The Dim-Post

November 29, 2009

Real toads in imaginary gardens

Filed under: Politics — danylmc @ 9:16 am

An interesting little glimpse behind the scenes. Chris Trotter, writing off the liberal left:

This segment of the New Zealand Left is risibly small – probably numbering fewer than 5,000 individuals. Very few of them occupy positions of genuine power or influence . . .

You can quibble about your definitions of liberalism, I guess but the Clark-Cullen government was undenaibly liberal and they held power for nine years; even when they fell apart in their last term they recieved ~800,000 votes in 08. The only demographic in which they maintained support was with educated, urban voters. I think it’s safe to say that a majority of university graduates have broadly liberal values, probably about 200,000 -300,000 voters in change (of course some of them vote Green, many more voted for Key after they were driven away from Labour by Clark’s indulgence of Winston Peters). So let’s assume at least 400,000 liberal left voters in New Zealand.

So it’s not unusual for Trotter to be ignorant and deluded and hopelessly wrong, and hopefully when I get this confused someone will have the decency to unplug my feeding tubes – but what is interesting is this comment at the end of the thread from one John Pagani:

I think this is the most astute reading of the state of left politics that I’ve seen recently Chris. It’s about connecting with things that matter to people and making politics work for people, instead of instructing people in what’s good for them and inventing fabrications about the people the left represents. (Emphasis mine.)

Pagani is Phil Goff’s strategy advisor.

About these ads

48 Comments »

  1. This seems to translate as “lets go back to class warfare and chuck the fags, women, and maaaries under the nearest bus.” It disturbs me how many on the left seem to want to do this – Marty G (and others) at the Standard, Trotter, and seemingly Goff’s strategy team.

    Comment by Eddie Clark — November 29, 2009 @ 11:13 am

  2. The Social Report puts the number of adults with a bachelor’s degree or higher qualification at 469,000. They don’t all vote Labour – far from it – but the pool of people Goff is alienating by pandering to racists is much larger than Trotter suggests.

    Comment by Idiot/Savant — November 29, 2009 @ 11:27 am

  3. This seems to translate as “lets go back to class warfare and chuck the fags, women, and maaaries under the nearest bus.”

    I think they’re testing the water; I wouldn’t be too surprised to see a coded attack on feminism: a speech to (say) a church group or sports club on how New Zealand boys are ‘being left behind’ would do nicely.

    Comment by danylmc — November 29, 2009 @ 11:50 am

  4. I think Pagani will (or should) come to regret squeeing over someone who attacks the “liberal left” as ” the fervent champions of an indigenous culture they can never truly join because, fundamentally, they despise their own.”

    I’m sorely tempted to Goswin myself here, and point out who the kind of people who go there…

    Comment by Craig Ranapia — November 29, 2009 @ 12:10 pm

  5. GODWIN myself, damnit…

    Comment by Craig Ranapia — November 29, 2009 @ 12:10 pm

  6. I think they’re testing the water; I wouldn’t be too surprised to see a coded attack on feminism: a speech to (say) a church group or sports club on how New Zealand boys are ‘being left behind’ would do nicely.

    Yep. I agree. Immigration might get a ‘touch up’ also.

    Comment by Gooner — November 29, 2009 @ 12:26 pm

  7. I’m sorely tempted to Goswin myself here, and point out who the kind of people who go there…

    Already beaten you to it.

    Comment by Idiot/Savant — November 29, 2009 @ 1:29 pm

  8. I think they’re testing the water

    They’ve been resting it for a long time – remember Mallard’s outbursts over maori criminals getting lighter sentences?

    Comment by Idiot/Savant — November 29, 2009 @ 1:30 pm

  9. I can’t see where Trotter’s getting this 5000 figure from, unless he’s thinking of leftist activists (in which case 5000 is probably too high). Hell, however you want to define the liberal left, there’d be a thousand just on the staff of my university.

    He’s right about the identity politics though – Labour really does need to haul itself back from its current role as a party of teachers and union officials promoting liberal middle class obsessions, if it wants to be taking voters back from National. How many previous Labour voters who voted National last year did so because they felt Labour weren’t women-, gay- and Maori-friendly enough, do you think? And how many of the people finding Goff not very Maori-friendly right now would really be likely to change their vote to National in 2011? From a political point of view it’s a good strategy.

    Comment by Psycho Milt — November 29, 2009 @ 1:34 pm

  10. How many previous Labour voters who voted National last year did so because they felt Labour weren’t women-, gay- and Maori-friendly enough, do you think?

    Yeah right, Trotter waxing homoerotic over Goff should fix that.

    Comment by joe W — November 29, 2009 @ 1:44 pm

  11. Don’t know much about politics… but I love the Marianne Moore quote from my favourite poem for the heading.

    Comment by Stephen Stratford — November 29, 2009 @ 2:01 pm

  12. Milt,

    How many previous Labour voters who voted National last year did so because they felt Labour weren’t women-, gay- and Maori-friendly enough, do you think?

    Your point is valid with respect to gays and women, but the FSA turned a bunch of people off. It may not have driven them to National, but it did prevent a whole hell of a lot of them from voting at all, and that’s the next worst thing.

    And how many of the people finding Goff not very Maori-friendly right now would really be likely to change their vote to National in 2011?

    If National does right with the Foreshore and Seabed legislation and starts to take its relationship with Māori a bit more seriously, I think the answer to this question is “enough”.

    Labour owes its electoral success, such as it has been, in no small part to Māori, and in particular to long-term startegic alliances with Ratana, the Kingitanga, and key iwi groups. As that demographic continues to grow, and with the Māori cultural renaissance™ continuing apace, what we’re seeing is more and more Māori, becoming more and more connected with their history, and drawing ever clooser to the age at which they will not only be able to vote, but will be running the country. Labour can’t win without them, and it excludes them and their concerns at its peril.

    The future Labour party will eat these words, or it will perish.

    L

    Comment by Lew — November 29, 2009 @ 2:02 pm

  13. I can’t see where Trotter’s getting this 5000 figure from, unless he’s thinking of leftist activists (in which case 5000 is probably too high). Hell, however you want to define the liberal left, there’d be a thousand just on the staff of my university.

    I don’t think Trotter considers people who work at a university to be ‘real New Zealanders’, what with their fancy degrees and their policies against sexual harrasement and so on. I think his logical process is that he doesn’t like liberals, therefore he doesn’t know many, ergo there can’t be that many around.

    I think Pagani will (or should) come to regret squeeing over someone who attacks the “liberal left” as ” the fervent champions of an indigenous culture they can never truly join because, fundamentally, they despise their own.”

    Pagani used to be Anderton’s advisor; the conventional wisdom around Parliament is that he’s a cunning political strategist. Personally I don’t look at the disintergration of the Alliance and subsequent death spiral of Anderton’s career and see the invisible hand of a master tactician, but what do I know?

    I love the Marianne Moore quote from my favourite poem for the heading.

    I also like ‘Silence’.

    Labour really does need to haul itself back from its current role as a party of teachers and union officials promoting liberal middle class obsessions, if it wants to be taking voters back from National.

    Clark’s Labour was a successful (for a while) coalition of Maori, urban liberals and organised Labour/working class New Zealand. The last group was alienated by the overreach of the liberals; the danger of Goff’s strategy is that he’ll win back the socially conservative working class while sacrificing Maori and the liberal left.

    If Trotter and Pagani were right and there were only 5000 liberals in the country then this might be a pretty good plan. They’re wrong though; I think it’ll turn out to be an awful, awful strategy.

    Comment by danylmc — November 29, 2009 @ 3:27 pm

  14. Think you stretch things too much; you’re rather in love with your own lierary cleverness at times. Generally you selct your targets, confine them to your version of their barrel, and fire a few shots.Tnink fish or sitting ducks, not toads. Your “analysis” of Goff’s speech was a case in point. My Year 13 class of a few years ago did a better job on the Owera Brash original by a country mile.

    Comment by Galeandra — November 29, 2009 @ 3:33 pm

  15. PS And, no, I can’t type for nuts and an edit function would be mervellous.

    Comment by Galeandra — November 29, 2009 @ 3:35 pm

  16. I proudly number myself as part of the liberal left and think if this what labour are becoming then it wouldn’t take much for them to lost my vote. If they again become the party of militant class activism I’m out.

    Comment by Chris — November 29, 2009 @ 3:46 pm

  17. PS And, no, I can’t type for nuts and an edit function would be mervellous.

    Come back when you learn how to spell.

    Comment by Zoo Neeland — November 29, 2009 @ 4:00 pm

  18. Milt:

    I’m not sure I disagree with you about the politics. But honestly, is that all that really matters? The political effect? Its not what Trotter, at least, is concerned about. He genuinely seems to think that faggotry and feminism have ruined a good working class party.

    For me personally, its just nice to be in one of the few Western countries where one of the major parties is generally supportive of its gay citizens (compare with Australia and American, where attitutdes to gays among the major parties range from hatred on the right to indifference on the left).

    Let me put it this way – its not as well remembered as Brash’s Orewa speech, but right before the election he went on TV3 for a one on one interview (I think with John Campbell) and was asked to define what his “mainstream New Zealand”. He specifically excluded gays, feminists, and if I recall correctly, members of the Labour party! I would have benefitted enormously from Brash’s proposed tax cuts, and not at all from Labour’s student loans and extended WFF policies that election, but after he specifically told me that I wasn’t part of his New Zealand, like I’m voting National while he’s in charge.

    It seems to me that this populist, fear of the other bullshit is what Goff is looking at playing with here. I hope he doesn’t take it further. I might not vote National in response, but I’m sure as shit not voting labour.

    Comment by Eddie Clark — November 29, 2009 @ 4:12 pm

  19. Come back when you learn how to spell.

    Actually I like having a commentator with spelling worse than mine around, although I’m troubled to hear he’s also a teacher.

    Comment by danylmc — November 29, 2009 @ 4:15 pm

  20. Phil is just doing what an amateur pianist might do in front of a strange audience. He’s played a bit of classical, which didn’t resonate; he’s done My Old Man’s a Dustman with little response, same with Easyrider.. and now he’s playing Dixie.

    JC

    Comment by JC — November 29, 2009 @ 4:49 pm

  21. But honestly, is that all that really matters? The political effect?
    Probably. There’s rather a lot of that sort of weak-kneed cynicism posing as insight among the self-styled commentariat. For example, Bomber Bradbury’s headless chicken impersonation at the time of the Urewera raids, over those alarming “terrorist” revelations that he with his radical cred just happened to be privy to. Once whitebread NZ got wind of just how bad things were the backlash would be massive. Two years later, bullshit as usual.

    Brash’s ‘mainstream’ capitulation was the most shameful thing he’s ever done. While he’s gone some way towards redeeming his legacy by repudiating the racist thrust of the Orewa speech, he’s unlikely to muster the necessary bottle to demonstrate that he’ll ever be truly his own man. Compared to to Goff, it’s doubtful that he really believed the nonsense he was given to mouth. To his credit, he did look rather uncomfortable during that TV3 interview, just as he did when Clark asked him to his face if he considered her to be “mainstream”. As Goff continues to be massaged by his minders into his “reasonable Trevor Mallard” persona he’ll be comforted by an occasionally wavering faith in the rank opportunism that’s always sustained him. It’s people like him, who essentially stand for nothing but their own career advancement, who have white-anted the Labour party.

    Comment by joe W — November 29, 2009 @ 5:04 pm

  22. The more I read Chris Trotter’s blog post the more I find he misunderstood the 2008 election. The people he seems to be really speaking to are the people that actually didn’t vote in 2008. That Goff’s speech speaks to those people I would find to be rather untrue. Those people responded against Don Brash. For what Brash had to say truly scared them in such a way they needed to get out and vote. Those people won’t come to vote in 2011 unless John Key suddenly becomes the scary one that Labour tried to project in the 2008 election.

    John Key is doing much to dispel that. Labour pointed to it directly on One News today. In giving Brash the ability to spout rather hard-right Neo-liberal nonsense. John Key knows he won’t implement much of it for most of it is unfathomable to a large proportion of voters. That dispels any illusion that John Key is hard-right. Labour are right. But at the same time that doesn’t help Labour.

    No one can really say why 150-200,000 voters switched to National in 2008. I would say most of them grew tired of a Helen Clark government. That’s the strange thing about politics. Most of it is highly irrational and therefore too often misunderstood by so many. That National since John Key took the reins have become much more moderate meant likely they could vote again for National. Therefore its highly unlikely those people will actually respond to Goff’s speech.

    Goff’s speech if anything should attract those that switched to National in 2005. The only problem Labour has, is that they won’t out-right National and they’re wholly dependent on support by the Greens now. Something Trotter seems to have wholly forgotten. Its hard to fathom that the likely people to respond to Goff’s speech see much to like in the Greens. For if voters have been turned off by an increasingly Liberal Labour. Why would they then go back to a Labour party that is dependent on support with the Greens.

    Mind you Trotter is stuck in some 1950s vision of New Zealand. We’re not going back there.

    Comment by gingercrush — November 29, 2009 @ 6:32 pm

  23. Alienated ‘liberal-left’ voters migrate to the Green Party and Labour can pick up all those votes wasted on NZ first in 2008.

    Win-Win

    Comment by EbolaCola — November 29, 2009 @ 6:40 pm

  24. Labour can pick up all those votes wasted on NZ first in 2008.

    As the high NZ First turnout has historically been in safe Labour seats, I wouldn’t get too excited.

    Comment by joe W — November 29, 2009 @ 6:52 pm

  25. the danger of Goff’s strategy is that he’ll win back the socially conservative working class while sacrificing Maori and the liberal left.

    I believe he can afford to, for the same reason as EbolaCola above. To which I’d add your own point about the MP leadership being likely to go with whoever offers limos and mana-enhancing trinkets.

    But honestly, is that all that really matters? The political effect?

    For Goff, yes if he wants to both keep his current job and have a shot at PM. We can afford the highest moral standards as mere sidelines blatherers, but politicians have chosen poker-faced cynicism as a career skill.

    Comment by Psycho Milt — November 29, 2009 @ 7:07 pm

  26. Alienated ‘liberal-left’ voters migrate to the Green Party and Labour can pick up all those votes wasted on NZ first in 2008.

    Most of these people are reluctant to go over the Greens. And I don’t blame them – the Greens have in the past struggled to realise that people care about things other than GE and climate change when voting, and failed to market themselves as a complete package.

    They may move, they may not.

    Comment by George Darroch — November 29, 2009 @ 8:03 pm

  27. The main part of Trotters monologue says

    1) fuck yeah, lets go all union and get us some voters back (anyway we need union cash to pay our debts)
    2) that Maori Party need to be shown who’s boss, (Labour always looked after Maori far better, lol).

    Why you need 500 words and fallatiously glowing praise for Goff I don’t know, it’s hardly rocket science. One could surmise Trotter was involved in recent strategy development or a least lobbied in this direction.

    The last three paragraphs are more telling of the internal rifts in Labour that are setting the liberal academic elite, neo-ecosocialists and rainbow wings of labour against the old union and mainstream trad labour heartland factions.

    IMHO, Labour are kindof forgetting they BRIBED most of the urban middle class voters they picked up over the Clark era, thats right bribed them with welfare and drugged them into reliance on state handouts during the heady feel good global asset and housing boom. Which incidentally shows how Clark rode the housing boom for all it was worth. Those voters aren’t likely to return to Labour anytime soon and current strategy is likely to keep them away.

    Trotter then witters

    “Should anyone care? Not really. This segment of the New Zealand Left is risibly small – probably numbering fewer than 5,000 individuals. Very few of them occupy positions of genuine power or influence, and fewer still possess the political skills to advance their cause much beyond the blogosphere, or the letters page of the daily newspapers.”
    >>Meeeow,

    “They have no understanding of, nor empathy for, the hopes and fears of ordinary people. Nor do they understand the brutal and unforgiving realities of electoral politics. The truth of the matter is, liberal leftists have been preaching to themselves for so long they no longer appreciate how few people give a tinker’s cuss what they say.”
    >>True

    “In the face of the Liberal Left’s entirely predictable criticism, Phil Goff should just keep his head down and press-on regardless. He mustn’t forget that in November 2008 New Zealanders decisively rejected the Liberal Left’s vision of New Zealand’s future. The great virtue of his ‘Nationhood’ speech is its recognition of that rejection. By abandoning the failed, identity-driven politics of the past 30 years, and returning his party to its egalitarian and socialist roots, Phil Goff has taken the first, and absolutely necessary steps towards Labour’s rehabilitation – and re-election.”
    >>yawn, identity driven is what politics is about, sounds like code for handing the keys back to the EPMU and teachers unions, spectatcular.

    Glad I’m not a Labour supporter.

    Comment by piglet — November 29, 2009 @ 9:04 pm

  28. “Glad I’m not a Labour supporter.”

    I’m pretty sure the Labour Pary is also relieved. I feel sorry for Act though. Take this for example:

    “Labour are kindof (sic) forgetting they BRIBED most of the urban middle class (sic) voters they picked up over the Clark era, thats (sic) right (sic) bribed them with welfare and drugged them into reliance on state handouts…”

    A policy of tax concessions for working families with children, which is a feature of the tax systems in every developed country, is akin in the porcine mind to well-poisoning and the actions of the mafia. And they wonder why Douglas and co can’t get more than two or three percent support.

    Comment by Guy Smiley — November 29, 2009 @ 9:49 pm

  29. “For Goff, yes if he wants to both keep his current job and have a shot at PM. We can afford the highest moral standards as mere sidelines blatherers, but politicians have chosen poker-faced cynicism as a career skill.”

    a few problems with that. Firstly, Brash did not to be PM, Key did. That seems completely lost on Labour. I doubt Goff’s lurch into racism is going to have any more sucess. As a strategy I don’t think it will work. Labour will lose the MAori vote for a generation with no gain.

    Secondly, tossing away what have been core liberal values for power has never been a good look even if sucessful. And generally people who sucedd that way continue on in the same vein.

    Comment by Neil — November 29, 2009 @ 11:24 pm

  30. We can afford the highest moral standards as mere sidelines blatherers, but politicians have chosen poker-faced cynicism as a career skill.

    *sigh* Thankfully, Justice Rodney Hansen and the jury considering the charges of bribery and corruption as an MP against Philip Field weren’t so glibly cynical.

    Comment by Craig Ranapia — November 30, 2009 @ 7:00 am

  31. How much of Labour’s current problems are due to Goff reaching the Peter Principle of rising to his level of incompetence, and how much is due to poor party strategy and tactics? Or are the two the same?

    (I admired Goff as a Minister but he’s not exactly commanding at a party leader.)

    Comment by Ataahua — November 30, 2009 @ 7:26 am

  32. “A policy of tax concessions for working families with children, which is a feature of the tax systems in every developed country, is akin in the porcine mind to well-poisoning and the actions of the mafia. And they wonder why Douglas and co can’t get more than two or three percent support”

    Oh the wit and eruditian display of a put down. If only everyone woke up to the fact that WFF is a discriminatroy towards single working folk and BLGT people. what a crock. but of course the true labour supporter only acknowledges pork barrel politics when it’s business involved. despite the fact business contributes more to teh economy than any number of children looked after by a stay at home mum (who stays at home being unproductive, not using child care, because wff makes up the difference).

    Comment by George — November 30, 2009 @ 7:56 am

  33. Thanks George. You should stay off the turps at this hour of the morning though. The errors of spelling, grammar and logic in your comment make it completely incoherent. What is a BLGT person?

    Comment by Guy Smiley — November 30, 2009 @ 8:03 am

  34. “the danger of Goff’s strategy is that he’ll win back the socially conservative working class while sacrificing Maori and the liberal left.”

    While we on the liberal left are useless tossers, most of whom would vote for our own sterilisation if it kept National out of power, I think there’s a real danger that Labour will lose Maori (and make it very hard to gain the Maori Party’s participation in a coalition or support for a minority govt) AND fail to gain the socially conservative working class, for the following reasons:

    1. As it happens, a good proportion of the socially conservative working class are Maori.
    2. A further good proportion of the SCWC are Pacific Islanders, who might well see themselves as next in line for demonisation.
    3. As for the rest of the SCWC, you’re not actually giving them anything new and substantive. You already passed Foreshore & Seabed, and Brash outflanked you on that by saying it wasn’t anti-Maori enough. It would take substantially more than that to undo the Clark-era presumption that Labour was the more minority-driven of the major parties, and I really hope you don’t want to go there.

    You want to win back the working class? The country just got smacked like Larry Baldock’s kids by a recession. You’re a Labour Party, remember how in the old days that meant you appealed to people by talking about wages and jobs? Well, news flash, the working class still cares about that stuff. If you’re going to pander with rhetoric, you might as well make sketchy promises about things that will actually improve people’s material lives. Four cars in every garage!

    Comment by bradluen — November 30, 2009 @ 8:15 am

  35. As the high NZ First turnout has historically been in safe Labour seats, I wouldn’t get too excited.

    Remember, we’re under MMP now. Electorates are mostly irrelevant, its the party vote that counts.

    What is a BLGT person?

    Like an LGBT, but with someone different on top.

    Comment by Idiot/Savant — November 30, 2009 @ 9:21 am

  36. thanks guy, wowserism alive and well still i see. no harm in large weekends is there? A bi, lesbian, gay or transexual person for the record. you can’t really live up to your moniker if your always frowning can you?

    Comment by George — November 30, 2009 @ 9:21 am

  37. Meanwhile, it’s going to be great fun watching Labour get tea-bagged by its own leader…

    Comment by Craig Ranapia — November 30, 2009 @ 11:28 am

  38. In a sense, Goff is following Key’s lead. Key tried to appeal to less right-wing voters, he lost some voters to ACT as a result, then he did a deal with ACT after the election. I’m guessing Goff hopes he can win some more conservative voters to Labour, and not worry about losing voters to the Greens because the Greens will support him after the election if he needs them to.

    Comment by kahikatea — November 30, 2009 @ 12:32 pm

  39. I’m guessing Goff hopes he can win some more conservative voters to Labour, and not worry about losing voters to the Greens because the Greens will support him after the election if he needs them to.

    The huge risk here is that urban liberal voters might realise that Labour no longer represents their conscience so they’ll vote thier pocket book and switch to National.

    Comment by danylmc — November 30, 2009 @ 12:47 pm

  40. Did I see in the paper this morning that Goff’s popularity (as potential PM) has managed to *fall*, down to 5 percent? Against Key’s 54%? That’s got to hurt.

    Comment by Sam Finnemore — November 30, 2009 @ 1:02 pm

  41. Just a test, so it may not get through, but what thell archie – since I am here, may add that I find it hard to see Mr Goff one of acolytes of Roger Douglas and supporter of the 1980′s reforms, as a class warrior -

    Comment by Leopold — November 30, 2009 @ 6:58 pm

  42. May I suggest something really machiavellian.

    The greens are in electoral trouble now, with Norman as leader, Sue Bradford gone. They may well be lucky to get to the threshold of 5%.

    Goff knows this.

    Let’s says there are hundreds of thousands of ‘liberal left’ labour voters. Goff knows that is he pisses any of these voters off they will take the votes elsewhere, rather than not vote. This will lift the green vote.

    Same time, he is ‘reconnecting’ with the Trotter left.

    Voila.

    Comment by aj — November 30, 2009 @ 7:51 pm

  43. And Chris Trotter writes another bizarre post. http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2009/11/liberal-left-who-are-they.html

    Comment by gingercrush — November 30, 2009 @ 9:19 pm

  44. Wow, that latest Trotter rant is surreal.

    Comment by George Darroch — November 30, 2009 @ 10:46 pm

  45. Yet again, I’d be more offended if it make any sense whatsoever. It reads like a first year pols essay written on the back of a all-nighter fuelled by instant coffee & dodgy kebab.

    Comment by Craig Ranapia — November 30, 2009 @ 11:34 pm

  46. I love Trotter’s latest DIM POST SURE IS DIM riposte. It really just confirms that he doesn’t get it at all.

    Comment by JD — December 1, 2009 @ 10:49 am

  47. Trotter lives in Synechdocde, New Zealand and like the hero of Kaufman’s film has a simliar but less interesting malaise.

    A lot of what Trotter describes did happen. Often the result of Pakeha newly converted. Faux Maori ceremonies grafted onto govt departments etc. But it was only part and most of that has gone.

    What we have left are such things as health and education systems which have changed in response to the specifics of Maroi needs. With such positive results that prove the argumewnt very conclusively that we are not all the same.

    Looking over at The Standard though, Goff has found an audience. Hopefully it is confined to angry male unionists. But it’s very toxic. Stirring up working class resentment against ethnic groups usually ends unpleasantly.

    Comment by Neil — December 1, 2009 @ 6:30 pm

  48. One other thing that strikes me about all of this is the deathly silence from such MPs as David Shearer and Charles Chauvel. Not a murmur of dissent about where the thugs are taking Labour. Spineless opportunists.

    Comment by Neil — December 1, 2009 @ 7:03 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 336 other followers

%d bloggers like this: