imagine that a sitter on the set would qualify as a guardian. It might be that the law implies a guardian be a legal guardian. I don't know.
*************
If this is modeled after the California law, an on-set guardian is a glorified babysitter. I have a friend that was a guardian for a child actor. All he did was hang out with the kid to fulfill the legal requirement of having a parent or designee present on set.
Lisa on Survivor tonight broke down in tears talking about how she "lost" something being a child star. She was on The Facts of Life. And this from a child star who has from what I can see never reported being abused, neglected or lost her money to her parents. Her parents raised her outside of LA in Texas. Even when your childhood was GOOD being a star screws you up.
I learned to get love by performing, she explained. It is a total shock to her to be around a group of people most of whom don't even know who she is, and most of whom don't like her and she is not fitting in with them.
He and Robert H. talk every day.
--------------
And you know this...how?
It would be interesting to talk to Lange's children to find out how they felt about being put into foster care on a regular basis. Some of them should still be alive.
I agree though. Better to give up kids that you don't have clue how to parent, than to keep them around for exploitation purposes only...so much so that you incorporate the number 8 into your name as a selling point. "K8". How very clever of her.
Anonymous said... 25
''..........He and Robert H. talk every day. There is no logic as to why they both should keep this a secret, since they want everyone to believe they are in the know on everything happening at the katepound.''
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not nearly as slick as you think....sliding in that Jon and Robert talk every day. Robert said he hasn't talked to Jon since the book came out. We believe Robert. Get used to it.
If this is modeled after the California law, an on-set guardian is a glorified babysitter. I have a friend that was a guardian for a child actor. All he did was hang out with the kid to fulfill the legal requirement of having a parent or designee present on set.
&&&
Yes but just like in PA, CA requires a set teacher on set and that set teacher in CA is REQUIRED to know the CA child labor laws backwards and forwards. A set teacher in CA has the power to stop production if something is unsafe and is supposed to keep track of the hours and my experience is they take it VERY seriously, the reason being because it's on them if they get caught violating any child labor laws and incur fines. The set teacher on the set of the movie I was on was literally there with her stopwatch counting the seconds to make sure no one went over time. I did the babysitting, she did the child labor laws watching. We even did a scene where a blind child had to crash into a tree and she was literally right there over his shoulder making sure everything was perfectly safe. They put a gigantic thick pad around the tree and one on the ground so that he ran into a nice foam pad and fell onto something soft. She was really great, the director always used her for all his films.
In a way, it's actually good to have a babysitter on set so the set teacher doesn't have to babysit and can just do her job.
Funny I was kind of getting the impression he and Jon don't talk much at all, if at all.
Three of her kids were stepkids and their dad was off to work too and their mom was in NYC. She had five in total. In fairness raising another woman's children is a very tough thing especially for someone as young as her who lands herself suddenly famous photos in every publication around the world who is suddenly charged with documenting the Great Depression for the State of CA. And surely must have been heartbreaking to take all those photos of those poor people then say goodbye and go enjoy a movie back home in San Francisco. It must have been overwhelming. It's interesting she captured mothers and children with such sensitivity, that eye has to come from somewhere. I kind of wonder if maybe a part of her was searching for that motherly bond out in the field that she couldn't seem to find in herself. Her story fascinates me.
Lisa Welchel (sp?) went through a divorce just weeks before leaving her home to film Survivor. She was probably on her last nerve, especially since her public persona is evangelical Christian. She may feel she has truly offended God and chosen "self" over commitment. She may have no support system depending on how strict her family and church are about these things.
She may also be a real diva. Who knows?
Who was it--the Gosselin neighbor?--who said the cameras filmed for ridiculous hours each week. Well, here's what Christi from Dance Moms says about filming time. Notice Lifetime films almost *2 hours* for every *minute* on the show. Tell us again how the kids were just playing in front of the camera, Kate.
As the saying goes, "I don't even want to do something FUN for 70 hours a week!"
~~~~~~~~
Lukasiak gets frustrated at times with the way she comes across on the show. “Cameras film 70 hours a week for a 42-minite show,” she says. “And it seems like all of my terrible moments are always broadcast, where other people have awful moments that never see the light of day. But for whatever reason, every single one of my bad moments comes to light.”
http://tvguide.ca/TVNews/Articles/121030_dance_moms_IM.htm
I think I read that Lisa, from The Facts of Life, was married to a man hand picked by her father. She felt she had no choice but to marry him. Maybe I read her father was a pastor too.
Conspiracy theory here :)
I'm beginning to wonder if Robert found the discarded journals in the trash around the same time we really saw a shift in Jon & Kate's "on tv" relationship. Remember how out of it she was looking on the couch, shoulders slumped,not making much eye contact with the camera (her fave thing) more than the usual disgusted looks at Jon? GWOP would have the recaps for that time (maybe they're here too admin?) I wonder if that propelled her into being the full blown psychotic narcissist she is today? Her pure venom hatred towards Jon? No doubt she believes he's got something to do with Robert getting the journals. It wonder if she's had her legal team working on this for years??
Lisa Welchel is an interesting example. She certainly blames her background as a child star for a lot of her problems and, yes, she comes from a Fundamentalist (rather than Evangelical) background. She is now claiming to have been "forced" into marriage with a Pastor. Prior to her divorce of the man she was married to for over 20 years, however, she wrote several books preaching the glories of her faith, marriage and lifestyle as a Pastor's wife and Christian homeschooling mother.
Possibly the worst of her books is "Creative Correction." She uses methods similar to those of the Pearls (To Train Up a Child.) Under the cloak of maintaining a Godly home, she advocated methods of discipline that are absolute child abuse by my standards: hot sauce on the tongue for lying, blindfolding a child who rolls their eyes for an hour, handcuffing quarelling siblings together, pulling a child who refuses to hold hands by the hair, and making a child who hit a sibling wear boxing gloves for hours -- and then video-taping said child trying to eat popcorn so that the family could laugh at, humiliate and taunt the victim. Shades of Kate Gosselin but Kate at least seems ashamed of her child abuse and tries to hide it. Lisa Welchel preached child abuse as Godly Correction.
How much of all this comes from her experience as a Child Star versus an abusive family and/or marriage is debatable, and I'm sure her early acting experiences had a very negative effect on her. However, she is IMO now reinventing herself as a victim after her divorce to get back into the limelight. More shades of Kate Gosselin. I have yet to see her recanting or apologising for the child rearing methods she touted in that repulsive book.
I did not watch her on "Survival." If and when she recants and apologises for that book I'll have some sympathy for her, but I'm not holding my breath.
Kateplusmy8
RT @GreatestQuotes: "A man who has committed a mistake and doesn't correct it, is committing another mistake." - Confucius
Kate, do you practice what you preach?
Unfortunately, Lisa is another one who is proud of the harsh "discipline" she used with her children. I believe she wrote a book titled, "Creative Correction" - stuff like hot sauce in the mouth etc, shutting of the circuit breaker their rooms if they're not clean enough, refusing to answer if they are calling to her from another room, and then making them wait 5 minutes for every yell to her before they can speak once they do come to her, forced eating of hated food as a punishment if, and of course spanking and more spanking, beginning at a year old, so as not to spare the rod... Vile piece of work, that one. She wrote many articles for Focus on the Family and others detailing her excitement over new "creative" things to inflict on her kids. She proudly states that, "there is reason discipline has to be boring". GAG. Not sure if she is a narcissist, but she seems to be one messed up woman.
It's almost a which came first the chicken or the egg argument with Lisa Welchel. She has issues, for sure. I just don't know why anyone would create Hollywood starlets out of their children. Why risk it having any bearing on future dysfunction in their life?
As for Dance Moms.....they're going to have some real issues with this new law if they film two hours for every minute.
Well well well, Lisa didn't have to dig deep to portray her Blair Warner character on TFOL. Crazy! I would never have guessed!! What's scary is she comes across as so soft spoken and gentle! I hear she has West Nile.
TFGOT - 39
You stated it all better than I did. Her upbringing may have had something to do with things, but boy was she proud of herself every time she came up with a new abusive thing to do to her kids.
ADMIN ~ Like you, I would've loved to see that DUST BOWL screening! How do you go about finding/getting notified about upcoming events like this? Thanks in advance for any tips.. :)
Mel, you explained the positioning of the period with " marks much better than what I was going to say. After Anon. said the period goes inside the quotes, I was going to say nuh uh!
Improbable Dreams I'm sure there must be a better way to do it but the way I find things like this in L.A. is by word of mouth and by checking local calendars. I'll check Long Beach, Beverley Hills, my town and surrounding towns. They all have web sites with current events around town, usually on their city hall pages. I know the LA times tries to have a city wide calendar but for my purposes I've found that to not only be way too big, but doesn't even include all the cool events I've found by looking locally.
The problem is I forget to check as often as I should, or if I have some busy weeks I won't bother to check and then I miss out on things like this! Gosh darn it all, I think I would have rearranged my schedule.
I wish there was a way to see all the local community calendars in one place. Some kind of reader feed app may do it but not to my liking. I should invent an app.
NEW POST, thanks Virginia Penn for that horrifying article. How did we miss that the first time? I guess we were too caught up in the Hurricane.
New comments are not allowed.