Trump’s, Sanders’ success result of anti-PC public

By:  LeRoy Goldman

Special To The Observer

The charlotte Observer

1-27-2016

The 2016 presidential sweepstakes aren’t playing out according to script. Hillary Clinton seems less and less inevitable. Her improbable foe, Bernie Sanders, continues to gather momentum. That momentum comes not from the political class, but from the people, people fed up with those who preach political correctness while profiting from the Washington establishment and its nexus with power centers of immense wealth.

For the Republicans Donald Trump continues to lead the crowded GOP field regardless of what he says or does. The Republican establishment and the party power structure first believed that ignoring him would suffice. They believed his intemperate, politically incorrect tirades would capsize his candidacy. When that didn’t work they maneuvered to get him to sign a pledge that he would not run as an independent candidate. Now they are attempting to destroy him.

But none of the efforts to silence Trump or Sanders is working . Why? Maybe the answer hides in plain sight. What if the power brokers in both parties are guilty of the same blindingly stupid mistake? What if they have taken the whimsical advice of baseball great, Satchel Paige, who said, “Don’t look back. Something might be gaining on you”? They have, because looking back at what’s gaining on them brings into focus a reality so threatening to the perpetuation of their vested self interest that it must be denied.

What’s gaining on both political parties is the fury of the American people. Sanders’ and Trump’s momentum are being propelled by that fury. Washington is about to meet its match, and the 2016 election will be nothing short of unpredictably transformational.

The origin of political correctness decades ago was innocuous enough. Putting boundaries around offensive, hurtful speech and behavior seemed reasonable. But it has been transmogrified by elitists into something so pernicious that most Americans now rightly reject it. No longer sensible or silly, it has become an instrument aimed at not only changing behavior, but also at stifling free speech. Today’s virulent form of political correctness demands conformity to its strictures and shows little mercy in punishing those who dare to challenge its expanding hegemony.

The American people reject the PC strait jacket. A Fairleigh Dickinson University poll last fall found that 68 percent oppose political correctness. More importantly, this view is not held exclusively by hard right Republicans. It is shared by 62 percent of Democrats, 68 percent of independents, 81 percent of Republicans, 72 percent of whites, and 61 percent of nonwhites.

Donald Trump’s appeal is rooted in his opposition to political correctness. What’s now clear is that, if it’s OK for a presidential candidateto confront PC for the evil that it has become, then it’s OK for all of the rest of us to do so too. Trump has let the genie of outright opposition to political correctness out of the bottle. And it’s going to resonate across the entire political spectrum.

When we get into the fall campaign, if it’s Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton, the political class, the pundits, and those in the media and academe who cloak discrimination in the name of making the world safe for diversity will be in for a rude awakening that will violate their “safe spaces” and arrive without “trigger warnings.”

Regardless of whether Donald Trump wins the GOP nomination or the presidency, his legacy as a trail blazer is already secure. And that’s a very good thing.

The Shadow Welcomes Comments

Please Contact Me At:  EmailMe

Will Paul Ryan come to the rescue of the GOP?

By:

LeRoy Goldman, GUEST COLUMNIST

Asheville Citicen-Times

1-25-2016

When the President comes to Capitol Hill to deliver the State of the Union message to Congress and the American people, his arrival in the House chamber is announced by the House Sergeant at Arms who cries out for all to hear, “Mr. Speaker, the President of the United States”.

When that next occurs after the election this coming November, where will Paul Ryan be? Will he be seated in the Speaker’s chair on the rostrum, or will he be standing immediately behind Sergeant at Arms, Paul Irving? The answer to that question may not be as apparent as it seems.

Last Sept. 25, House Speaker John Boehner stunned Washington by announcing his resignation. By Oct. 8, the House Republican Caucus was set to vote on Boehner’s successor. It was widely assumed that House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy had the inside track. But that day McCarthy abruptly dropped out. The vote was postponed. Chaos ensued.

Paul Ryan, chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, had intended to give the nominating speech for McCarthy. When McCarthy threw in the towel, Ryan immediately issued a statement saying he was not interested in the job. He said, “I will not be a candidate.”

But on Sept. 20, only 12 days later, the mounting drumbeat for Ryan had grown to a crescendo, and Ryan said he would consider seeking the post if the Republican Caucus would unite behind him and accede to his conditions.

On Sept.29, the GOP Caucus elected Ryan Speaker of the House by a vote of 236-9. In his address to the House that day he said, “Let’s be frank: The House is broken. We are not solving problems. I am not interested in laying blame. We are wiping the slate clean. How reassuring it would be if we finally got our act together...if we actually fixed the tax code, put patients in charge of their health care, grew our economy, strengthened our military, lifted people out of poverty, and paid down the debt.”

Five weeks later Ryan in a speech at the Library of Congress laid out his detailed vision for a confident America at home and abroad. But before he plunged into the substance of his remarks he said, “This country has big problems. If we do not have a President who will work with us, we will not solve those problems.”

To chart a different course Ryan argues the GOP must not only win the White House in 2016, he believes that it must also win a mandate. And he argues that winning a mandate requires the GOP to offer ideas. And that requires them to actually have ideas. In other words, he rejects fully the notion that all the GOP need do is to oppose the Democrats. That won’t work.

Even more striking is the yawning chasm between Ryan’s concept of an inspirational and policy driven Republican agenda and the absence of such an agenda to restore America’s greatness offered by the GOP frontrunner, Donald Trump. Ryan has challenged his party to put up or shut up. Trump has told friend and foe alike to buzz off. They are operating in parallel universes. How much better would it be if they were in direct competition with one another.

However, a year ago Ryan took himself out of the 2016 presidential sweepstakes. He told NBC News, “I have decided that I am not going to run for President in 2016.”

Earlier this month, however, Ryan moderated a policy seminar in Columbia, South Carolina on poverty in America and how to better deal with it. It was sponsored by the Jack Kemp Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute. Some of the Republicans running for President attended. Trump and Ted Cruz did not.

Sometimes events overwhelm intentions. And that is what may be happening now behind the scenes. It is increasingly clear that none of Trump’s opponents is able to lay a glove on him, let alone offer a forward-looking agenda that would result in the election of a Republican president next November.

Ryan surely knows that the agenda he is proposing cannot be implemented by or from the House of Representatives. Only a President with an electoral mandate can do that. Last fall a reluctant Ryan, when asked, rescued the House GOP. At the Republican Convention next summer, Paul Ryan may be asked to ride to a far bigger rescue. He’ll be there. He’s the convention chairman.

The Shadow Welcomes Comments

Please Contact Me at:  EmailMe

Hillary’s secret weapon - Republican madness

Hillary’s secret weapon - Republican madness

By:

LeRoy Goldman - GUEST COLUMNIST

Asheville Citizen-Times

12-31-2015

It’s one thing for a political party to suffer a humiliating presidential defeat when the stars are aligned against it. That’s understandable. When the Democrats nominated Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and 1956 they knew he never had a chance against Ike. When the Republicans nominated Barry Goldwater in 1964 we all knew that the choice he offered was one that would be resoundingly rejected on election day. The same unavoidable and predictable fate befell Democrats George McGovern in 1972, and Walter Mondale in 1984, as well as Republican John McCain in 2008.

But 2016 is shaping up in a way that promises to break new ground, ground so bizarre that it defies sanity. This election is one that history teaches us the Republicans should win. Call it the pendulum effect. After two terms in office the voters frequently have handed the reins of power over to the opposition party. 2016 should be such a year. President Obama’s favorability rating is in the low 40s, far below the 50 percent minimum that is typically necessary for an incumbent’s party to have a reasonable chance to retain the presidency. In addition, about two-thirds of the American people believe the nation is on the wrong track.

Barring a bolt of lightning, say from the FBI, it’s clear that the Democrats will nominate Hillary Clinton. However, she comes with much baggage. Large numbers of Americans, including Democrats, do not trust her. She is not likable. She’s stiff and wooden on the campaign trail. Thanks to her proclivity for secrecy, she is under investigation by the FBI regarding her use of a private email system while serving as President Obama’s Secretary of State. Finally, she will be hamstrung by the fact that she dare not separate herself too far from Obama’s unpopular policies for fear of alienating African-Americans and Hispanics whose votes she must have in order to win next November.

And yet with the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire Primary just around the corner, it looks like the GOP is on the verge of not only anointing a nominee who can’t win, but also one who will enable the Democrats to retake control of the United States Senate. If that happens, it may well destroy the Republican Party, a fate the Party of Lincoln will have earned and richly deserved.

In a column in the Washington Post about a month ago former Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, described the kind of president the nation needs. Gates is a Republican who worked for eight presidents. He ran the Pentagon for Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, and was the Director of the CIA under President George H. W. Bush. Gates believes we need a president who understands that power in Washington is divided among the three branches of government, a president who is truthful, not a deceptive “spinner”, a president who will be resolute and have the courage to act “in defiance of public opinion” when the national interest is at stake, and, most importantly, a president who will be a unifier of the American people.

The front runners for the GOP nomination, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Ben Carson all fail Gates’ worthy requirements, and they fail them miserably.

In addition, all of them will provide Hillary Clinton with the red meat she requires in order to avert the defeat that otherwise would befall her next November.

The battle for the White House will come down to which candidate wins in the crucial eight swing states of Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, New Hampshire, Ohio, Iowa, Colorado, and Nevada. Trump, Cruz, or Carson can’t win any of them.

Moreover, most of those eight are the states that will also determine which party controls the Senate. The “down-ballot” effect on Republican Senate candidates in the swing states will be devastating, if the GOP nominates one of the certain losers that it has come to adore.

Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, recently cautioned his party not to nominate candidates who can’t win the November election. He said, “we’d like to have a nominee who can carry purple states...otherwise he’s not going to get elected”. He then pointed out that the determinative Senate elections will be in those same states: Florida, New Hampshire, Ohio, Colorado, and Nevada, as well as Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Illinois.

The Republican Party stands on the edge of an abyss of its own making. The question is whether it will take the plunge. The GOP’s madness is Hillary’s secret weapon.

The Shadow Welcomes Comments

Please Contact Me At:  EmailMe

GOP, look to Eisenhower election for guidance

BY LEROY GOLDMANThe Charlotte Observer

Special to the ObserverDecember 23, 2015

GOP, look to Eisenhower election for guidance

On December 7, Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, arranged a dinner for 20-plus GOP power brokers at the posh Source restaurant in Washington. That they gathered on the anniversary of Pearl Harbor is too delicious to overlook. Their purpose, if possible, was to prepare for a contested and possibly brokered national convention in Cleveland next July, in the hope that the delegates nominate a candidate who can win in November.

Their task, while essential, is fraught with danger. It must be accomplished without so angering Donald Trump and his supporters that he and they bolt the party. If Trump is either nominated or bolts, the Republicans lose. Think Charles Bronson and Death Wish.

There is, however, a way to thread the eye of this needle. The mainstream candidate the GOP kingmakers seek must not come from among those Republicans currently running. Any effort to pick one of them to leapfrog Trump will drive Trump and his followers out of the party.

In a recent column in Real Clear Politics, Sean Trende sets forth the odds of winning the nomination for each of the 14 Republicans currently running. Not surprisingly, Trump leads the pack, but at only 20 percent. Trende’s odds for the remaining baker’s dozen are far worse than Trump’s. His odds that no one wins enough delegates tops Trump at 25 percent. Thus, Trende believes we’re headed for a contested or brokered convention.

Looking back to the 1952 election is the way to find the GOP’s exit ramp out of this snarled traffic jam. Then the Republicans believed they could recapture the White House after two decades of Democratic rule. But their leading candidate, Senator Robert A. Taft, held isolationist views that led him to oppose the creation of NATO. The party elders knew that to successfully oppose communist expansion and win the election they needed an internationalist. They needed an alternative to Taft.

Thus, leading Republicans attempted to persuade an outsider, General Dwight D. Eisenhower, to run. Initially Ike was reluctant. He had not even voted until 1948. No one knew whether he was a Republican or a Democrat. And wisely, the Republicans didn’t care.

In January of 1952, Ike announced that he was a Republican and that he would seek the presidency. In a battle over seating disputed delegates at the contested GOP Convention in Chicago, the Eisenhower forces out maneuvered Taft. Ike won the nomination, and in November he cruised to the first of his two overwhelming victories.

Today the Republicans need another outsider in the Eisenhower mold. Remarkably his office is only four blocks from the Source restaurant where the panicked GOP elders dined on December 7.

It’s the office of the director of the FBI. James Comey is a Republican who President Obama nominated to lead the FBI in 2013. The Senate confirmed him 93-1. As acting attorney general in the Bush administration in 2004, Comey successfully stared down those in the Bush White House who were willing to violate the rule of law in order to reauthorize the Patriot Act.

He is a principled man of impeccable character. He’s conservative, but not crazy conservative. He knows how government and politics works, but he does not have a paper trail that can be used to destroy him. He can not only unify the GOP, but can win most independents and some Democrats.

If approached, he will likely say no. But like Ike, he likely will change his mind. James Comey is the GOP’s exit ramp in Cleveland next Summer. Tempis fugit.

Goldman worked on Capitol Hill and at the National Institutes of Health. He has retired to Flat Rock and can be reached at:  EmailMe

The Shadow Welcomes Comments

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article51159940.html#storylink=cpy

Hillary doesn't control her destiny

By

LeRoy Goldman

BlueRidgeNow.com

December 13, 2015

The calendar will soon say 2016, and that’s when the campaigns for the White House will kick into high gear. The Clinton Campaign has done all that it can to exude a sense of confidence and inevitability about first securing the Democratic nomination and then winning the general election. It appears that her nomination is in the bag.

Her competitors, Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley, don’t even rise to the nuisance level. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who would have been a formidable opponent, demurred. Vice President Joe Biden teased us for a couple of months but then said no.

But do not let appearances deceive you. All is not as rosy as it might seem. Clinton faces two existential challenges that may well derail either her nomination or her election.

The first is the ongoing FBI investigation into the private email system she created and controlled when she was President Barack Obama’s secretary of state. And the second is the daunting task of trying to separate herself from the problematic policies of the Obama administration in which she served without putting at risk the African-American and Hispanic voters she will need to win.

Last August, the inspector general for the intelligence community said some of Clinton’s work-related emails from her private server contained top-secret information. And that revelation led to the ongoing FBI investigation by that agency’s counterintelligence section. Details of the investigation are appropriately shrouded in secrecy, though FBI Director James Comey has testified to Congress that he is following the investigation “very closely.”

The centerpiece of the inquiry is whether Clinton’s use of her private email system compromised national security. If Clinton or her aides knew the server contained classified information and it was mishandled, they may be exposed to criminal prosecution.

In addition, Secretary Clinton signed nondisclosure agreements with respect to the handling of classified information. In so doing, she acknowledged that “the unauthorized disclosure, retention, or negligent handling of Sensitive Compartmented Information by me could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation.”

Also, it appears the FBI probe is looking into whether Clinton or her aides may have made “materially false statements” to agents conducting the probe. That, too, is a violation of federal law, which can result in a prison term of up to five years.

It’s reasonable to assume that the results of the FBI investigation will be public before the Democratic National Convention next summer. And, while none of us knows now what the investigation will conclude, we do know this: Comey is a man of principle and beyond reproach. Comey has testified to Congress that politics will not be a factor in the investigation. He said, referring to the investigators, “If you know my folks, you know they don’t give a rip about politics.”

An FBI report that does not give Clinton an undiluted clean bill of health could destroy her presidential campaign in a nanosecond and leave the Democratic Party twisting in the wind.

Even if Clinton is exonerated by the FBI, she’s not out of danger. The outcome of most presidential elections is determined by the economy. And, while there is no doubt that the economy will be a central issue in 2016, it is also the case that foreign policy and national security concerns will play a pivotal role, too.

The stalemated Korean War destroyed any hope that Harry Truman might have had for another term in 1952. After the Democrats tried and failed to recruit Gen. Dwight Eisenhower, they nominated Adlai Stevenson, who lost in a landslide.

On March 31,1968, President Lyndon Johnson announced he would not seek another term as president. He was a casualty of the failed American war policy in Vietnam. And his vice president, Hubert Humphrey, lost to Richard Nixon.

President Jimmy Carter was denied a second term in office in large measure because of his failed attempt to free American hostages in Iran.

Obama’s election in 2008 was made inevitable by the fact that most Americans had turned against President George W. Bush’s pre-emptive war in Iraq.

The point is that when the American people come to believe that their president can’t handle foreign policy, can’t win wars or can’t keep us safe, he and his party flame out.

The evidence suggests that we may be there again. If so, Clinton will pay the price for the nation’s increased vulnerability to radical Islamic terrorism and, even worse, a president whose arrogance and bubble isolation leads him to believe the American people are stupid enough to not figure out he neither knows what to do nor how to do it.

Clinton is caught in a vice. As Obama’s secretary of state, her fingerprints are all over the Obama administration’s foreign and national security policy. And it has been a policy of failure in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Iran, the Palestinian State and Israel. And now the long arm of ISIS has demonstrated its ability to kill and terrorize innocent people from Paris to San Bernardino.

Look at it this way: If Hillary Clinton is nominated, the American people may do her a favor and save her from having to move out of the White House for a second time complaining that she and Bill are “dead broke.”

LeRoy Goldman is a Flat Rock resident. Reach him at:  EmailMe

The Shadow Welcomes Comments

By

LeRoy Goldman

GUEST COLUMNIST

Asheville Citizen-Times

December 4, 2015

The 2016 number 1 draft pick: James Comey

By now everyone’s familiar with America’s latest get rich quick scheme, Draft King and Fan Duel. They offer the gullible the opportunity to combine fantasy football with gambling. They hold out the false promise of free money. Some of their ads close with the line, “Get off the sidelines and get some.”

There are lessons to be learned if we apply the evanescent appeal of Draft King and Fan Duel to the unfolding race for the presidency next year. Maybe we ought to avert the coming disaster by drafting someone for the job instead of sitting back and accepting the inevitable train wreck that’s headed our way.

It’s increasingly clear that Hillary Clinton will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. For the Republicans Donald Trump continues to be the frontrunner by a wide margin.

What’s worse is that the election of either of these two individuals guarantees the continuation of gridlock in Washington. In order to win, Clinton will of necessity be forced to support most of President Obama’s policies. Doing otherwise puts at risk the African-American and Hispanic votes she must have. If elected, she will certainly face a Republican House of Representatives that will thwart her every move. The Republican radicals, who will continue to control the House, will morph from Obama hatred to Hillary hatred.

If Trump is elected, virtually all of his major initiatives will flame out in the Senate. There is no chance that the Republicans will have the 60 votes necessary to prevent the Democrats from using the filibuster to turn the Senate into a Trump graveyard.

Although time is short, it’s not too late for the American people to rise up and draft a candidate who’s qualified, and who can end gridlock. His name is James Comey. As you may know, he is the director of the FBI, was appointed by President Obama, and is a Republican.

Here’s what you probably don’t know. And it’s what sets Comey apart from the two stooges described above.

In March 2004 Comey was acting Attorney General because his boss, Attorney General John Ashcroft, lay gravely ill in George Washington Hospital. Comey had temporarily suspended President George W. Bush’s domestic spying program because he and other officials at Justice believed parts of the program were illegal, especially those respecting the enormous data mining operation that ultimately were exposed years later when Edward Snowden released classified information from the National Security Agency.

On his way home on the evening of March 10, 2004 Comey learned that White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales and White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card were on their way to the hospital with the intention of having Ashcroft overrule Comey and reauthorize the covert program. Comey immediately called FBI Director Robert Mueller and asked him to join him at the hospital. Think of this meeting as a shootout at the O.K. Corral.

At Ashcroft’s bedside Gonzales and Card attempted to do just what Comey anticipated. But Ashcroft would have none of it. Moreover, he pointed out to them what they were requesting was impossible because the powers of the Attorney General had been transferred from him to James Comey.

Shortly thereafter a furious Andrew Card called Comey and demanded that he come to the White House immediately. Comey complied, but he took the Solicitor General of the United States, Ted Olson, with him as a witness. There they met with Card and Gonzales.

The next day the program was reauthorized even though the Justice Department had not attested to its legality. At that point Comey wrote his letter of resignation. It quickly became apparent that FBI Director Mueller and John Ashcroft were also going to resign.

Two days later the firestorm was averted when President Bush met with Comey one-on-one. In that meeting President Bush authorized the Justice Department to put the program on a sound legal basis, which is exactly what Comey then did.

It’s no wonder that when President Obama nominated Comey to head the FBI in 2013 he said Comey was a man of “fierce independence and deep integrity.”

Those are the qualities we need in a president. They are qualities that can’t be faked.

When you vote in your presidential primary, whether it is a Republican Primary or a Democratic Primary, write in Promo Code: Comey, that’s: Comey. Get off the sidelines, and put your country back on track.

LeRoy Goldman lives in Flat Rock and can be reached at:  EmailMe

The Shadow Encourages Comments

America has lost sight of Thanksgiving’s meaning

By:

LeRoy Goldman

The Charlotte Observer

November 26, 2015

Two of the “regulars” who comment on my columns, a bank executive from Wisconsin and a cardiologist from North Carolina, sing the same refrain, “Well done, but too negative. Tell us how to end gridlock.”

Fair enough. But it’s hard, really hard. But maybe, just maybe, the answer hides in plain sight here on Thanksgiving Day.

America has lost sight of Thanksgiving’s meaning.

In many ways Thanksgiving is a uniquely American national holiday. It was first celebrated by the Pilgrims and Native Americans in 1621. They thanked God for the blessings of their harvest. They knew that their very existence depended upon it.

The first Thanksgiving Proclamation was signed by President Washington on October 3, 1789. It read in part, “I recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the people of these states to the service of that great and glorious Being...That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks.”

In 1863 President Lincoln’s proclamation made Thanksgiving a national holiday. The Proclamation called for a “national day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens.”

For the Pilgrims and Presidents Washington and Lincoln, there’s no denying that giving thanks to God was the centerpiece of Thanksgiving.

But now Thanksgiving has been dumbed-down into a day of gluttony.

In very different ways we have dumbed-down politics and governance too. Americans have walled themselves off into two separate, warring nations, the Reds and the Blues, who loathe one another. Each of them believes they have a corner on truth. Each believes compromise is surrender. Each elects individuals who will perpetuate paralysis.

Perhaps there’s a way out. Take an hour and a half out of your otherwise barren Thanksgiving Day and watch the classic, Academy Award-winning 1947 film, Miracle on 34th Street.

Starring Edmund Gwenn as Kris Kringle, the cast also includes Maureen O’Hara and Natalie Wood, who plays a girl who like her mother, played by O’Hara, does not believe in Santa Claus. O’Hara, a Macy’s executive, is in charge of orchestrating the annual Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, and she recruits Kringle to be Macy’s Santa.

But she ends up with far more than she bargained for. Kringle not only believes he’s Santa Claus, but he also believes that he’s the one and only Santa Claus. If that’s not enough, he has the temerity to send Macy’s customers to its corporate rival, Gimbels, if Macy doesn’t have the toy a child wants.

Messrs. Macy and Gimbel loathe each other. Think of them as modern day Red and Blue generalissimos. They each share the same objective, the destruction of the other.

Kris Kringle throws a monkey wrench into all these destructive relationships. His unjust dessert includes being fired and being deemed dangerously mentally ill. He’s imprisoned, and put on trial.

But then it happens. Macy’s sales surge due to the publicity of Kringle’s advice to children. Gimbels is forced to follow suit. Messrs. Macy and Gimbel discover that they can prosper by cooperating with one another.

Kringle’s enterprising lawyer, played by John Payne, finds an ingenious way to prove in court that Kringle is the one and only Santa Claus. His legal tour de force not only delights New Yorkers of all ages, it melts the hearts of both female leads.

So, an old man with a bit of divine inspiration changes everything. Are you such an individual? What counts is what’s in your heart, not your wallet.

Goldman worked on Capitol Hill and at the National Institutes of Health. He has retired to Flat Rock.

The Shadow Welcomes comments:

Please Contact Me at:  EmailMe