Ten compelling reasons for women to vote for Obama if he’s the candidate

There has been an unprecedented amount of back and forth about Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and John McCain, here, here and here. I’ve written before about how neither Obama or Clinton satisfy me and I’ve meant as much every other time as I mean it now.  I invite supporters of Hillary Clinton to write up ten compelling reasons for people to vote for Clinton and I will post it.

But these ten compelling reasons come from the blog of author Ellen Bravo of Taking on the Big Boys.  I interviewed her last week and I really like her approach to many things.  Bravo is based in reality and keeps her eye on the prize.  Which, as a Democrat, I feel we all must do.  Here are her ten compelling reasons for women to vote for Obama if he is the candidate of the Democratic party for president:

Should Sen. Barack Obama emerge as the Democratic candidate, women have compelling reasons to support his candidacy. Here are my top ten:

10. Nearly half of women voting in the Democratic primaries already support Sen. Obama’s candidacy. CNN compiled exit polling data from all the states that held primaries before West Virginia. Averaging the percentage that each candidate received from women voters in these states, the two Democratic candidates were only three points apart (46.6% for Obama, 49.6% for Clinton). Sen. Obama won the women’s vote in 13 states, compared to 16 for Clinton – and that’s not counting the caucuses where he won decisively, including among women.

9. Support for Sen. Obama among women is not surprising. His stands on issues important to women, from fair pay to reproductive justice to support for paid sick days and paid family leave, are strikingly similar to Sen. Clinton’s. He’ll be not just on the right side but a champion for gender justice. Above all, he has shown his commitment and ability to galvanize grassroots movements – the key to moving our agenda.

8. He has attributed his understanding of gender to the strong women in his life, including his mother, grandmother and wife Michelle. Having been raised by a single mother, he has insights into the lives of those who need food stamps to feed their families or have to choose between seeking health care or paying the rent. As an engaged father he understands the reality of work-life conflicts, but he also sees how these fall disproportionately on women, and how much more difficult they are for women without resources.

7. Our anger at the sexism that emerged in this campaign, from low-life hecklers to high-profile pundits, should stoke our determination but not determine our vote. At the same time, we must all oppose the racism that emerged in both blatant and coded ways and recognize that breaking that glass ceiling is also a blow to the Big Boys, one that weakens them and strengthens us.

6. Women can set an example of unity to build a stronger party that draws on the unprecedented turnout in the primaries among African-Americans, women of all races, young people and others who have too long been left out of political decision-making. Such a coming together will not only power an election victory, but lay the groundwork for significant social change in the coming years.

5. John McCain on the war: Sen. Obama’s early judgment opposing the war in Iraq puts him in an excellent position to take on John McCain, who has not only supported the war from its onset but professed to having no problem should troops remain in Iraq for 100 years. Women can’t afford a president who thinks “Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” is a stance to brag about.

4. John McCain on the right to abortion: not only does he oppose it, he’s pledged to fill any Supreme Court vacancies with justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade.

3. John McCain on health care: McCain voted against reauthorizing the State Children’s Health Insurance Program for five years. His health plan provides $2 billion in tax cuts to the top ten health insurance companies, while allowing those companies to exclude people with pre-existing conditions.

2. John McCain on valuing families: When Congress was considering the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993, McCain voted to suspend it unless the federal government certified that compliance wouldn’t increase business expenses or gave employers financial assistance to cover any costs. He supports a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and campaigned for an Arizona constitutional amendment banning any legal recognition to gay couples.

1. John McCain on fair pay: He opposes the Fair Pay Restoration Act on the grounds that it will create too many lawsuits (this is like opposing OSHA inspections on the grounds that too many violations will be found). He also opposed raising the minimum wage and safeguarding overtime rights.

And did I mention John McCain?

Those of us who have been supporting Obama welcome the passionate, hard-working supporters of Sen. Clinton – as we will support her should the campaign turn out differently than expected. Every woman angry at the way in which gender discrimination has robbed our pay, crimped our opportunities, devalued our work in the labor force and in the home, minimized our pain and trivialized the barriers we face, now has a great opportunity to determine the outcome of this election. We also have a great responsibility, to ourselves and the women who follow.

34 thoughts on “Ten compelling reasons for women to vote for Obama if he’s the candidate

  1. Pingback: Anti-Obama blogs targeted in Blogspot account shutdowns | Writes Like She Talks

  2. lou: First you abuse these voters for Hillary and now the cycle of abuse comes around to ‘making nice’.

    Come on, the abuse between the most vehement supporters of both Obama and Hillary has run both ways since the beginning. I have no doubt that both candidates would denounce (and reject) this abuse.

    I, for one, take great solace in the fact that it’s the candidates, not the supporters, we are choosing from for the nomination.

  3. “You and a bunch making the same statements are not in the mood for it”, with “it”being what? Myself and a bunch of whom? I also cannot image who you think is asking you to guess what. Look at the record of democratic presidential.candidates simce 1952. We have elected precisely three candidates, so it shouldn’t be too difficult or take too much time. We do better with centrists, when we can elect them at all. Obama is acknowledged to have the most liberal voting record of any sitting Senator. To the left of Ted Kennedy. PS this middle-aged woman has never voted for a Republican and has not missed an election since 1966. At this point in time, I don’t know what I’m going to do.

  4. It’s Democrats, there is no base unless you just arbitrarily pick one, which you just did. Your middle aged women went GWB twice.

    In regard to domestic policy right/left there isn’t spit difference between Clinton/Obama. Foreign policy Hillary is a hawk. Put McCain in that mix and what common ground do you have? Iran with Hillary? You sure aren’t talking voting records or written policy statements to put one l/r domestically so that isn’t what it’s about. It’s only bloodbath for other reasons and I don’t know what your thinking/feeling is. I’m not going to guess, I don’t like guessing.

    This is pointless until September at the earliest, you and a bunch making the same statements are not in the mood for it.

  5. We also have to wonder how we manage to repeatedly nominate candidates who appeal greatly to 51% of our base, and leave the other 49% cold. Let’s remember Stevenson, McGovern, Dukakis, etc. Kerry also. I managed to get myself to vote for them, but Obama appears to be even further to the left. Now if we cannot appeal to our moderates and conservative democrats, we have zero chance again. Not a tantrum, just an observation. We are getting further and further away from large portions of our base. Middle aged women are an extremely large chunk of the Democratic base. If we lose them, this should actually be a bloodbath of the McGovern variety. This is why we have superdelegates.

  6. Why are you even talking about this? You still DO NOT get it do you? There are women, men, latinos, asians, catholics and jews, seniors and more who rather vote McCain than Obama.
    We simply do not want him. Not now. Not ever.
    He is not a good alternative. First you abuse these voters for Hillary and now the cycle of abuse comes around to ‘making nice’.
    NO NO NO..Barack Obama [edited out] is bad for America and NOT a vialble option. PERIOD
    Case Closed.

  7. All I can say is this, it is wrong to try to browbeat someone into a candidate’s camp. It is also not sensible to leave out of the equation that you have McCain and then you have Clinton & Obama for policies. People vote for their own reasons, all you can do is try to make your own reasons look better to them.

    I should note that since Ohio I have been a strong supporter of Hillary continuing her campaign, though not necessarily the rhetoric.

  8. Lynda and Chuck both – thanks for staying with this thread.

    Chuck – I do think Lynda speaks for a lot of folks, at least in Ohio which really is a swingy state. Your familiarity with the political machines is so intimate – I can never disrespect it, but each of us does have to come to a place within ourselves that we’re comfortable with a candidate. Sure – a lot of people will never vote that way – but blogs are kind of the exception – we’re kooky wonks basically.

    Although I didn’t start out this way at all! 🙂

  9. Ah, for the love of the First Amendment. 🙂

    Thanks, TOVFM. I am with you as you know re: tired of voting for men and am actively working to make SURE we have MORE than enough women to choose from. Of course there are plenty of men to vote for too, but I want more choice – and frankly, this extends to women of color and people of color and LGBT as well. Ohio’s Gov. Ted STrickland placed some “out” LGBT people in very visible places and that helps make the statement.

    I am confident about my reasons for why I post what I post. I intensely dislike when people, esp. those who know better and know me better, just accuse me of stupid stuff without even the remotest likelihood of what they are saying is my motivation to be true. That’s the downside of the blogosphere.

    But the comments of readers prove when a topic is something that engages people – and at the bottom, that’s what a blog is about.

    Thanks for the support – and the time and commenting. I really feel like these are conversations about politics that real people have in real life too – over coffee, dinner or a beer or wine.

  10. Again, not everyone who is hesitant to leap onto the Obama bandwagon is having a tantrum. Your dedication and service to the Party is commendable, Chuck, but not every Democrat can/will find it possible to know immediately that they find the nominee acceptable. It’s going to take some thought for many of us to get there, if at all. I’m a lot more moderate than is Sen. Obama. I am really going to have to give this some thought. Also, I have two grandsons, so reproductive rights, while important, mean little more to me personally than to you. I’ll never need an abortion and neither will they.

  11. Said my piece, tend to eschew repetition. Hats off to Jill for reffing at least two feisty threads today, and with great aplomb. And just for the record, Jill, I do not want your head to explode.

  12. TOVFM
    Voting for McCain or staying home to spite the Democrats is a tantrum, male or female and it will only devalue any search for your support. It will not aid your causes. You might think it will teach the Democrats a lesson, that lesson could take a lot of forms may not be to your taste.

    You seem to assume the “tantrum” is gender related – too bad, it isn’t. There are a lot of male Hillary supporters taking the same stance and it’s a tantrum in their case as well. And yes, you cherry-picked, you took something from one context and applied it to your agenda, classic example of what the term means. It pissed you off.

    The man stated simple demographic trends, you took it to be “taking for granted”. If you apply emotions in statistical analysis you get garbage for analysis. There are any number of cases of taking a pre-determined stance and using numbers to get there, that is agenda based garbage. You looked at numbers as having an emotional content. The women in this demographic will do as most demographic groups do, look out for their best interests by taking what they can get. I do it every election and virtually every voter does, because those interests cannot be met by a single individual.

    Jill is lukewarm on both candidates, so am I. I object more strongly to Hillary, but I’d take her over McCain. I am a male, I have certain genetic hardwiring and a certain amount of cultural wiring, but I also have a very active brain. My genetic wiring might incline me to resolve disputes with physical power, I do not, but I am also am not fearful of it. That is genetic. I am culturally surprised to see women racers when I’m drag racing, but I love it. (over time I’m considerably less surprised)

    I do not give you excuses or leeway because you’re not male. A tantrum gets called that, I don’t care if you take it as a gender slam, it isn’t. I didn’t accuse you of tantrum, I said that behavior is, if you do it then you’ve included yourself. You take insult from me just as you did with the demographics article, it isn’t there until you make it there.

    Is it an insult that the gender neutral pronoun in English regarding a person is “he”? “It” means something else entirely and he/she is tremendously awkward. Are the roots of “he” in a patriarchal society, certainly, and what? Few women ever went down a manhole and few still do – it must be personhole? Manhole and nigger are two different things, one was simply descriptive, the other was intentionally offensive or dismissive. Bitch is offensive, it is meant to be, applied to male or female. My work place is male dominated, few women want to do it and only some of them are physically able to. Most men would at least suffer starting out. This isn’t sexism, it is reality.

    Bitch and nigger and bastard are insults, I’ve never known of them to be other. They say a lot about the regard the person using them has for the intended recipient. I think it is stupid to pointlessly make enemies. Here’s an example, Hillary and Obama both stink on the 2nd Amendment, McCain not so much – I’ll see that one out in court not at the ballot box with McCain as an alternative. It is something that is important to me, very important, and I could rationalize all the other damage on the basis of a guaranteed individual right and I won’t ever need an abortion and I have 2 sons and no daughters.

    I’m trying to take care of too many things at one time, I hope this makes some sense…

  13. Chuck, Not everyone has held their primary yet. Not all voices have been heard. Look at it from that basis.

  14. Chuck, I “cherry-picked to piss myself off”? From where you are sitting, do you, can you, have deep insights into me?

    Anyone (like Jill) who is familiar with my line of thinking knows I am not in the grip of a Messianic mania, nor riddled with grief; not absent reason, nor without measured principle. These suggestions–along with your continued insistence that I am throwing a tantrum (the history of women who act-up being compared to children is, of course, long and rich) are the only parts of your post I find offensive. The rest is a matter of disagreement, and partially the result of our differing perspectives, which might also–though it might pain you to hear this–be partially a result of our differently gendered positions.

    As we write, it looks like–hard to tell–the two camps are in talks about Hillary as VP. Various analysts have argued both for and against a “unity ticket”–I link to a discussion of both sides on my blog–and various analysts have offered pictures of whether, more broadly speaking, a woman on the ticket would be helpful or hurtful to the Democratic cause. Polls that suggest (as of today) that Obama would beat McCain are encouraging to me, as are the remarks (today) of Nancy Pelosi, and others, that VP-Hillary would fill in the holes many like you are concerned about. If you would like to go on oversimplifying my positions, I would suggest something like this: This TOVM insists on having her real, Democrat cake and eating it too. And you would be right. And you are right about this: Politics is not a pretty business. Those with any political will must act accordingly. Me not act pretty, you see. Me act as my reason, my conscience, and my goals dictate. And when I do this, I attempt to do it without recourse to personal insult, or to the diminishment of those who disagree with me. I think this is all Jill expects of us, on her blog.

  15. If you choose to take the blogosphere as a political measure or anything you are exaggerating its effect. If you watch the comments you will see a handful of people winding themselves and others up with patently false statements. I am not a hardcore Obama supporter, I am a hardcore Democrat unless given a very good reason. I am also hugely involved in politics and watch closely, I know who has done what and said what.

    You propose that because a situation exists, sexism, that you should participate in it and not only participate but react to your own deficit. The VP is a matter of a balancing act of getting someone the Candidate can work with and then filling in the holes with the electorate. If something is junk, sexism, I simply refuse to play it. If a man and woman were evenly balanced in my estimation, I would, in this atmosphere, probably choose the woman, I might allow sex to be the final and last measure, but no farther up than that. You propose to put it first. That is the only place it can be faced with McCain if you have to hesitate. I am not going to detail why I don’t like Hillary, it is based on issues entirely outside sex is as far as I will go – the object here isn’t to fire up opposition. If she were the nominee I would be hugely disappointed and the same as if she were VP, but I would hold my nose and vote the ticket – John McCain is the problem.

    Jill finds my compassion lacking. I have great respect for Jill, even when I disagree with her – because she takes stands on the basis of reason and will listen and think. Your stance is not. If you need time to grieve, you have made something out of a politician that they are not. Any politician in the national arena has managed to thrive in a deeply flawed system, they are not messianic. They also are not all the same, so you take measures, and vote in the Primary – then you measure again and vote in the GE. If McCain is better, well, there you go – but you cannot get from Hillary to McCain, the disconnect is huge.

    I work in a very male dominated field – construction – and I am male. I spent 2 hours within about 12 feet of Obama, I can assure you that he is a masculine figure, our builds are quite similar though I am considerably more muscular. This metrosexual thing is one of the funnier things I’ve read – what, you expect a lawyer and US Senator to dress like a construction worker? I also spent a similar amount of time within the same distance of Bill Clinton, he is quite masculine also. (I get VIP seating) ((you might consider why I get VIP seating with BOTH campaigns))

    I am fully aware of what has been done to women and what has been done to minority races. Either voting against or by not voting acting against their own interests and that of the nation out of pique doesn’t generate much compassion from me. Putting your head down and keeping at it, in the face of obstacles, failing, and doing it again will get compassion from me. Tantrums don’t. If you were black and doing the same thing, you’d get the same level of compassion from me – I have no use for tantrums, I won’t pet you and I won’t stroke you; I will just tell you. You were treated with the respect of being an equal and I have treated this blog with the respect of not going partisan in regard to Hillary.

    Politics is not a pretty thing when looked at from the inside. There is a certain elegance in the dance of working with disparate interests by good politician, but it is like watching sausage being made. If you want pretty, watch ballet or something like that. The political analysis you objected to was not written to make anybody feel good, it is a cold hearted analysis and it doesn’t care why it is true and neither do I. The facts regarding BushCo and McCain where women are concerned are clear. That isn’t to say work doesn’t need to be done, but that is a different analysis. You cherry-picked to piss yourself off, that’s silly. Discussions of Hillary’s cleavage are about as intelligent as ones about Obama’s ears. If you haven’t noticed, there is no shortage of stupidity in the world and expecting it to not happen is not reasonable.

    Sure, we should oppose stupidity – and that certainly doesn’t mean engaging in it ourselves. Whether the issue is race or sexism, being stupid in “opposition” to it is self-defeating. Whatever else there is to say about Hillary and Barack, the simple fact that both have had a credible shot at the Presidency is earth shattering in this country. You may have to be satisfied with that this time around and understand that “not this woman” isn’t the same thing as “not a woman.”

    I didn’t see any sign that I’d offended you, which is good because I had no desire to.

  16. Pingback: Why women voters should support Barack Obama | Why choose Barack Obama?

  17. Yes, Chuck, I was concerned by Pomper’s analysis, because it did not factor in a) the millions of new members of the Democratic Party, and b) it did not quantify any progress we (may) as a nation have made after 8 years of Bush, or to put it another way, it did not raise the question of the potential impact of white men who had left the Democratic Party now being so disgusted they are ready to come back. And of course, it made potentially outdated/wrong-headed assumptions about the female voting block. Anyone taking the pulse of the blogosphere right now knows that this is both problematic and inaccurate. Women are not lining up. That is one of the reasons, I think, Jill started this thread, and Bravo made her list. Finally, the manner in which statistical analysis is presented can, yes, show bias. It can even, on occasion, move, intentionally or unintentionally, toward an outcome rather than describe a potential outcome.

    This is one reason I argue, so strenuously, for gender parity. Having women on board to describe the world and how they see it makes a difference. Re your curious comment: I would not find it particularly helpful for Obama to grow breasts–although perhaps that would be encouraging to the metrosexual voting block. I would find it tremendously helpful to see a balanced ticket. Were there no qualified woman candidates for Obama to choose from, my position, of course, would be untenable. But there are. I am. you see, equally about equality, and progress. I seek to treat women and men equally as a candidates, and I seek to press for progress for women at the same time. Not later. Not some day. Not as a subordinate clause. At the same time. As it happens, the statistical reality that lies outside Pomper’s purview is that until women who hold points of view similar to mine make our stances and urgencies clear, we are, indeed, statistically and strategically unimportant, to the Obama campaign, and to everyone else.

    A solution to my dilemma lies on the ground like a bird’s nest waiting to be picked up. I wait to see how far Obama, his supporters, and all of us are willing to reach. Someone with my position on gender progress, whether you agree with it or not, is being asked to dig deep, particularly in a race that looks like it will end–statistically–dead even. My hope is that we’ll all dig a little deeper.

  18. I certainly will trust you on that, Cheri, and I know you’re hardly alone among your gender in thinking that. But those big jughead ears of his kind of ruin it for me. And I’m left somewhat in stunned silence when I see him compared to JFK in terms of sexual appeal. It leaves me feeling like I need a new prescription for my glasses. But then, I do defer to women when it comes to judging male sex appeal. But don’t you just want to feed the guy and put a few pounds on that skinny frame of his?

  19. Not masculine enough? Say what?

    Trust a girl’s instincts on this one, John. Obama is more than certainly masculine in aura. (and he *does* wear a suit well, I’ll admit).

    Even if he weren’t,since when should one’s levels or masculinity – or femininity – be a measure of one’s fitness for the Presidency?

  20. Pingback: American Street » Blog Archive » The Truth about the Clintons

  21. You included? Wow. Interesting. I’ve not once thought of him as necessarily effeminate. If I had, I don’t think I’d find it off-putting, like I do your comment.

  22. And reason #11: he’s a metrosexual, with all the effeminate qualities that entails. They’re off-putting to many males (me included), and I predict it will be among the leading reasons for sinking his chances in the general election.

  23. Lynda – I think that what you just expressed is how many people feel. I feel that way – it is a very accurate portrait, frankly, of how I feel about both Obama and Clinton – I am SO lukewarm about both of them. I won’t moan again about how both were at the bottom of the list for me and only stopped being there because of being the last two standing.

    All this talk about if Clinton just tells her supporters that she trusts Obama, they will then vote for him. That’s nuts – sure, she needs to do it, sure, it will help make the choice easier for some voters, but for a lot of us, for God’s sake, EVERY candidate no matter where on the ticket has to EARN my vote. Why it should be different for Obama is beyond me.

  24. Chuck – your passion is coming right through the screen! 🙂

    But if I might suggest, because I know of your sincerity, that you just take a couple of minutes to check out “tiredof”‘s blog and see where her motivation comes from. I wouldn’t say this for every commenter, but I have read her blog and exchanged some emails with her and I’m quite confident that her writing is part of her process in learning and understanding – as well as being clear about how she sees the situation. Which isn’t unlike how many women see it – even if people disagree with it.

    So – because I “love” you both as commenters, I’d like to encourage a little cross-fertilization and then more conversation.

    Ick – I know – that sounds pretty gushy. Anyway – you know what I mean I bet.

  25. Early in the campaign, Michelle Obama was asked by a reporter if she would support Sen. Clinton as a nominee. Her response was something to the effect of she’d have to think about it. Well, I do, too. And the first thing I have to solve in my head is whether I mistrust Sen. Obama or his surrogates. I’m less than thrilled about some of Mrs. O’s stances, the Rev. Wright has given me some pause, and the young fellow I met recently wearing a “bros before hos – vote Obama” tee shirt has not sat well, either, Let me think about this. I need to know in my heart that this is a good decision, and so far I’m just not there.

  26. I’ll be go to hell, tiredof, you read a demographic political breakdown of voting patterns and take that as sexism?? An analysis that shows men leaving Democratic ranks and not women means your votes are somehow devalued and discounted?????

    The Democratic Party gets beaten around the head and shoulders by the right and loses elections on the basis of its support for issues particular to your gender and YOU have to do all the heavy lifting? And partly because of what you’re complaining about it is primarily men who are losing for you. Do you have some illusion that it is an easy thing to recruit candidates of any sex? I have a wall I might well go talk to.

    I got beaten in a Primary that cost me what I couldn’t afford by a woman, then I turned around and spent money and time for her (that I couldn’t afford). And that was in the face of a lack of any confidence she could even dent the Republican Representative (33% says she couldn’t). I give a rat’s patoot about gender…or race…or religion, I care about good policies or at least an improvement.

  27. This is a truly grotesque response to Jill’s post. So gender is now a qualification for President or VP? To satisfy you Obama either must grow breasts or find someone with them to enhance the ticket? Isn’t that exactly what it is that you’ve objected to? Gender based hiring and promotion?

    You make some kind of claim that Hillary stands for something worth your support and you have a problem choosing Obama over McCain? I can understand (loosely speaking) supporting Clinton over Obama but after that the equation is no more than spoiled child tantrums. You’ve seen the kids, rolling on the floor squealing, “I want dat one an I’ll hold my breath ’til I die,” only this time there will be deaths. Should I measure your candidate by you? If that is the case I should do everything in my power to see her buried in the dust bin of forgotten history.

    Fortunately for NY & USA I don’t think that’s quite the case, though the last couple days might make a person wonder.

    Thanks for a good post Jill, sensible people learn how to disagree on some things and work together for all our good. Jill knows that my chances of being closely represented by a Presidential candidate are vanishingly small – ever.

  28. Thank you, Paul, this has been my point as well. Bravo’s list is succinct, articulate–and didn’t tell me, a thinking Democrat, voter, and woman, anything I didn’t already know. What concerns me is that women are being expected to do all the heavy lifting here, while Obama remains, in the manner he is so often praised for, “above the fray.” (He is, of course, being counseled to do so, since “women are best at persuading other women.”)

    I’m not, however, interested in a candidate who remains above the fray. The fray is down here; and it’s real. I note that women, once again and as usual, are being asked to work hard as Democrats, and this time to work “on” each other (Obama’s female supporters expected to rally Clinton’s female supporters, Clinton’s being asked to join Obama’s campaign), all for the greater good; what I don’t yet detect is any signal or action on the part of the candidate, himself, that addresses the greater good as it’s represented in a genuine issue–what’s at the core of much of the current tension–the question of the relationship between gender parity and the goals and aspirations of all Democrats.

    Until he does so (and for strategic reasons he himself would be familiar with), I can declare myself only “present” at this historic juncture. I already know that women are very, very, very good at working on behalf of this country. What I am waiting to see is how good Obama is at doing more of the work, himself. The appointment of a woman as his VP candidate would demonstrate this to me, loud and clear.

  29. There are some strong arguments for Barack Obama selecting a woman as a VP running mate. A lot of women have been activated by Clinton’s campaign and they need to be brought into Obama’s campaign.

Comment here

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s