Psychology study: Rugged American individualism bad, Chinese communism good
posted at 1:39 pm on July 19, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Well, you know how these things go. No comment required: just take a gander at the elaborate, painstaking experiment they conducted to reach this very obvious conclusion. There’s nothing like a totalitarian culture to help broaden your horizons and impart respect for others’ points of view.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Repeat after me:
Anti-freeze-filled toothpaste good,
American toothpaste, bad.
Poisoned petfood, good,
American petfood, bad.
Sounds like an interesting Behavioralistic trick.
profitsbeard on July 19, 2007 at 1:42 PM
My tax dollars at work….. and they didn’t even correlate that with rugged American individualism’s impact on the environment.
liquidflorian on July 19, 2007 at 1:43 PM
I have a cardboard box in my garage, and now my car and me…
we never talk.
We just don’t see eye to eye anymore.
It’s a shame really.
shooter on July 19, 2007 at 1:43 PM
Whoa….such retardation in supposedly educated people is mind numbing….
doriangrey on July 19, 2007 at 1:44 PM
:Yawn: Yet another propeganda piece disguised as “science” that trys to make the point that conservitism is somehow a mental disease.
Hey… how’s that communist worker’s paradise working out for the average Chinese citizen? Thought so.
crazy_legs on July 19, 2007 at 1:45 PM
These guys are so much smarter than we are. We should all just follow our computers out the window.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on July 19, 2007 at 1:45 PM
Huh, what was the question again? I wasn’t listening.
KelliD on July 19, 2007 at 1:50 PM
Yeah, Chinese communism is better than American individualis all right. When it comes to the balance of trade, that is.
Now excuse me while I go shopping, trying to find that ever-elusive product that doesn’t have a “made in China” label on it. Sadly, “made in America” is getting as hard to find as my namesake.
Bigfoot on July 19, 2007 at 1:52 PM
Ummm… wait… they said that Japanese tend to look at eyes first… and Americans Mouths first…
Don’t you think this would have an impact on this study? If the eye thing is oriental culture, not just Japanese, then it would follow that they would notice the gaze first…
Stuck on stupid here folks…
Romeo13 on July 19, 2007 at 1:55 PM
Bigfoot on July 19, 2007 at 1:52 PM
Na, you’re just looking for it in the wrong place, you’re not going to find Bigfoot swimming in the Loc Ness. 15 out of the top ten most trusted/desired products in the world are “made in America” ya just cant “buy” them in America.
doriangrey on July 19, 2007 at 1:56 PM
Laugh now, but thanks to Dept of Education, NEA and “Big Ed” in general, this is the new science. Expect more stuff like this in the future.
Want a real laugh. Guess what books the freshman class at Elon College is suppose to read: An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore
Never let facts get in the way of fiction.
Wuptdo on July 19, 2007 at 1:57 PM
Romeo13 on July 19, 2007 at 1:55 PM
Yep, thats when I knew they were full of $hit. Americans only look at the mouth first if its same sex if its man to woman the first thing they look at is her boobs…
doriangrey on July 19, 2007 at 1:59 PM
Bigfoot,
Go find something that costs more than $100 that’s made in China. They can make all the t-shirts they want. When they start making our F-22’s, let me know.
Tman on July 19, 2007 at 1:59 PM
Um, no. I lived in China for a few months, they are “more skilled”, because they’re taught to think that way.
By the way, those “Rugged American individualists” have saved countries from being invaded by “collectivist” societies.
amerpundit on July 19, 2007 at 1:59 PM
mmmm Steak…I think. At least that’s the purty picture I clicked on, and without consideration for my veterinarian neighbors perspective.
Memnon on July 19, 2007 at 2:01 PM
I believe this deserves a…
REAL AMERICAN HERO: TODAY WE SALUTE YOU, MR. HATES-AMERIKKKA-AND-WANTS-TO-PROVE-OTHER-PEOPLE-ARE-BETTER-CAUSE-HE-CANT-GET-LAID-WANNABE-PSYCHOLOGY-PROFESSOR!
WHILE OTHER MEN ARE OUT GETTING LAID, YOU SIT IN YOUR MOTHER’S BASEMENT LOOKING AT YOUR SMALL SUSPICIOUS PACKAGE.
IT’S TINY!
SO CRACK OPEN ANOTHER BUD ON US!
TheEJS on July 19, 2007 at 2:03 PM
While I agree that the Chinese make a lot of things we have in everyday life, they don’t make some of the most important things. For example, military technology, many medical advances, equipment used by NASA, anti-freeze-free toothpaste, rat poison-free dog food, etc.
amerpundit on July 19, 2007 at 2:03 PM
So, as long as you need to Chinese to produce a 12-pack of shower curtain rings, don’t count on them to come through with the next state-of-the-art military technology.
amerpundit on July 19, 2007 at 2:04 PM
Where did they get their Chinese Communists?
Harpoon on July 19, 2007 at 2:06 PM
Some university in Paris, I think.
RushBaby on July 19, 2007 at 2:09 PM
You know which block I would move? The one across from my right hand–me being right handed and all.
CUS on July 19, 2007 at 2:12 PM
Considering the poisonous toothpaste and dog food stories, not to mention lots of other defects found in Chinese products, I can’t imagine who will be standing in line to purchase one of these.
Tactical fighter aircraft, no. Cheap personal transportation? Apparently yes. I’m pretty sure Americans will pay more than a hundred bucks for one too.
Guardian on July 19, 2007 at 2:15 PM
And all of those people in China who didn’t move the correct block are in a collective grave somewhere.
MrFreeman07 on July 19, 2007 at 2:16 PM
This all sounds suspiciously much like what people used to say about the differences between the US and Japan, back in the 1980’s, before Japan’s top-down “collective” form of capitalism made a huge mistake and the Japanese economy ceased to expand for well over a decade.
Nikkei 1989 – 40,000
Nikkei today – 18,000
progressoverpeace on July 19, 2007 at 2:16 PM
Hmmm.. or maybe it has to do with tone of voice…
An American would expect to be asked… wait for the please… while a Chinese person would jump at the order?
Romeo13 on July 19, 2007 at 2:18 PM
I love scientific studies drawing conclusions on cultural differences from a piece of cardboard almost as much as I liked the studies using a rabbit cage to simulate a 110 story skyscraper.
fogw on July 19, 2007 at 2:18 PM
Ahhhh, more liberal claptrap from Livenon-Science.com. Looks like they have proven conclusively that living as a slave causes one to think like a slave. You see, living under harsh Communist rule where one slip of the tongue could put you in the Chinese gulag for the rest of your life definitely has a tendency to make you more considerate of your master’s expectations, there is little doubt about that.
Clearly the big push to exalt socialism is well under way and our commie friends at Livenon-Science.com are on the cutting edge… as expected.
Maxx on July 19, 2007 at 2:19 PM
Probably from staff.
Maxx on July 19, 2007 at 2:22 PM
As an American, the first thing I would think during this experiment is that the questioner wanted me to assume that he could only see one of the blocks, when he actually knew there were two, in order to maneuver me into confirming some kind of hoped-for outcome for the stupid experiment. So I would have hesitated moving a block, in my attempt to figure out the purpose of the test, instead of blindly walking myself into the fate spelled out for me.
What I would have failed to appreciate, is that my attempt to game the system could never change what was not merely a hoped-for, but a pre-determined outcome for the experiment.
Still, it’s pretty cool when your two year old starts figuring out that there are other perspectives beside their own– the Communists should be proud of themselves. I didn’t think they had made it that far.
a4g on July 19, 2007 at 2:22 PM
The article doesn’t say individualism is bad, or that communism is good. All cultures are of equal value, right? That you assume individualism is bad is maybe more indicative of your feelings. I suspect the Chinese would react the same way whether they live in a totalitarian society or not. Their culture has always been more group oriented.
B26354 on July 19, 2007 at 2:26 PM
This research sounds quite fishy. I’m trying to figure this out:
This might just be a mistake of stupid reporting, but if the person is asked to move a block, then why would he assume that the director thinks there is only one block – which would bring up the command – move THE block. If someone says, “Move A block,” then the normal assumption is that the person perceives more than one block.
Of course, this all has to do with definite and indefinite articles, and we all know that Chinese language has some weird problems with these articles, seeing how Chinese speak English as a second language. The missing articles are the clearest indication of a native Chinese speaker.
progressoverpeace on July 19, 2007 at 2:28 PM
First, they are in academia so they’re already 90% left. Second, they’re from University of Chicago…Left! Third, when they stop flip flopping on almost everything survey or study they have all done in the past thirty years, then maybe I’ll start paying attention. All I know is that I gave up eggs, coffee, fat, butter, milk and now is o.k. to have these. I recycle but now am told that’s not good. Gore tells me the planet is warming, everybody else notices things are getting cold in weired places. Why would we pay attention to anything that purports to say that the Chinese are better off at anything! Geez, they are so controlled, polluted and have been for so long that who knows why they do what they do or when they do it? I love America and that’s enough for me, even with the loony left!!
sharinlite on July 19, 2007 at 2:31 PM
Gee ….
Chinese test subjects obey leader figure without question.
American test subjects do as they damned well please.
So … which group of test subjects do you want to emulate?
Kristopher on July 19, 2007 at 2:39 PM
Wrong !
Maxx on July 19, 2007 at 2:41 PM
Yeah, all this rugged individualism has hampered the U.S.
I guess that is why we are just a sucky third world s*&thole like.. uh oh wait that’s not us it is them.
It is we that have the highest standard of living on earth. Heck, even our poor people are obese, microwaves and color TV sets.
But the commie bastages will never stop beating their drum, no matter how many times they see Marxism fail. And it fails every time it is tried.
TheSitRep on July 19, 2007 at 2:46 PM
If one block is hidden, any self-respecting American would have to first decide whether he trusted the “Director” enough to move the hidden block. (i.e., communicate information to the “Director”)
All a communist surf would do is perform whatever task they’re told to do.
jaime on July 19, 2007 at 2:46 PM
Maxx, I was being sarcastic. It’s difficult to see the value of some of these psychological experiments. I just assume the psychologists know what they’re doing (more sarcasm).
B26354 on July 19, 2007 at 2:48 PM
T-man,
You’re darn tootin’ those China-made things don’t cost much. Funny you should mention T-shirts. I’m sure I’ve bought a few that were made in China. But one time on vacation in Poland, I bought a T-shirt that said “Polska” on it. Eventually I got around to looking at the label, which said “made in China” (and in English, by the way).
No, the Chicoms aren’t making F-22’s yet, but I vaguely remember Mr. Bill allowing “technology transfers” that enabled the Chinese to get their rockets (or more precisely, the payload thereon) into orbit more easily. So maybe if Hillary gets her way…
Bigfoot on July 19, 2007 at 2:49 PM
They are absolutely right and it’s good to see these prominent Americans prove by their very own conclusions that Americans understand what they want to understand and have a hard time comprehending foreigners.
I loved their could’s and possibly’s. I just finished my study of their study and come to the conclusion they could possibly be dolts.
Dusty on July 19, 2007 at 2:51 PM
So I guess when your/(liberal wannabe)our oppressive government sucks out any and all reason to care about the quality of life and everything is a middle gray tone; all that’s left is to sit around and talk in a PC induced haze.
Sounds like a wonderfully simplistic, pastoral, artificial life, welcome to the Matrix.
Speakup on July 19, 2007 at 2:52 PM
B26354 on July 19, 2007 at 2:48 PM
Oh… my apologies then.
Maxx on July 19, 2007 at 2:53 PM
My reaction to the article was:
I then finished reading the article and realized it was full of more poop than my nephews diaper (and he can really poop).
looking4statesmen on July 19, 2007 at 2:54 PM
My thoughts as well. It may also have to do with the fact that we might not be inclined to take (move) what appears to belong to the other. Articles aside, if someone said to move the car, I would not go on the other side of my neighbor’s fence and move his. Hello, China, we are not a collectivist society and we plan on staying that way.
Connie on July 19, 2007 at 2:54 PM
Bigfoot,
My point is that we shouldn’t be mad about the trade deficit with China. I’ll let PJ O’Rourke explain it better, because he’s much funnier.
Tman on July 19, 2007 at 2:56 PM
This might come as a surprise to my PRC-educated friend who once said, “Communism, capitalism – there’s no real difference.” Is that part of the PRC “skill at understanding other people’s perspectives”?
calbear on July 19, 2007 at 2:59 PM
Wow, with a piece of cardboard and a block we’ve discovered everything that is wrong with Americans. Maybe we can sort out the whole middle-east problem with a plastic fork and a golfball
Keli on July 19, 2007 at 3:09 PM
Problem is that they use those pictures of Franklin to buy things from other countries…
like Missle technology from Russia…
Or Oil from the Mid East (driving up prices here)…
Or building a self sustaining economy by destroying their environment (by 2025 its estimated that 30% or Californias air pollution will be from China, blown over by the trades…).
Romeo13 on July 19, 2007 at 3:11 PM
My daughter’s boyfriend-the-liberal (who I call Meathead) was regurgitating some talking points about how bad individualism is recently. I was like, WTF? How can somebody grow up in the US and hate individualism? Answer: 4 years at Cal Berkeley.
Bad Penny on July 19, 2007 at 3:23 PM
Romeo,
The fact is that China is going to buy Missle technology from Russia or Oil from the Mid East regardless of what we do. I say we get cheap DVD players and t-shirts in exchange for what is essentially a zero-percent financing of our federal budget. We won’t be in a better position to deal with China if we are all broke.
Tman on July 19, 2007 at 3:27 PM
Good point, Connie. Notions of private property are also very different between the cultures and could have a large impact on the “study”.
As to the general argument of individualistic socieites versus collective societies, history has been pretty clear on which type is more creative, productive, and freer.
An interesting sidenote on Chinese culture: The Chinese are clearly brilliant, and had many inventions long before Europeans (important inventions, like moveable type) but the Chinese never parlayed these great advances into a modern society like the Judeo-Christian, individualistic Europeans did (and later, the much more individualistic Americans, who have the only political system that takes the individual as the fundamental political entity {versus parties in other systems}).
It is clear from history that the Chinese never took full advantage of the genius inventions they came up with and the fault almost surely rests with the culture – which is less concerned with progress than with calm and order. This is another point of individualistic culture versus collective.
progressoverpeace on July 19, 2007 at 3:32 PM
When my sister and I were younger we often fought – a lot. That enmity disappeared when we faced the wrath of Dad. Of course people in a totalitarian regime have empathy with their fellow man – their fellow man is facing the same cruelty and starvation (NK) from an oppressive government.
jeffNWV on July 19, 2007 at 3:36 PM
Only in America – would the University Eggheads proclaim the beauty of Communism and Collectivism; yet, know nothing about the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution.
Eggheads – when you get your Communist Utopia, enjoy the totalitarian presence in your classrooms, and the constant threat of a bullet to the base of your skulls. I hope that you reap what you sow.
OhEssYouCowboys on July 19, 2007 at 3:37 PM
I actually agree with the study in a limited way. Dims will never understand the terrorist jihadi/communist mind. They (the dims) think they can talk rationally with them and everybody can be friends. On the other hand the jihadis/communists know they can fool the Dims all the time. Just promise them anything, they will believe you. Then the jihadis/communists can just go on and do anything they please to do.
SIJ6141 on July 19, 2007 at 4:49 PM
Bingo.
I would like to read the details of the experiment, not a two-paragraph treatment article, before rendering an analysis of just how pretzel-like was the logic applied to arrive at the conclusions.
Many good comments above. Not knowing the configuration of the table’s layout, but trusting the written description of the article, I might assume that the “director” can’t see the second block. But if his direction is to “move a block, I would drop the assumption and suppose that he is aware of the second block in spite of the lack of sightline. I might decide to ask a clarifying question to ensure that I am correctly following the directions, if I think they are ambiguous or arbitrary. My questions might be viewed as indicating confusion.
It is the culture of the experimenters that expects someone to respond immediately, and in the simplest possible manner, that allows them to substitute “confusion” for a real consideration of “outside the box” possibilities. Now the conclusions are reversed, and it is the Americans who allow for a broader array of permutations and seek additional information, while the Oriental participants MERELY obey in a straight-line pattern.
It isn’t that the Chinese participants more freely recognized the “other’s” perspective, it is that they dared not FAIL to recognize the “other’s” perspective. Americans feel no need to follow such ridigity, and would therefore find the directions ambiguous or requiring clarification.
But you go right ahead and keep sending your children to the socialism indoctrination centers masquerading as places such as the University of Chicago.
Freelancer on July 19, 2007 at 4:58 PM
My wife was born in China and struggled along with her family through the horrors of the cultural revolution. She would beg to differ about how wonderful communism is.
IMHO and based on years of obersevation and interaction the Chinese are concrete in their thinking and not as abstract as Americans are. Let’s face it we’re cowboys.
Mojave Mark on July 19, 2007 at 5:16 PM
Actually, that experiment shows that the average American’s brain functions at a higher level, resulting in the true understanding that the researcher has seen the “obstructed” block and cannot be manipulated as easily as the child-like Chinese test subjects! What a horrible, non-empirical experiment. It seriously only proves that the Americans knew it was a test and the Chinese thought the guy wanted to see some stupid block. So much for the superiority of a socialist education.
Mephistefales on July 19, 2007 at 5:49 PM
I really botched the italics there.
Sorry, I was educated in China.
Mephistefales on July 19, 2007 at 5:50 PM
How did African-Americans do on this test?
Metro on July 19, 2007 at 5:53 PM
Yeah? Well other peoples perspectives suck @$$!
ronsfi on July 19, 2007 at 5:56 PM
I don’t — not all of us eggheads are oblivious pinko commies. I don’t want to pay for their naivety.
Mephistefales on July 19, 2007 at 6:06 PM
Psychobabble.
Zorro on July 19, 2007 at 6:07 PM
Alternate title:
“Study: Chinese make stupid assumptions, Americans pay attention to details.”
c6gunner on July 19, 2007 at 6:09 PM
See? If I were a pinko, I would have used the French spelling, but no! American, baby!
Mephistefales on July 19, 2007 at 6:11 PM
A collectivist tries to please whoever is giving him orders while an individualist tries to figure out the game. Gee, who would have thought? Says more about the administrators of the test than the subjects, to be honest. They knew how the experiment would probably come out strictly by looking at the contrasting cultures and still they trumpet it as some kind of shocking news. And that’s disregarding any paralinguistic nuances that may have gotten in the way. This is severely shoddy science and yet another reason Psychology and Sociology belong in the Philosophy department and not in the Sciences.
Militant Bibliophile on July 19, 2007 at 7:08 PM
That should be linguistic nuances. Darned spell check.
Militant Bibliophile on July 19, 2007 at 7:09 PM
What?! I went through all I went through to get my Master’s and THAT’S how you conduct a study?? Boy, did I waste alot of time. Sheesh…
JWS on July 19, 2007 at 7:23 PM
For starters, how about a control question where which block it is that is supposed to be moved is changed. Quick action to “do something” is not a superior outcome if you move the wrong block 50% of the time, figuratively or literally.
Resolute on July 19, 2007 at 7:31 PM
In the words of B.F. Skinner:
Ching-chong ching-chong.
profitsbeard on July 19, 2007 at 7:54 PM
We don’t understand others, and dammit, we don’t need to.
Frozen Tex on July 19, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Donning my academic robes for a moment:
According to the published article, available for a fee or for subscribers here,
While the terms “communist” and “communism” aren’t in the article, the emphasis on mainland Chinese is notable, as is the directness of the language of the abstract, “We conclude that cultural patterns of
interdependence focus attention on the other, causing Chinese to be better perspective takers than Americans.” It could be a matter of opinion whether this study starts off with a Chinese stereotype or a Maoist stereotype, but, either way, it seems to conclude that Chinese are superior, even though, as some commenters seem to indicate, it’s just as likely that the “Chinese” tend to make certain assumptions (and not, for example, question authority regarding what is desired) and “Americans” don’t.
It should also be noted that one of the “other variables” not accounted for is that of intelligence, either using grades or using other factors. Given that someone who comes to Chicago from an overseas community of over a billion is likely to have overcome more hurdles than someone who comes from Illinois or California, it might be reasonable to assume that the Chinese participants had higher IQs. This might have accounted for the quicker reaction time.
Incidentally, my handle here reflects the four years I spent at Cal Berkeley, and I certainly have no hatred of individualism nor do I have much love for the People’s Republic. Speaking of which, the book based on this article, A Year Without “Made in China”, just came out, for those interested.
calbear on July 19, 2007 at 9:01 PM
A more direct link to the article (for fee) and its abstract (for free) is this one.
calbear on July 19, 2007 at 9:18 PM
How on earth can the monolithic mainland Chinese understand OTHER people’s perspectives better than the Land of Immgration Americans? The CHINESE?!? Have a better perspective? To be able to appreciate other persepctives, one must FIRST be aware there are other perspectives. Does the State-controlled Chinese media provide that to the population?
Which country has more genuine diversity? How many, say, people of African descent live in China? Mexicans of Aztec extraction? Thai, French, Lebanese, um … Indians?
Entire swaths of our print, broadcast and internet media seem to be designed now solely to make us stupider.
naliaka on July 19, 2007 at 9:47 PM
As a professor of communication and psychology, a college teacher for 43 years, and the co-producer of 200+ books, let me add my two cents here: HOGWASH!
The world’s expert on democide (government murders) Dr. R. J. Rummel estimates four communist dictators alone killed 126 million people in the 20th Century (Mao Tse-tung 77 million, Joseph Stalin 43 million, Vladimir Lenin 4 million, and Pol Pot 2 million). Some empathy, eh?
Biosocial evidence pretty much proves people are concerned with their own self-interests. But communists get so mad at people’s nature that they have killed millions in vain attempts to get them to do what the dictators want. Stalin said, “You can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.” What history teaches all but the leftie loons is that communism can’t even make an omelet after breaking the eggs.
Individualism is the engine of progress. It is responsible for most the good things existing in the world today. For example, the reason China is now doing so well economically is because their leadership finally reversed course and began encouraging micro-level capitalistic activities. In the same way, Ireland, which used to be the 2nd worst economy in Europe, is now the 2nd best because it too switched direction and rewarded individual initiative.
The IRA has pretty much wasted away. And why? Because workers are too busy paying off their BMWs.
And who are the communists’ closest rivals for whoesale slaughter? Not surprisingly they are the previously mentioned leftist loons whose 30 year inspired ban on DDT spaying has been estimated to have caused 80 million deaths. (See Steve Jalsevac’s “Finally an End to Massive Genocide Caused by Environmental Extremists’ DDT Ban.”) Just like the communists, the environmentalists thought they knew better than others what others should do. And they were wrong. And millions died.
So when it comes to this experiment, brothers and sisters, please take its implications with a grain of salt.
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on July 19, 2007 at 10:55 PM
Finally, a study to explain all the people moving from the U.S. to live in the great collectivist sharing nation of China… oh, wait.
If you want to live in a country where people “place more value on the needs of the group and less on the autonomy of the individual” then moving to China might be a good plan.
Don’t complain when you lose some of the individualist self-focused rights you may have become accustomed to, that’s part of the charm.
gekkobear on July 19, 2007 at 11:00 PM
Dr. C. G. Waugh, fantastic facts, and credentials.
Hogwash. Ask most Chinese to answer if they wish to be communist and, if allowed to respond freely, hardly any would choose to. You’ll find more collectivist Chinese leftie activists here in the U.S. than in China today.
When I lived in communism none of us gave a damn about the well-being of others or “the needs of the group and less on the autonomy of the individual”. We were so miserable, looking out for the next meal, or acquiring the next item for which a shortage existed, all the while hating, really hating the totalitarian leaders who forced that lifestyle and fear on us.
This can only be ’sold’ to idealistic idiots. If I could aford to send them all to force-live in such a system for 2 years, without knowing that they could ever return, it would be a cured world of at least one major ‘disease’.
Entelechy on July 19, 2007 at 11:07 PM
To be fair, I don’t think they are talking so much about communism as Confucionism. China was collectivist long before communism. As an American living in China, I have found that Americans are generally better at problem solving than Chinese, but Chinese are much better at memorization than we are. This has been a general observation.
p40tiger on July 20, 2007 at 3:07 AM
I wonder if China can Google this article?
No? Must be a glitch.
Black Adam on July 20, 2007 at 3:12 AM
This article proves that, now more than ever, American needs John Edwards . . .
srhoades on July 20, 2007 at 1:47 PM
. . . to go away.
srhoades on July 20, 2007 at 1:48 PM
Comment pages: