Category: Rants

Sorry for the long delay in posting. I'm on vacation in the former Austro-Hungarian empire and I'm quite busy trying to enjoy it.

A few people, all older men, have asked me as we've talked casually about where I'm traveling if there is any resentment of Americans in the short experience I've had. The easy answer is No, nobody seems to care. To the extent that there is any resentment to be felt I think it's directed at the Germans for being obviously so much wealthier than Czechs, Croatians, etc.

The more interesting answer is, it says a ton about the generation gap that anyone from the Cold War era still thinks Europeans are envious of or aspire to be Americans. Yeah, they like our shit music and movies. The dominant sense, though, is that they just feel sorry for us at this point. Nobody's crawling under barbed wire to escape East Germany now, and certainly not to get to a country with zero paid vacation days mandated by law and in which people can work full time and have no ability to see a doctor when they're sick. I feel – and maybe I'm projecting – that people in Southeast Europe have lived through a collapsing, failed regime and they know one when they see one. And they feel sorry for Americans today the same way Americans used to feel sorry for Eastern Europeans under communism. Just replace "God, they don't even have toilet paper! They have to wait in line for bread!" with "God, they're all one paycheck from being homeless, and they can't even go to the hospital!"

America's immigration policy where white Europeans are concerned is an open door now. Nobody resents us – they see others (Japanese, German, etc) who are as wealthy as American tourists, and they see the benefits they enjoy for being EU citizens and consciously choose not to trade it for what they could get in the US, which boils down to lower taxes and not much else. They'll continue to buy our Lil' Pump tracks and our Dwayne Johnson movies, but do they want to be us?
buy zithromax online buy zithromax no prescription

No. They think we're nuts. Right now we're the Crazy Friend who you like but want to keep at arms length.

We're on our way to being the Train Wreck Friend who you actively ignore when the number comes up on the phone.
buy synthroid online buy synthroid no prescription

One deal I have with myself as a traveler is that I will partake of every opportunity to see something that advertises itself as a museum (I could stop the sentence there and it would be mostly true) of the cold war period. This has led me into some truly awful, abysmal, corn-ball shit (the "Spy Museum" in DC is among the funniest things I've seen that was not intended to be funny) and a few interesting places as well.

This will sound bad, but I don't go into such places to learn anything. I don't mean that I already know it all; it's more that I could get all the information I could ever want from any number of books, online sources, documentaries, and so on. So, and I suspect this is a big reason behind the Disneyfication of museums everywhere, they have to find an interesting way to tell the story.

Finding out that Prague has a "Museum of Communism" was a no-hesitation moment for me. Finding out once we arrived that it is located in a tourist-heavy area and thus would likely cater to American tastes was icing on the cake. This would be BAD.

On one count the place was legitimately good – everything was presented from a Czech perspective. That was refreshing. I feel like younger people (those who don't remember pre-1989) could learn a lot there.

Points of reference as specific as addresses, small towns, and stories from normal people were used widely for context. I mean, I know that's not exactly rare in the museum world now but as shit as I was expecting the place to be, it was welcome.

The editorial perspective, though, was weird.

It's always weird on this topic. It's clearly the "See? Communism failed! You are so lucky not to have to live in this failed system!" perspective, as every take on the Soviet bloc written after 1989 has used. Hooray! Capitalism won! Here's an enormous list of flaws with centrally planned government.

The genius of that framing is that it's impossible to refute in a vacuum. Clearly nobody really misses a system in which toilet paper was a rare commodity. It's indisputable that if you judge systems by their ability to churn out consumer products, there's no comparison. If you give people a choice between two systems that don't really work and one has ample, cheap Ass Paper, they're going to pick that one every time.

The irony, though, is that focusing attention exclusively on the failings of "Communism" is a great way to allow people of a certain mindset to walk out thinking, "See? Communism sucked!" without prompting any kind of reflection about the system we live in now. Because aside from the obvious gap in ability to make cheap shit to fill store shelves, every criticism in the entire museum was as applicable to modern capitalism as to Soviet-style communism.

Oh, under communism lots of people were imprisoned? People didn't feel free? Government was corrupt and unresponsive? Wow interesting tell me more. Through that lens even the line of argument that capitalism is awesome for consumption looks a little wobbly; "Most people couldn't get the things they wanted or needed" sounds an awful lot like "Most people can't afford the things they want or need" and the difference is semantic.
buy strattera generic rxbuyonlinewithoutprescriptionrx.net over the counter

I guess if the reason people end up under-provided for is the most important thing to you, that argument is worth having. In practice it isn't.

I liked all the photos and video of Wenceslas Square during the events of 1989. In that era it looked gray, dull, and absent any obvious symbols of affluence. Today it's crammed with equally sad, but in the sense that every available inch of space has been crammed full of foreign chain stores. The Jan Palach memorial is about 25 feet from a McDonald's. Across the square from that is a casino. It's gaudy and shitty and sad in a very affluent First World way that you can experience in just about any city on Earth.

It's not that the argument about a "failed system" is flawed. That doesn't bother me. What does bother me is the absence of recognition that it has been replaced with an equally flawed system. There was and is no "winner." People with power and money simply decided one set of flaws was more to their liking than another.

Pissing on the West Wing might seem like picking low-hanging fruit in 2018, now that political reality is an even more stark contrast to its Disney version of the Beltway than before. But I recently re-read this Luke Savage piece from last summer detailing the popularity of the show as a product of an era (the late 1990s and pre-9/11 00s) in which the politics of ideologically neutral centrism finally seemed within reach to the many people who are into this sort of thing.

Look, it's a TV show. I've grown out of trying to talk people out of liking TV shows. If you like it, you like it. In the Trump era, though, I'm starting to feel like some of the people still obsessed with the show – given when it aired, mostly the 50-and-over crowd right now – might be falling into a trap that conservatives have wallowed in for years now.

You know how the entirety of white conservatism is based on the shared idea of a "good old days," back before the fall? Of course the idealized America they're thinking of never really existed.
online pharmacy aciphex best drugstore for you

It's a fantasy. It's fair to say that in the 1950s and 1960s ordinary working people were financially better off (thanks Unions!) but the monoculture, the institutionalized racism and sexism, the social stratification, it was all there. Nothing was perfect and wonderful, except for a select portion of white people.

I think some liberals, and a lot of people in the center, are starting to adopt a similar fantasy about the politics of the West Wing. If only we could rid ourselves of the slimy corruption of Trumpism and get back to a politics of integrity, honesty, and mutual respect! When there were Good Republicans, and Democrats were Pragmatic, and all policy discussions (and of course that was the majority of what governing was) ended with handshakes and some good, common sense status quo reinforcing centrism.

Look. I see the appeal of that. But that was a TV show; politics was never like that. The zeitgeist of the West Wing was the early Clinton years, but look at what happened during the actual Clinton years: a billion dollar campaign of lies to undermine universal health care, Democrats signing on to Reagan's agenda wholesale (welfare reform, sentencing reform, NAFTA, etc.), and Republicans spending six years trying to rip them to shreds anyway.

To the extent that consensus and Both Sides handshake politics ever existed it was on issues where a brutal elite consense pervaded (segregation, for example) and so no debate was necessary. It's like the old joke about how you can get a Catholic and a Protestant to stop bickering if you bring up Jews, because they can both agree on that point.

You see some ribbon threads of this today – Democrats and Republicans "coming together" to roll back Dodd-Frank and appease the financial industry. That's a terrible outcome. Just terrible. "Bipartisan" or "consensus" are not synonyms for "good" when it comes to public policy.
online pharmacy xenical best drugstore for you

It simply means that everyone agrees on an outcome (inevitably the status quo) and says nothing about the outcome itself. The Iraq War resolution was bipartisan. Agreeing to let Wall Street off the hook in the early Obama years was a bipartisan consensus. Spending a trillion dollars a year on the military is a bipartisan consensus. These are all idiotic and destructive ideas. If you applaud any of them simply on the basis of how good it makes you feel that no one really argued about anything and everyone shook hands and smiled and agreed, then I think you might not fully understand what politics is. This week, Congress passed a 7 Billion Pentagon spending bill without one word of debate.
buy norvasc online infoblobuy.com no prescription

Everyone in Congress was no doubt very Civil about it, because they all want to roll around in the trough of money they just created. I would rather they caned each other over the head on the House floor and spent half as much on the military.

There's a reason the West Wing had to create a fictional world in which politics is good and wholesome and full of people of integrity. If you could follow actual politics and get any of that, there would have been no need to write the show.

Let's be blunt: Third Way and all the other groups that exist to glorify centrism are conservative groups.
https://primeraeyecare.com/wp-content/themes/consultstreet/inc/customizer/custom/stromectol.html

They appeal solely to people who agree with Republican policy but are embarrassed at how mean and backward and – worst of all – uncivil Republicans are. It's the Aaron Sorkin / West Wing deleted scenes version of political reality in which everyone is very serious and very honorable and lo and behold all of the policy they push is virtually indistinguishable from anything the Republican Party has wanted since the 1970s. Liberals fall for this sometimes because the idea of politics being nice and civil even when you disagree about things is just so darn appealing to some people for whom process and decorum are far more important than outcomes.

You can't do a much better job of undercutting the whole Centrist / Third Way movement than it does to itself, though, and I think this exercise in concern trolling about the Democratic Party being just so ultra-leftist (e.g., shows signs of supporting something to the left of Joe Lieberman and Zell Miller) is a great example:

Some of the key initiatives are a massive apprenticeship program to train workers, a privatized employer-funded universal pension that would supplement Social Security and an overhaul of unemployment insurance to include skills training. Other proposals included a "small business bill of rights" and the creation of a "BoomerCorps" — like the volunteer AmericaCorps for seniors.

Meanwhile, they say the progressive agenda is out of date. They dismiss, for instance, a federal jobs guarantee as a rehash of the New Deal.

"Our ideas must be bold, but they must also fit the age we are in," Cowan said. "Big isn't enough. If it's bold and old — it’s simply old."

OK so there's a lot to unpack here. Privatization (straight out of the right wing playbook), "retraining" (Bill Clinton at Peak Neoliberal), small business handjobbing (Chamber of Commerce right-wing deregulation), and…something so utterly stupid that I don't even know how to define it.

Then the New Deal is invoked to…deride the Democratic Party? Clearly what the Democratic Party should avoid at all costs is the thing that got a president and his successor re-elected five times, produced the largest Democratic Senate majority in history, and was instrumental in the economic development of the country at a perilous time.
https://primeraeyecare.com/wp-content/themes/consultstreet/inc/customizer/custom/furosemide.html

These people are idiots, the whole centrism fetishizing apparatus is a stalking horse for right-wing economic policy, and the more the Democratic Party has tried to appease these people the worse its results – electorally and policy-wise – have been.
buy avapro generic buy avapro online over the counter

They're dumb and they're wrong. Stop listening to them and stop idealizing their fantasy version of a Politics of Politeness and Propriety that never was.

After Helsinki I'm having second thoughts about my Grand Russia Theory.

Since the 2016 Election I've been of the opinion that anyone expecting evidence of direct collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia was going to be sorely disappointed – that there would be no red-handed moment like the release of a video or phone calls where Trump or his close associates say "OK, so tomorrow we do X and you do Y, talk to you afterward." It seemed more likely to me – and on balance I think this is still the more likely reality, even though I'm hedging now – that what happened is Russia is and has always been trying to interfere in our domestic politics and at some point the Trump people learned about specific examples of this. Instead of contacting the FBI or whatever, they just laughed and said "lol awesome" like the rank amateurs and soulless con men they are.
online pharmacy stromectol best drugstore for you

Along the way I assumed, correctly as it has turned out, that the President would make so many ham-fisted attempts to obstruct investigations into his various malfeasances (??

) that he'd eventually get rolled up in those charges.

Now I'm wondering about the viability of a second theory – that Russia, in their long-standing efforts to destabilize the politics of Europe, China, the US, and anyone else they can destabilize to their advantage economically, politically, and militarily – does have something explicit like phone calls, emails, or video of direct Trump campaign contacts and requests. Because pardon my absence of scientific rigor here, but this is just getting too weird. It's dangerous to read anything into their usual sound-and-fury reactions, but even some Republicans appear to be concerned at a level that is subtly different. I think, for the first time, it's a real possibility that Russia's grand strategy here is to hold a release of damning evidence over Trump's head for as long as possible, extract whatever favorable concessions from him they can, and then release the evidence and sit back to watch the American political system have a total, complete, years-long meltdown.

I've never believed, and do not believe, that Russia gives a shit about Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump per se. What they care about is creating as much of a shitshow out of America's increasingly feeble attempts to govern itself so that it, Russia, can present itself to the world as the safer, stabler economic and military protecting power. Domestic chaos in the US also drastically reduces the chance of American attempts to limit Russian geographic expansion (and if you fail to understand that geographic security is the guiding force behind all Russian strategic thinking for the past five centuries, read up and get back to us). There was no Grand Scheme to "install" Trump.
online pharmacy prednisone best drugstore for you

They just saw an opportunity and took it. The U.S. would do exactly the same – and has repeatedly in the past – if we thought there was some opportunity to install a total ass clown dictator type in Russia or another country.

I haven't convinced myself yet, but this is just getting too fuckin' weird for someone with an active imagination not to start thinking about more spectacular endings.

Lost in the shuffle with Kennedy's retirement from the Supreme Court is the growing importance of the courts in resolving the outcomes of our increasingly complicated and fractious elections.

Last fall I wrote a piece for the Washington Post attempting to clarify the seemingly confusing question of why the President would attempt to undermine confidence in the integrity of an election that he won. The takeaway point is that undermining Americans' faith in the electoral process is one of the basic goals of the Trump "movement" because when that faith disappears, then "no one really knows" who won any given election.
buy clomid online www.mobleymd.com/wp-content/languages/new/clomid.html no prescription

And once every election outcome is treated as an open question, the outcome ends up being either heavily influenced or outright decided by the permanent, non-elected institutions of the state: courts, bureaucracy, and, in truly failed states, the military.
buy clomiphene online www.mobleymd.com/wp-content/languages/new/clomiphene.html no prescription

I mentioned in Episode 006 of the podcast that the growing chasm between how our system is supposed to work on paper and how it works in practice is one of the symptoms of a failing state, or at the very least democratic backsliding. Elections decided (or influenced) by something other than an actual count of the ballots cast are another symptom. Trump is setting up an insanely dangerous dynamic wherein the only way we can know if an election was fair is if Republicans win – that is, victory by the right is sufficient evidence that the insidious forces of liberalism were thwarted in their many efforts to rig the election.

If the right loses, conversely, then that is sufficient evidence that the election was rigged against them.

The short-term outcome is that American courts are likely to be called upon again, as they were in 2000, to resolve election outcomes in this new poisoned-well dynamic. Bear that in mind when realizing how Trump is reshaping the Federal courts.

Then go have a couple drinks.

If you follow me on Socials Media you may have noted that on Saturday morning I participated in the "Shut down the Dan Ryan" march in Chicago that achieved its goal of saturation local media coverage in addition to national exposure…as a way Fox News could offer its dying, elderly audience a group of black people to be mad at for no particular reason.

The reasons I went are many. One is that the South Side is routinely an afterthought in this city, even among people who live here. Another is that since a Catholic parish organized and led the event, I thought there was at least a decent chance the police wouldn't just club everyone over the head and herd them into paddywagons. But mostly I was eager to participate to use the experience of being there as a baseline for evaluating the media coverage (and social media commentary) on the event after the fact. Here are, in no order, some observations.

1. The police presence was absolutely ridiculous overkill, and I have substantial experience already being at events in public places where the police presence was ridiculous. I suppose the police have to "plan for the worst" from their perspective, but they had enough people and vehicles and equipment there to fight a small rearguard action in the Korean War. You wonder what goes on in their imaginations – like, what is the imagined scenario they are preparing for?

2. As it turned out, the crowd was overwhelmingly older people, pre-adolescent kids, and people of middle age with kids in tow. There were, to my knowledge and post-event reports, zero arrests. It could not have been more uneventful from a police vs. protesters perspective.

3. That didn't stop the Governor and tens of thousands of racist Facebook uncles from going off half-assed about "chaos" and "mobs" and whatnot. Event organizers, coordinating with the police at every step of the process, told everyone where to stand and wait (a fenced-in park).

Then they told us when we could enter the expressway. Then they told us where we could exit (67th Street, as planned). The crowd of mostly elderly and older adult people made no attempt to do anything except what was planned.

4. The messaging was devoid of "Fuck the cops, black power!" and very heavy on economic messages. Lots of "We need jobs" and "fix the schools" and "45 minutes for 9-1-1 calls??" and "$8/hr isn't enough." People seem remarkably attuned to the economic causes of violence and averse to the tired old "culture of violence" bullshit.

5. For police who were supposedly very worried about the flow of traffic, I find their decision-making curious. They allowed everyone to enter the highway with 3 of the 4 lanes blocked off. Traffic continued through the one open lane. Then they made us wait for 90 minutes while the Catholic leaders negotiated to shut down the fourth and final lane.

We just stood there, waiting. Nobody indicated any aggression. Just patience like you'd expect from people who have been waiting patiently for decades to be listened to. And then the State Police announced, "Hey OK go ahead we'll close off the fourth lane too." And then we had the whole highway. What was the point of blocking the highway for an additional 90 minutes in "holding pattern" before letting us do exactly what we wanted to anyway?

6. Well…I chalk that up to some Dick-Waving by the police. A very juvenile sort of "We're in charge here" power play. But if the state, city, and law enforcement REALLY were so concerned about the interruption of traffic, they demonstrated that concern in a very odd way by making the event take at LEAST two hours longer than it would have. In my only interaction with a police officer, I told the nearest state trooper during our lengthy delay, "You know if you guys had just let everyone go we'd have been done an hour ago."

7. Three lanes of traffic were closed for several hours on a Saturday morning.

All four lanes were closed for about 30-40 minutes.
buy azithromycin online mannadew.co.uk/wp-content/languages/new/uk/azithromycin.html no prescription

The crowd moved at normal speed over a course of about 1.25 miles. No one attempted to sit or lie in the roadway to delay. The crowd was compact enough that I could see everything, and I brought my bike so I was able to ride back and forth along its length (the police had no problem with bikes) several times. If anything like fights had erupted, I would have seen it.

8. Then it was over, and every reporter on the planet was on the 67th Street ramp. I declined to make comments when asked, as a white person who does not live in that neighborhood.
buy lipitor online mannadew.co.uk/wp-content/languages/new/uk/lipitor.html no prescription

I told them to interview the people who live there, which the media present was eager to do. The interviews I've seen in the papers and on the radio/TV coverage were all very On Message. With older people in the majority, "Our kids should not have all these guns" was the common theme.

I'm long past the point of arguing with old white people on social media, but I have to say that from a first-hand perspective it is quite hilarious(ly sad) to see the narrative that people, including Republican elected officials, attempt to create about something that was in practice quite uneventful. I've been in rowdier buffet lines. The crowds on the street at Bar Time are more aggressive and unpredictable than that group was. Wrigley Field is more chaotic after a Cubs game. And yet in all the unsubtly racially coded language available, people insist on telling lurid tales of chaos and rioting and violence – all the while insisting that their attitudes have nothing to do with race.

Sure they don't, buddy. That's why you spent Saturday on the internet making up tales of mob violence at a march of black grandparents that briefly closed traffic, a disruption announced weeks in advance that could only have inconvenienced people who insisted on paying no attention to traffic reports or the news.

I found it, guys. I found the picture that will be on the first page of the chapter in every textbook about the Trump years in the future.

Just look at that. Don't look at it and feel sorry for the kid, necessarily, although I'm sure you do feel that way. Look at that and think about how many adults participating in this farce are able to keep in character while doing it. Kids as young as three are being obligated to appear alone in whatever they're calling these obviously illegitimate on their face pseudo-legal proceedings, conducted in a language they do not understand, and somehow everyone involved was told this was to be the case and they nodded and said "OK see ya tomorrow at 8 AM, then!"

Like, how do you do it. I know employment is a sticky web, and sooner or later we all get asked to do things we don't want to do and obviously the need to keep ourselves financially solvent prevents us from storming out in a fit of indignity. But you really have to wonder how any of the adults – the "judge", the various representatives of the government, etc. – were told to do this and didn't have some hill-to-die-on reservations. That none thought, "OK this is fucking ridiculous, too ridiculous even for someone with a high tolerance for ridiculous." That none thought, "Do I really want my name on the wall next to a picture of this in a museum exhibit in fifty years? Is this what I want my name associated with, even obliquely?"

We're all cynical enough to have lost faith in individuals' sense of shame to avert atrocities, but even still I struggle to understand how any adult could learn about this and decline to…say no. Just say, "No, I'm not doing that." Not in a big, dramatic movie scene sort of way, but a simple, "Look, I'm essentially impossible to fire as a federal employee anyway, so go ahead and try if you want.
buy furosemide online buy furosemide no prescription

But I'm not doing this." sort of way. I know there are sick fuckers out there in the world – Stephen Miller types who legitimately enjoy the idea of making certain people suffer – but they usually do so from a position of safe detachment.

buy singulair online buy singulair no prescription

They aren't the ones who actually have to show up in a courtroom and pretend that a six year-old Salvadoran runaway can represent himself in an immigration hearing.

Every time I think I finally understand the mindset of the people in that part of the political spectrum, they manage to turn it up another notch and I find myself adrift in their delusions once again.

So first of all, check out a new thing I have up at The Week about what Senate Democrats can do to stop the upcoming Supreme Court nominee (hint: nothing) and what they need to change moving forward so that they stop taking brutal losses like this as a matter of course.

In a broader sense, this week feels like it was a tipping point – and hopefully not simply for me personally. I feel like I reached total Trump Fatigue sometime Thursday afternoon when the news of the mass shooting at the Capital Gazette reached me. It was a back-breaking straw for me, the knowledge that we will all sit around making and listening to the same arguments and the Trump people will all pretend like the President constantly telling crowds of armed half-wits that journalists are "enemies of the American people" has nothing to do with armed half-wits killing journalists. Our discourse has gotten so insane and repetitive that very few people seem capable of or interested in stepping back and asking what the fuck we are doing. It has been a boil-the-frog process of slowly normalizing one form of insanity after another and it is not at all clear that people in power will figure that out before it is too late and the water is boiling.

Couple that with the utter spinelessness of the current congressional Democratic leadership – a generation of white geezers who seem to have internalized losing as par for the course who are trying to confront a literal authoritarian as if he is some generic Republican to be bargained with – and the ability to summon hope for the future is pretty limited at present. Look at what is happening in this country, and Chuck Schumer and the supposedly Liberal Media spent half the week jerking each other off with pearl-clutching lectures about Civility.

I want to yell very loudly and I want to punch someone but I don't feel like there's anything to be accomplished by either. And the constant pep talks about working for November are falling on deaf ears at this point if there isn't a serious change in leadership and direction of the Democratic Party.

This is, or needs to be, a Dred Scott moment. That decision didn't do anything to sway abolitionists (who were already perfectly convinced that slavery was bad) but hit home for the mushy center position held by many wealthy elites that "OK slavery is bad but gosh, abolition seems too drastic can't we find some halfway compromise point?"

In the 1840s and 1850s, we tried. We tried repeatedly to find a compromise, at least until it dawned on those people in the Let's Be Civil and Please Everyone center that there is no compromise to be had. Some things require us to be for them or against them. Some things require us to take an actual position and deny ourselves the luxury of comfortable Third Way bullshit that attempts to please everyone.

You can't compromise with the current American right. You have to defeat it. Anyone in Congress who doesn't understand that yet needs to retire and take up crossword puzzles. Since 1994 the Republicans have operated on the principle of "No compromises, oppose and obstruct at every opportunity using any tools available" because they realize (Democratic strategists, pay attention here) nobody gives a flying fuck about "optics" or bipartisanship – your party's base wants to see you win. Period. Don't lose politely – win. Get results. The GOP gets results. Democrats lose and sit around complaining that the GOP isn't playing nice and fair and how history will vindicate them.

Now the GOP owns the Supreme Court. Because they get results and are willing to fight dirty to get them. Compared to the Moral Victories that Democratic leaders have been doling out for 25 years, I think most of us would prefer to have the Supreme Court.

Lost in the coverage of "Zero Tolerance" for asylum seekers in the U.S. is the fact that this has already played out on the other side of the globe in Australia since 2001. I wrote a thing for Baffler about the "Pacific Solution" and the disaster that holding a large population of semi-stateless people in legal limbo for years on end in outdoor tent camps inevitably becomes.

In an effort to make it a less depressing read I led with the tragi-comedy of Nauru, the tiny Pacific island nation that ended up so broke that it was induced to becoming an offshore detention center (prison camp, really) in exchange for boatloads of money from the Australian government.

Nauru needed money and Australia had some people they wanted kept far out of sight and far away from prying eyes.
buy dapoxetine online buy dapoxetine no prescription

Voila. Capitalism to the rescue.

Whether families are being separated or not is a sideshow to the growing population of people being detained indefinitely with unclear or nonexistent rights. Their numbers are growing exponentially under Trump and it won't be long before America is searching for its own Nauru where they can be boxed up and put out of sight.
buy nolvadex online buy nolvadex no prescription