Lions Are Lying Down With Lambs…

SmithStCrx

January 31, 2022

It’s another sad day for Leftism, AKA a Monday, when conservatives have to an otherwise rabid woke Lefty like Sean Penn or J.K. Rowling from their own fellow rabid woke leftists.

As to what Mr. Penn said, would this best be described as “blind squirrel & acorn” or “broken clock”?

Joe Doakes

January 31, 2022

Bolsheviks always turn on Menshiviks. Always.

Blade Nzimande

January 31, 2022

JD has this exactly right; Penn is a committed, big “C” Communist. He supports the “woke” mob only as long as they are useful tools to further de-stabilize our society. But he holds them as a disease to be eradicated, in due time.

In his version of America, trannies, fags, lesbians, degenerates of all stripes will line up on the wall right next to trade labor leaders, Bill Gates and Zuckerberg. He is vocalizing the masculine ideal of his mentors, Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega. It’s nothing to admire him for.

Very shallow, naïve insight there, Mitch.

justplainangry

January 31, 2022

He is vocalizing the masculine ideal of his mentors, Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega. It’s nothing to admire him for.

Absolutely not. Che and Castro, not those other two wimps – not enough blood on their hands.

Yes, Mitch, you are agreeing with Penn for all the wrong reasons. You’ve been duped, hook, line and sinker. Next, you’ll be saying that J6 was the worst terrorist act on US soil.

Night Writer

January 31, 2022

There was a time, when my daughters were entering their teens, when I regarded the young men in their circle of friends and realized that I was going to have to kill them – or teach them. That was the beginning of the Fundamentals in Film group where I invited the boys for pizza and a film, with the films accenting positive masculine characters and traits. I figured this would be an alternative to the two main ways men seemed to be portrayed on TV: as either Homer Simpson, or as WWE wrestlers.

The popular movies I selected all emphasized character traits such as courage (as opposed to just boldness), honor (doing what you said you’d do even at personal cost), self-sacrifice, vision, and having your character catch up with your growing body. I ended up covering some 30 movies, followed by Q&A discussions, for two different groups of 13-15 yo boys. I still run into the lads – now grown men, some with families of their own – from time to time. I didn’t have to shoot a single one. Occasionally they even ask questions about something we covered back in the day.

justplainangry

January 31, 2022

NW, can you share the list of some 30 movies please. Thank you.

jdm

January 31, 2022

Mitch, you *do* realize that the term “toxic masculinity” is a totally made-up concept, like “voter ID vote suppression” and “kwanza”, yes? Moreover, by even discussing how mistaken or wrong-headed it is, you give it a credence it doesn’t deserve?

bikebubba

January 31, 2022

Dittos for what JPA noted.

Regarding Penn, I think that the outcry here is partially because the historic behavior of Sean Penn is, by most standards, “toxic masculinity.” Beating up photographers, all those weird relationships he’s had, etc..

So he’s correct to a degree, but he’s correct in a “maybe given your personal history, you might want to keep quiet to better promote your perspective.”

jdm

January 31, 2022

“toxic masculinity.” Beating up photographers, all those weird relationships he’s had, etc..

Jeebus, you’re giving credence to a concept used to disparage men *in general* regardless of who they are or how they act, just because Penn has anger management issues. Aka, he’s an asshole.

Besides some photographers deserve it.

jdm

January 31, 2022

Sorry, just because Penn is a creep with anger management issues.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

So, once again Mitch, I looks to me like you’ve taken a small truism and tried to turn it into something I very much think he never likely meant. He is FAR more progressive (and I HOPE, thoughtful) than to say “Oh, by the way, women really DO want to be sexaulized and really DO want to be discriminated against because after all, they make certain assumptions about roles in a heterosexual relationship.” I’m sure that’s NOT what he meant and I’m certainly hoping that’s not what you were trying to imply without saying. I’m guessing it wasn’t. But, you say it’s a debate long overdue one which “our culture” needs to win, what debate is that and which culture do you mean?

I’m game, what debate?

And to start things off and level set, I suspect Penn is remarking that women (and men) in heterosexual relationships make role assumptions often based on strength and size, as is pretty logical and further, that whatever our intention, throughout the world, not just in “our culture” sex-based roles and assumptions persist, even among women. That’s hardly news or even a debate “which needs to happen” – rather it’s a strawman to say that most of those on the left think that’s not true, even should not be true. It’s also a strawman to worry about the 2% of the nation which does. But I suppose, nothing new, call the other party extremist to hide your own. It reminds me of Limbaugh, who when confronted on the term femi-nazi, what it meant and the likelihood/prevelance of people who aligned with his understanding of the term, would say there are only 6 in the US. To which I’d reply, then why bring it up? Why argue against such a tiny little fraction of people. The answer was that Limbaugh was playing to a perception that it’s much broader, just like it seems you are playing to an idea that really isn’t true, namely, that sex-based roles are completely rejected (they aren’t) – but neither do women care to be condescended to about physical ability nor watch “their man” get into a road-rage altercation because someone cut them off in traffic- e.g. toxic masculinity,

So, I’m game, what debate do you think is needed? I think you’ll find you have yourself all worked up over very little but may very well also find that, shocker, the left is FAR from asking for something super radical.

One last point, most of us (over 50 white males) on the left DO recognize that the #MeToo movement has probably swung the pendulum further than was desired. If you want to have THAT debate, I’m all in, but don’t be shocked when I say “Oh, you want EVIDENCE of harrassment, not just the accusation, OHHHH, you mean like wanting EVIDENCE of vote fraud? or Denying evidence of anthropromorphic climate change?” For you see, Mitch, most Americans, including the 35-40% who identify with liberal politics, are quite reasonable people, we believe in common fate – but we also expect you to not be hypocritical. Even so, I’m happy to have that debate. Go ahead.

As an aside, JD, you knuckle-head, it’s the RW who is embracing Putin and a resurgent “Soviet” hegemony. I find it utterly ironic that you righties bitch about communism while happily getting in bed with it’s worst elements (e.g. Communist China because it was good for your corporate masters, and now Putin, because he owns Trump.

P.S.S – I find it’s really funny that you call the far-left “woke” or “wokist” considering it was YOUR term for your own movement, that you all had “woken up” to the truth of Trump’s (and other rw media figure) assertions that the “elites” were running everything, whether that was Trump’s populism itself or Q-Anon.

kinlaw

January 31, 2022

Cripes, another essay from pudding boy. TL/DR

Anyway, we used to be able to raise boys into masculine, respectful, reasonable MEN. But then the left got to work: no more men’s clubs, no more (normal) boy scouts, no more shooting classes at school. I could go on, but the idiot lefties have no one to blame for horrible men but themselves.

PS Anyone who read puddingboy can you summarize? I could use a laugh.

jdm

January 31, 2022

Oh my, this is a special day. A p-boy eruption. And it threatens to debate things. Something, I for one, have never seen the p-boy do. I look forward to the coming back-and-f… and… and… oh, he’s gone again.

jdm

January 31, 2022

kinlaw: Limbaugh, Trump, Putin, Trump (again), Q-Anon, and don’t make me debate you, Mitch.

jdm

January 31, 2022

kinlaw: I forgot there was also a special shout-out to JD for being wrong that was based on a complete misreading of what JD wrote. Sorry.

Scott Hughes

January 31, 2022

“Cripes, another essay from pudding boy. TL/DR”

Blade Nzimande

January 31, 2022

LMAO! What in thee hell was that, Peevee? Did you really just have a debate with yourself? HAhahahahahaa! Good job boy, you kicked your ass real good!

HahahahahahaahahaaaA!

bikebubba

January 31, 2022

jdm, I’m thinking more here that Penn’s got issues regarding the number of women he’s bedded and the like. He’s a jerk in more ways than one,and that was the same thought I had when I saw an article on Fox about how John Wayne showed the way to modern manliness–OK, four wives, numerous affairs, Sean Ford knew he needed to get Wayne’s scenes done by about noon because he’d otherwise be too drunk to act….that’s manliness?

No doubt that even if we used some good examples, the likes of Paddyboy would still be posting (TL/DR) screeds against it, but it would at least make the argument a little bit more difficult, and less plausible.

kinlaw

January 31, 2022

bike, they mean in the movies. John Wayne is a movie star, and in his movies he showed real manliness. Not so much in real life.

jdm

January 31, 2022

bike, I was unaware that Wayne’s private life was used as or intended to be a model for manly behavior. As to the equation of being a drunk as a symbol for being manly, you’ve lost me there.

My point was and still is that using the bolshevik term “toxic masculinity” allows the bolsheviks to define yet another aspect of the Narrative. An accusation they can use for anyone – including you – even if you do kinda shrug and sheepishly admit that sure, you guess, there are some toxic males. Bullshit. The term “toxic masculinity” means literally nothing and you get no benefit whatsoever from trying give it life.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

Waiting on you (as always) Mitch.

And to the pee-brained gallery, the reason I post and don’t really come back to look for a response is exactly that issue. Mitch likes to TALK about a debate but just about never means it.

With respect to “debating” myself. No, I was mocking what LIKELY was the intent while trying to give at least a little room for engagement.

JDM, you can’t think your way out of a sack but hey, since Mitch won’t step up and to call you on your mistaken assertion, how about you. Take that one on. What debate are we having, exactly? What culture are we saving, exactly?

I made the point that we don’t need to waste time on strawmen like that feminists deny sexual roles, they don’t or that women generally don’t accept certain sexual roles, they do, especially in heterosexual relationships. But, and here’s the big one you and all of the Mitchey-mice can’t follow, THAT’s not the debate, it’s certainly not the important one.

The important one is, don’t lose the forest for the trees. Sexism WAS and is a pretty big problem. From Jeffrey Epstein to Harvey Weinstein to, yes, Donald Trump, sexual exploitation in the workplace is a serious issue. Pretending that Penn’s comments mean that it’s really not or that feminist hypocrisy is ACTUALLY the issue – by beating your chest when Sean Penn says certain sex-based roles are not something we are likely to abandon (men or women) means “it’s all gone too far” as a way of pushing back on this will never EVER work for you. Saying “don’t say you hate sexism and then endorse it” may, but you have to handle the bigger issue first.

So, JDM, I realize that’s a whole lot of words for you – but give it a try, what point is it you think Mitch meant and you want to support?

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

As I expected, gutless.

By the way, if you hold me to the standard of supposedly having to reply immediately, turn about is fair play.

Joe Doakes

January 31, 2022

Geez, Mitch, it’s been a whole hour since the Piddler posted his screed and you STILL haven’t responded.

(tapping wristwatch)

We’re not paying you to sit around, you know.

(refreshes screen)

Cripes, an hour and an HALF, with yet another call-out, and you STILL haven’t danced for his amusement. Who the hell do you think is running this outfit?

kinlaw

January 31, 2022

paddyboy, if you were a bit more concise perhaps people would engage you more.

A short paragraph or (maybe) two is more than enough if you have a point and facts to back it up.

Your way is to throw a ton of crap against the wall to see what sticks.

jdm

January 31, 2022

JDM, you can’t think your way out of a sack but hey, since Mitch won’t step up and to call you on your mistaken assertion, how about you.

I guess I’ll have to defer to the p-boy’s expertise in getting out of sacks – one wonders how and why he puts himself into them. I mean, so as to acquire all that expertise.

As to debates… the only thing that exceeds your your inability to write clearly is your inability to understand what you read. You can’t deal with the actual words of what Penn said without HOPING he’s more thoughtful, assuring yourself that’s not what he meant, hoping again that’s not what he meant, guessing, and suspecting to change the actual words to something you’d rather talk about. That’s not a debate, you moron, that’s a threadjack.

Don’t try to buffalo me with your I-am-so-smart mantra because you always have and always will end up looking like Homer Simpson.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

JDM, ducking the discussion. Not surprising, but certainly disappointing.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

Hey Doekes, I wasn’t given an hour.. so, heal thyself ya’ turd. Said more directly, I’ve earned more than just a little decency, Doakes. I come here and put up with your shit. You put up blithering points. You don’t have the guts to do the same. Nor, clearly, does JDM.

I’ve had the same bitch made to me by Mitch as you are making, yet, when I say the same it’s crickets.

There is NO reason to be this adversarial, I’m your neighbor, I’m Mitch’s friend, but hate is all you know, so it’s all you spew.

jdm

January 31, 2022

p-boy, you don’t know what a discussion is. You have a cargo-cult notion of what discussion and debate is. And that little rhetorical swish of your tail at the end doesn’t work on me, sweetie.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

I work too, Joe… news flash, yet.. what I get is..”Oh my, this is a special day. A p-boy eruption. And it threatens to debate things. Something, I for one, have never seen the p-boy do. I look forward to the coming back-and-f… and… and… oh, he’s gone again.”

Which was why I challenged ole’ JDM.

Rather than stand up, he simply insults. Nothing new. It was as expected.

SOOO JDM, this is why I don’t come back.

You all can’t articulate the examples Bikebubba points to, not because they don’t exist, I’m sure they do. Rather it’s because you NEED to have that villain, you MUST have that villain, you NEED to have someone to hate.

That the mainstream of the Democratic Party wants to avoid going to far, NOOOOOO you can’t accept that. You NEED, desperately to cling to hating the extreme to justify the extreme.

So, Bubba, as you seem wonting for a fight, let’s talk about what’s wrong and what’s right about the #MeToo movement. Doakes couldn’t find a fact if it hit him in the face and JDM is clearly a coward.

I’m here, not afraid of the discussion, I insist you keep it civil, if you can’t do that, don’t bother.

What is it then, that you think needs to be accepted/proved? I think you’re going to find that I, though I don’t speak for my entire class of folks, probably agree with 95% of what you’re going to say, I suspect you will not agree with 95% of mine (I’m guessing) but more importantly is this, even if WE come to some consensus, I GUARANTEE you, Mitch will not acknowledge it. He wont’ because he’s a propogandist who needs to gin up his readership to keep it.

Problem for another day, so BB, give it a try. Unlike JDM who had to scurry under the rug, really.. give it a try, what point do you think so desperately needs to be debated and isn’t?

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

JDM, you’re a chicken-$sh4 nothing more, nothing less. Were you otherwise, you’d make your point. You don’t because you’re afraid I’ll peel it apart for its sophistry and hypocrisy. You’re also afraid it will show there’s nothing to hate. Gutless.

Joe Doakes

January 31, 2022

Nope, still no clue.

I mean, the words are there. They’re English words. It’s plain that P is attempting to communicate something. And it’s obvious he’s passionate about it. But what?

Feels like reading the transcript of Lesko Brandon’s remarks. “It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

jdm

January 31, 2022

I made a point.

You can’t deal with the actual words of what Penn said without HOPING he’s more thoughtful, assuring yourself that’s not what he meant, hoping again that’s not what he meant, guessing, and suspecting to change the actual words to something you’d rather talk about.

You still have not dealt with it. Nor debated it. Nor discussed it. This is precisely what I mean.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

BTW, JDM, what you clearly don’t know, maybe don’t recall as perhaps you were there in the past is that I USED TO engage with the Mitchey-mice. I used to have post streams hundreds of comments long, attempting to engage the mice in discussion. So actually, JDM, YEAH it wasn’t anything like “it never happened” it happened so much that Mitch cut things off. At one point even banned my comments because it was “dragging things down”, notwithstanding that it was he and his mice that focused on myopia, not the other way around. But hey, believe whatever lies help you sleep at night.

What I got from the mice then, is what I get now, not actual substance, not actual engagement, and remember, it’s ME, not YOU, who is willing to come onto a neo-con propaganda site and debate with the lame-brained responses, responses that rarely, if ever addressed the larger points. No, what I get is worry about whether it’s NE suburbs of Chicago (as a typo) vs. NW which are really conservative. What I get are insults about my service (from the host), what I get is insults (from the host) about my profession. What I get is insults from the commenters – most of whom couldn’t write three sentences coherently. So, what i conclude is a. Most aren’t able to think there way out of a sack. B. Those which could have no desire for real discussion and c. the host doesn’t either.

YET, I and Emory, come back, because we are seriously worried about the future of this country. You all claim to be “every man” sorts of folks, and I’m pretty sure for most of you, it’s true. Yet, you promote and support the system that keeps stripping you of your economic future, instead you focus on myopia like whether Sean Penn meant X or Y about feminism, as if feminism (itself) is somehow a serious problem in this country when compared to the vast transference of wealth, climate destruction, disenfranchisement, and a whole host of other FAR more important issues. I think you guys care, you just care about things I think are far from what’s important.

But, I’m willing to be convinced otherwise, are you? So, here’s your chance. I debate with feminists about #MeToo, I have more influence by far than do you with that crowd, tell me what you’d like said. If I think it’s got merit, I’ll use it. If not, I’ll tell you, and why. But I don’t think you have the stones, if I’m being honest.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

JDM, that’s not much of a point. Shall we focus on the specific words or otherwise assume Penn isn’t a cad?

I think he’s not, his history says he’s not.

You want to turn this into “See…see… even Sean Penn thinks Men should be men” and ipso facto, women should be women. Do you seriously think that’s what Penn meant?

My point, JDM, is that’s hardly worth the time to discuss. Like debating whether the 2nd Amendment should be seen as two distinct sentences, it’s myopia. The larger point is whether sexual exploitation is right to react to strongly, and if so, WHERE DO WE DRAW THAT LINE?

That’s the debate Mitch SHOULD mean to have. It isn’t, but it should be. Penn’s intent hardly matters. I don’t care if he meant “men should be men” if he did, he’s a fool, and you should see that.

Simple enough for you?

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

Doakes, I think you mean well, but you clearly aren’t keeping up. I said it pretty simply to JDM, give that a try.

Do you seriously want to debate whether Penn meant something akin to “Men should be men” and women actually WANT toxic masculinity, or do you think a discussion about what is too far for #MeToo is in order?

Simple enough for you? I can’t make it more simple than that.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

One more thing, Doakesie and JDM, the other really important point for you to think through, do you really even want a discussion?

I think you don’t. I think you fear it.

jdm

January 31, 2022

My point, JDM, is that’s hardly worth the time to discuss

I rest my case.

Simple enough for you?

Completely.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

JDM, ducking again.

You really think worrying about whether Sean Penn is trying to assert that “men should be men” is important to discuss?

I assumed, and yeah, I don’t mind, mock me, that Penn isn’t quite so shallow. You think he is and want to DEBATE that?

Ok JDM, he is, so what.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

In short, it’s not a debate, It’s stupid.

Now, try again with the harder one. Do you accept #MeToo has worth? Do you think it’s gone too far? Do you have even a notion of a guess as to what is the right line? What would you say?

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

For JDM, again, without cherry picking as the mice do, try the harder topic, not Penns’ personal worth. Neither of us can really know what Penn’s intent was unless he clarifies, but honestly, so f’in what?

bikebubba

January 31, 2022

Paddyboy, you seem stuck on personal attacks and trying to show how big you are by challenging people, myself included, to a wrestling match in the pigpen. Your pen. I decline.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

Clearly Bubba, you decline because you can’t stand up. you’ve insulted me time and again, hypocrite

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

BTW, Bubba, this is what I ALWAYS get from the mice.

First, bitch and moan because I won’t engage and say I’m running away

Second, claim I won’t engage because I didn’t immediately respond

Third, focus on the trivial

Last, refuse to engage, because it’s .. whatever lame-ass excuse you have.

You SAY the left won’t discuss but that’s not true, 99% of the time you won’t. And that 1%, it’s either deflect/change the subject, or you lose.

justplainangry

January 31, 2022

I think by now we can all agree that Peev is nothing but Mitch’s sock puppet who’s whole raison d’être is to drum up comment and word count. Nothing else, nothing more.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

Sure JPA, that’s why you lot were bitching that I just drive by…

Try to twist yourself into a pretzel much?

Blade Nzimande

January 31, 2022

Peevee drooled: “With respect to “debating” myself. No, I was mocking what LIKELY was the intent while trying to give at least a little room for engagement.”

Ooooooh, so you were mocking yourself. Well, so long as you continue to do so in your usual witless fashion, OK. But don’t try to do so unironically nitwit; that’s my job.

I think I understand why the idea a woman might prefer the company of a masculine man is so foreign a concept to you, Peevee. But just because your wife seems content with a brainless drag queen doesn’t mean they all are.

Night Writer

January 31, 2022

NW, can you share the list of some 30 movies please. Thank you.
Warning: a paddy-length threadjack ensues, with the focus on the character espoused by the actors in these movies, if not necessarily in their personal lives.

Most of the series, along with the discussion questions and points to ponder for each move, are under the Fundamentals in Film category on my old (but still open) blog, thenightwriterblog.com. Off the top of my head:

To catch and hold the attention of the young teen boys, I needed action. War movies are good for that. Zulu (importance of preparation before disaster), Sergeant York (faith and conscience at the sticking point); The Red Badge of Courage (mastering yourself, especially after failure); Band of Brothers series (the importance of leadership, but also the “extra” chapter, “We Stand Alone Together”). War movies, with their crucibles of courage, sacrifice and heroism, can be a rich source of material (as well as providing examples of less than admirable behavior as well). I didn’t include The Longest Day and A Bridge Too Far; obvious choices – except they take the “grand spectacle” approach to filming a war movie with casts of thousands and dozens of big stars. There’s very little chance to examine a particular character, or small group of characters, or identify with them. In contrast, a war movie such as Saving Private Ryan or Glory brings you up close to the men. For my purposes, this is essential because you have to see and relate to them being tested, not only by outside forces but from within. Glory was the first movie that really connected with the lads, engaging their outrage and empathy, but also in seeing how they themselves were marginalized (by people like me) for their youth and behavior. It sparked our liveliest discussion afterwards. (Glory was part of my own version of Black History Month, alongside Tuskegee Airmen (four score years after Glory), and the original version of Brian’s Song.

Westerns, too, have similar stories. I always started with High Noon and the Henry Fonda, Anthony Perkins film, Tin Star (the latter especially for showing the need for being a mentor and a mentee). My all-time favorite Western that I included: Conagher (“Who gave you that black eye?” “No one gave it to me; I fought for it.”).

Comedies: Groundhog’s Day (a Bill Murray movie with a fuzzy animal – but not THAT one; the evolution of one’s character); Secondhand Lions (with a couple of monologues that are dead, solid, perfect).

All-time character studies were included: To Kill a Mockingbird, Apollo 13, and the oft-overlooked Key Largo, which is a fine companion piece to the famous Casablanca. We also watched Chariots of Fire where I placed the emphasis on both the talented and driven Jew, Harold Abrams, and the devout Scotsman, Eric Liddell, ending up ignoring convention and even antagonizing society, but from different perspectives. Another great one: Khartoum (“Every man has a final weapon: his own life. If he’s afraid to lose it he throws the weapon away.”)

Deeper and, literally, Darker movies: The Dark Knight, and Ghost and the Darkness (it’s not about the absence of fear, but the mastery of it). Also, the movies we watched early on were pretty black and white about good guys and bad guys, but I also wanted to mix in films where the “hero” of the story might not really be such a good guy; my purpose being to show the young men how their emotions can be manipulated and their perceptions bent by the prism of the craft. For your consideration: The Shootist; Patton; and 3:10 to Yuma (remake).

I also told them that some day they might actually be lucky enough to have a woman in their lives, and if so they need to be able to watch and appreciate a “chick flick”. Therefore we watched Sense and Sensibility; despite the groans at the beginning, it was amazing to watch how rapt the lads became as the story went on, and how it resonated when I discussed at the end how it was the decisions of the men in the film, and their honorable and dishonorable behavior in relationship to those, that drove the drama and consequences for others.

One of the most epic nights, however, came the week after we watched and discussed The Shawshank Redemption. I think I’d be put in moderation if I provided the direct link to that discussion, but if you want to know what was said – and what the point of the entire series was – go to thenightwriterblog.com and search “Out With the Boys”.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

Blade, sorry but 3 is the limit. Go find someone else to chat with.

Paddyboy

January 31, 2022

Also, Bubba, read Blade’s comment, and YOU want to bitch about insults..

Par.
For.
The.
Course.

Joe Doakes

January 31, 2022

Yes, I’m terrified of debating you, Pad, that’s the reason I don’t respond to your posts with logic or reason, only ridicule. Whatever point you were trying to make, you won by default. Congratulations.

My leaving the arena frees up a position for one debater. Now you can take on Blade. Sic ’em!

Lions Are Lying Down With Lambs…

Comments

70 responses to “Lions Are Lying Down With Lambs…”

Leave a Reply