Ben Smith, right and wrong

Shortly after I posted my reply to the SPLC's Dr. Heidi Beirich, there was a miraculous intervention (cough, cough) by which I was inspired to e-mail Dr. Beirich again, urging her to read an item by Ben Smith of the Politico:

The pastor of the San Diego megachurch Vincent attends (with Carrie Prejean, natch) is black. She's also spent most of the last few years on a pair of inspirational books about, basically, racial reconciliation in the friendship between a rich white art dealer and a homeless black drifter, the first of them a Times bestseller. More broadly, she hails from a (large) stream of Evangelicalism that puts racial reconciliation very high on the agenda.
Vincent is -- like Palin -- well to the right, as Blumenthal notes, on abortion; but the race card (in both cases) seems out of place.

So much for the "Lynn Vincent, Secret Racist" meme, then. But in the same item, Ben Smith also writes:

Max Blumenthal goes after Sarah Palin's co-author, Lynn Vincent, in a broadside that focuses largely on her 2006 collaboration with a conservative blogger, Robert Stacy McCain, whose views on race . . . have since made him a pariah even on the right.

This is simply false, and I dare Ben Smith to put forth evidence that my "views on race" have made me "a pariah even on the right."

To begin with, let Ben Smith ask himself, "What are Stacy McCain's views on race?" He'll have a very difficult time discovering the answer, as the sources for this old "white supremacist" smear are a Gordian knot of confusion and error, and in some cases I have been condemned for doing things I never did. (For example, contrary to Michelangelo Signorile's assertion, I never contributed to the white separatist site "Reclaiming the South.")

So if anyone tries to tell you that they know my "views on race" -- and especially if they claim my views are so hateful or extreme as to make me a "pariah" -- you may rest assured that you are dealing with either a Liar or a Fool. Given that so many have demanded some sort of Definitive Statement from me, however, I will now provide one:

I believe that liberals are wrong about black people. Liberals are also wrong about white people, brown people, yellow people and red people. If NASA announced tomorrow that it had discovered a distant planet inhabited by purple people, anything that liberals believed about purple people would be wrong, too. Liberals are not only wrong about race, but they are also wrong about economics, crime, poverty, religion, science, war, marriage and foreign policy. In fact, as evidenced by their global-warming hysteria, liberals are wrong about the weather. Insofar as there is a "liberal consensus" on any particular subject -- including movies and sports -- then the truth is likely to be the exact opposite of whatever liberals say.

One of the things I have sought to avoid over the years is the "some of my best friends" defense. If my friends are aware of these attacks, they will defend me. If they are unaware of the attacks, it would be wrong to involve them in a dispute that is not of their concern. My enemies are my enemies, and I would do my friends no favors by siccing my enemies on them, so as to expose my friends to these guilt-by-association attacks.

However, if Lynn Vincent is both (a) undeniably my friend, and (b) an advocate of "racial reconciliation," then it would behoove Ben Smith to notice that there is a very large non sequitur -- the size of an elephant -- in the room.

BTW, Ben Smith: I'm not merely a "conservative blogger." I've been cranking it out on deadline since 1986, winning national awards before I ever came to Washington, and came to Washington nearly a decade before there was such a thing as the Politico. I've got T-shirts older than you, punk, and next time you call somebody a "pariah," I'd advise you to make a couple of phone calls first.

As my Old School editors always told me, "If your mother says she loves you, check it out." To which I would add this corollary: If a liberal says your mother loves you, your mother hates you.

UPDATE: Wow, suddenly everything comes tumbling down. Lynn Vincent "outs" her left-wing lesbian sister Lori and also the lesbian friend who was maid of honor at Lynn's own (hetero) wedding. (Hat-tip: Conservatives for Palin.) I wonder how long before Lynn outs me as a neo-Confederate lesbian?

Meanwhile, it has been noted that I elided the part of Ben Smith's post where he described me as being opposed to interracial marriage. To explain: Both my time and the reader's attention are limited quantities. A full-length explanation of the minute details of the accusations against me is ineffective and wasteful. The larger point is false -- I'm not a "white supremacist" or an "avowed segregationist," etc. -- and a discussion of the details only lends credibility to the accuser. "Stay out of the tall grass."

However, a commenter at the Hot Air Green Room -- "Diane" whose Twitter ID is "infobee" --raised this question quite directly, and I responded at length, citing the research of Dr. Zhenchao Qian at Ohio State University. Further explanation is possible but not, I hope, necessary.

Also see Cassandra at Villainous Company on "second-degree guilt-by-association."

How to Reply to the Southern Poverty Law Center (If You Must)

In response to a Palin-bashing expedition by Max Blumenthal -- attempting a guilt-by-association smear involving my Donkey Cons co-author --today I got an e-mail from my old friend, Heidi Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Center:

So you know Palin according to Max Blumenthal.
Is his reporting true?

Always happy to help a damsel in distress, I sent Heidi this e-mail reply:

In general, no. Max Blumenthal's career is a massive ziggurat of errors stacked one atop another. But that clever fool occasionally gets one or two things right, just to keep us on our toes The facts:

• I have never spoken directly to Sarah Palin.

When I covered her during the 2008 campaign, I had a very brief encounter with her. She was on stage at Shippensburg (Pa.) University for an "overflow" event -- that's where she held a smaller, short event for people who were still standing in line for the main rally when Secret Service closed the door. (Secret Service security is an extreme hassle from a reporter's standpoint, FYI.) When she did the "rope line" at the end of the overflow event, shaking hands and signing autographs, I approached the stage. My kids had asked me to get Sarah's autograph, so I handed her my notebook to sign.
Palin had appeared at the overflow event wearing a T-shirt -- probably a gift from a local supporter -- with the motto "Ship Happens," a joke-slogan among Shippensburg students, and I had made a note of that. When I handed Palin my notebook, she saw this note and, realizing that I was a reporter, gestured at her T-shirt and shouted, "Ship! Ship!" -- laughing in mock-panic that I might misreport the slogan. She then signed my notebook and handed it back with a wink and a smile.
That small gesture -- the joking recognition of the negative-P.R. potential of a "Ship Happens" T-shirt -- convinced me of Palin's keen political instinct. She is no dummy. And the fact that she has been portrayed as a dummy is one reason I have been so relentlessly critical of the (John) McCain campaign's media strategy.

• I co-authored Donkey Cons with Palin's collaborator, Lynn Vincent.

This has attracted much attention from various liberal media types, including Rachel Maddow and now Max Blumenthal. As is customary in such matters, Lynn signed a confidentiality agreement with Harper Collins, and thus is unable to discuss her interactions with Palin. Of course, as any good reporter knows, you never burn your sources, and the last thing in the world that Lynn would do is to betray Sarah Palin's trust. However, there was one occasion -- after some Alaska bloggers had falsely claimed that the Palins were on the verge of divorce -- when I asked Lynn, as a favor, if she could get me a quote from the governor on the matter, which she did.
Lynn Vincent is a wonderful person, and was wonderful long before she and I co-wrote Donkey Cons. It was Lynn who, as news editor of the Jacksonville (Ala.) State University studentpaper circa 1981-3, recruited me to join the staff of the newspaper, after seeing some of the rock music record reviews I'd submitted. Perhaps you should ask Morris Dees to send you up to JSU to root through the archives of the student newspaper (The Chanticleer) and see if you can find anything in my reviews of old Elvis Costello records that might be useful to the SPLC's mission.

It is regrettable that the Left's "By Any Means Necessary" effort to destroy Palin should have led you, Dr. Beirich, to waste time following up on Max Blumenthal's misguided work. As I've told you before, it is a shame that someone of your abilities finds herself toiling in that ridiculous Nonsense Factory down in Montgomery, rather than hiring on at a university and doing useful work. My sympathy for your plight -- I don't think you're evil, just because you can find no better employment than the SPLC -- is the main reason I've offered to sing karaoke with you, next time I'm visiting kinfolk in Montgomery.

Prior to your inquiry, I had not seen Blumenthal's Daily Beast column which is, in at least one point, accurate: It was I who, in a blog response to Clark Stooksbury of The American Conservative, planted the suggestion that Lynn seek the Palin contract. That Lynn saw that suggestion and followed up on it is a tribute to her entrepreneurial persistence. But in reading through Blumenthal's article, I note among his various mendacities this blatant falsehood:

"Marlene Johnson, the Times’ former arts section editor and an African-American, told me McCain was 'an avowed segregationist.'

This is just about 180 degrees opposite from the truth. If Ms. Johnson believed me to be an "avowed segregationist" -- which I most certainly am not -- this was not a case of *her* telling Blumenthal that, but of Blumenthal (or others) telling this *to her.* There were disgruntled employees and ex-employees of The Washington Times who, bearing personal malice toward the newspaper's management, chose to use the SPLC's attacks on me as a weapon for their own spiteful vengeance. Whatever harm was done to me was really collateral damage in terms of their main object of wounding Wes Pruden and others.

Live and learn, I suppose, but I am not the sort to harbor grudges. Max was assigned to do a hit-job on The Washington Times and did it rather ineptly, as he tends to do everything ineptly. When Max called me seeking comment for his Nation magazine article, I gave him the best quote in the story: "I'm too lazy to be evil." Once the article was in print, reaching out in a spirit of friendship, I invited him to have beers with me and my friends, a gesture of hospitality that he now falsely portrays as harassment. Max also claims that his Nation article had something to do with my being placed on probation at work in 2007; that is a flat-out lie -- both as to the timing and to the reasons for my probation -- and I would be happy to supply the names of witnesses who could testify that Blumenthal's report is false.

Of Blumenthal's other errors (i.e, repeating the delusional claims of George Archibald) I simply don't have time to deal with them now, except to say that anyone tempted to cite Max Blumenthal as a definitive source should be warned about Max's habitual sloppiness and inaccuracy. He is wrong in matters both large (I am not a white supremacist) and small (my work habits are not "anemic"), and his writing is so generally untrustworthy that we may say of his work what Mary McCarthy said of Lillian Hellman: Every word is a lie, including "and" and "the."

What is most absurd in all this is the transparent desperation of liberals to find something -- anything -- that they can use as the smoking-gun gotcha, the silver bullet that finally slays the Sarah Palin werewolf. Grateful that this quixotic quest is of some benefit to me, by adding to the gleaming lustre of my mysterious notoriety, I only hope that you'll encourage others to keep barking up this same tree. Because it's the wrong one, sweetheart. Please feel free to call me, Dr. Beirich. This e-mail is blind CC'd to others and will appear as a post at my blog.
--
Robert Stacy McCain

Let me know if I can be of further assistance, ma'am. It would be unchivalrous to refuse.

UPDATE: Old Reb is impressed, crediting me with having excelled Joe Guzzardi of VDare.

The key in these matters, I think, is to distinguish who is who in the Evil Coalition of Liars and Fools. At SPLC, Dees and Mark Potok are clearly the Liars. Their lesser minions are therefore Fools, and the fundamental task is to make the Fools realize they are being duped and exploited by the Liars.

If Beirich ever wises up, she has the potential to be Morris Dees' Worst Nightmare: A liberal Ph.D. thoroughly familiar with the evil machinations of the SPLC, ready and willing to expose the ugly truth.

By enlightening her, at the very least I put her in line for a handsome raise. "Pay me or trade me," as they say in the major leagues, and Dees can't afford to let Dr. Beirich go free, or he'll risk disastrous revelations.

Matthew 5:44 is a fearsome weapon against evil.

'Retract, Please': Letter to the Editor of the Charleston (W. Va.) Gazette

Dear Sir:
Your Oct. 7 editorial, "Palin Book: Already No. 1," contains factual errors which are defamatory and potentially libelous, to wit: "In 2006, Vincent teamed up with white supremacist Robert Stacy McCain to write a shrill book titled Donkey Cons: Sex, Crime and Corruption in the Democratic Party . . ."

Leave it to critics to judge whether or not Donkey Cons is "shrill" -- I suspect your editorial writer has not bothered to read it -- and ask yourself what authority there is for your assertion that I am a "white supremacist." Were this true, it would certainly come as a surprise to my numerous colleagues and friends, who are quite a panorama of diversity.

In the fourth paragraph of the aforesaid editorial, your writer was at least clever enough to cite two authorities for this defamation:

1. A "former Washington Times reporter," whom we need not name, and whose personal problems -- divorce, unemployment, etc. -- might be considered relevant to his motives for maligning me and for the veracity of his accusations.
2. The Southern Poverty Law Center, which began attacking me in 2000, after I published a feature article based on an interview with Kansas author Laird Wilcox ("Researcher Says 'Watchdogs' Exaggerate Hate Group Threat," 5/9/2000, Page A2, The Washington Times).

The Fifth Amendment of our Constitution means that I am not compelled to deny every false statement made about me. However, my silence cannot be considered proof that such statements are true.

When these accusations were first made, during my employment at The Washington Times, management decided not to respond, as to do so would tend to suggest that the accusers had some credibility. Therefore, I was required to maintain silence, rather than to make any rebuttal. By the time I resigned from the newspaper, in January 2008, to undertake a research trip to Africa, the appropriate time for explaining several falsehoods and misunderstandings had certainly expired.

Over the years, this malicious campaign against my reputation has metastasized spectacularly on the Internet, as individuals and organizations with various political or personal motives have elaborated and repeated them. Some of the original sources for these accusations (e.g., a column by Michelangelo Signorile) contained factual errors, which have been incorporated into the urban-legend mythology, producing a Gordian Knot of non-fact that is not worth the effort it would take to unravel it. Like ancient Alexander, however, I am prepared to swing the sword. Retract, please.

These charges have, as I say, taken on an Internet life of their own. However, never before have they been published in a print newspaper. Whatever malice against the former governor of Alaska inspired your publisher, editors and writers to undertake this false and dishonorable guilt-by-association smear, it was a most foolish blunder. Retract, please.

Having worked as a professional journalist since 1986, I have never forgotten the motto often repeated by those old-school editors who taught me the craft: If your mother says she loves you, check it out.

Hoping for warm friendship in the future, I remain sincerely

Your most humble and obedient servant,

Robert Stacy McCain

Co-author (with Lynn Vincent) of DONKEY CONS: Sex, Crime & Corruption in the Democratic Party

UPDATE: "Gee, Stacy, where did you learn this thing about letters-to-the-editor as a literary genre?" Like I say, sometimes you must ask yourself:

WHAT WOULD HUNTER S. THOMPSON DO?

UPDATE II: Former Washington Times intern Monique Stuart:

Now, for the most part, Stacy is staying above the fray. And, I applaud him for that. He shouldn’t have to defend himself against such wild accusations. And, the truth is, he doesn’t have to. . . .

Read the rest. And don't ever get on Monique's bad side.

Samuel L. Jackson will star in movie adaptation of Lynn Vincent's book

No, not Donkey Cons or Sarah Palin's new Going Rogue, but the No. 1 New York Times bestseller she co-authored, Same Kind of Different as Me:

Samuel L. Jackson has signed on to star in "Same Kind of Different as Me," an adaptation of a nonfiction bestseller that has been adapted by screenwriters Roderick and Bruce Taylor ("The Brave One").
Jackson will play Denver Moore, an ex-con drifter who develops an unlikely friendship with a wealthy Dallas art dealer named Ron Hall. The book, written by Hall, Moore and Lynn Vincent, was optioned by Veralux Media in 2008. With Jackson aboard, the script is now being shopped for production financing.
Ralph Winter will produce through his 1019 Entertainment banner, with Veralux's Mark Clayman and Jennifer Gates. Jackson will be exec producer alongside Brad Reeves, Susana Zepeda and Todd Shuster.

Don't worry, Rachel Maddow and Charles Johnson: I'll tell Lynn to say "hi" to Mr. Jackson for y'all.

Another book that's soon to be a major motion picture: Another Man's War, the incredible true story of the "Machine Gun Preacher," African missionary Pastor Sam Childers. Son of a Pennsylvania steelworker, Sam became involved in drugs and crime as a teenager. Fearing arrest or violent death, he fled to Florida, where he rode with outlaw bikers and met his wife while working as a "shotgunner" on a drug deal in a strip club.

After they married and returned to his native Pennsylvania, Sam built a million-dollar construction and real-estate business -- and gave it all up to establish an orphanage in war-torn Sudan, rescuing children from the terrorist army led by Ugandan madman Joseph Kony.

As Sam says, in Africa, dying is easy. It's living that's hard.

RIGHT WING SCANDAL ROCKS D.C.: MATT WELCH SAYS JUST 'FRIENDS'

Earlier today, in an exclusive report, The Other McCain Enquirer brought you revelations of the shocking liaison between Matt Welch and Andrew Breitbart -- a right-wing scandal that has sparked rumors and innuendo from Washington to Hollywood.

Welch has claimed that he and Breitbart are merely "friends," while insinuating that "respectable news outlets" should avoid the brewing imbroglio. However, the Enquirer can now reveal that there is new proof of other furtive right-wing rendezvous . . .

Breitbart (left) with Stephen Hayes (far right) of the neocon Weekly Standard. The mysterious figure in the center has yet to be positively identified.

Enquirer sources say Welch has been known to cavort at parties with girls barely out of their teens.

Welch (left) with a 20-year-old named McCain (far right).

Breitbart's association with young girls is also notorious, as he is alleged to have used 20-year-old Hannah Giles in a scheme to secure non-profit funding to import South American teen prostitutes to work for infamous pimp, James O'Keefe. Miss Giles may also have other connections to the Welch/Breitbart neocon conspiracy, as shown by this stunning new Enquirer photo . . .

Left to far-right: Neoconservative author David Frum, Hannah Giles, nefarious right-wing operatives Tom Qualtere and Sergio Gor, and Lynn Vincent, infamous collaborator with Sarah Palin.

Furthermore, while it has been alleged by Kejda Germani that the woman in this photo is, in fact, married to the arch-conspirator Breitbart, the mysterious man shown with her (far right) has yet to be positively identified. He is, however, reputed to be an extremely social conservative.

The Enquirer is devoted to bringing you exclusive coverage of this emerging scandal that "respectable news outlets" refuse to touch . . . .

When I dreamed long ago of appearing some day on 'Meet the Press' . . .

. . . this wasn't quite what I had in mind (7:40 mark):

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Rachel Maddow has got several facts wrong, and you know what? I'm going to let her try to figure out which facts she's got wrong. She gets paid by MSNBC to report the facts, and as she goes about the process of proving she couldn't find her own ass with both hands, I'll be content to watch and laugh.

How many times have I said that it's a long story, and that I'm not going to tell the whole thing until somebody pays me for the story? There are very good reasons I've kept calm, and resisted the temptation to confirm or deny this, that or the other specific point in their "Ransom Note Method" indictment. In such a situation, it's important to keep in mind your rights under Miranda v. Arizona. I don't have to explain myself or prove a negative.

Let Rachel Maddow find out for herself that, for example, Donkey Cons wasn't Lynn Vincent's most recent book. Or let her get in touch with novelist Tito Perdue or Stogie at Saberpoint and ask them to explain some of this. There is no obligation for me to speak a word in my own defense.

When the Left first came after me with this stuff eight years ago, I was under orders not to respond. Difficult, but it gave me a lot of time to contemplate, to watch how they do this to people (like they did to George Allen in 2006) and I think this painful education has taught me a thing or two about dealing with crap like this.

Remember: Being notorious isn't the same as being famous, but it's better than being anonymous.

(Hat-tip: Professor Donald Douglas, who still needs to apologize to Attila and Cassandra, if he wants to regain his "known associate" credentials.)

UPDATE (Smitty): Cythia Yockey musters the artillery for some solid counter-battery fire.

UPDATE II (RSM): Stogie at Saberpoint brings the cavalry. You can read the "Meet the Press" transcript, as I'm sure Sarah Palin and Lynn Vincent's lawyers will be doing quite carefully . . .

UPDATE III (Smitty):Fishersville Mike plays a heavy guilt-by-association card. Wow.

UPDATE IV (Smitty): Picks himself up after being knocked over by the Most Powerful 'Ahem' Ever Recorded. Thank you, Little Miss Attila.

Ah, the joys of guilt by association!

So, I walk into the Reason magazine party Thursday evening and the first person who greets me is my old buddy David Weigel. "Hey, your girl got the deal!"

Eh? And then he told me that Lynn Vincent, with whom I co-authored Donkey Cons, had been signed to collaborate on Sarah Palin's book. Son of a gun, it's true, it's true, it's true.

And as we have come to expect, the usual suspects launch the usual smear attack, complete with recycled idiocies about me.

After I clocked my first million hits here, one of the things I decided to do was to write a proper "Who is" bio, and in that bio I included this:

The "racist" smear. A long, long story that began on May 9, 2000, when I published a news feature with the headline, "Researchers Say 'Watchdogs' Exaggerate Hate Group Threat." When the smears started, my bosses decided that the best response was a non-response. The smears were thus elaborated year after year on the Internet, errors compounding on lies with additions of libels and distortions, like a metastasizing cancer.
Had I been permitted to respond initially in my own defense . . . well, "if" is the largest two-letter word. Trying to unravel it all at this late date would be a waste of time and energy.
Along the way, I've discovered the amazing professional value of a bad reputation. Being notorious is not the same as being famous, but it's better than being anonymous. The harm to my career and my reputation was more than recompensed by the acquisition of virtuous character attributed to A Man Who Has The Right Enemies -- the same parasitical assassins who attack me have also attacked inter alia Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, David Horowitz, Mark Steyn, Kathy Shaidle and other worthy souls more eminent than myself.
At this point, if it pleases anyone to think of me as a neo-Confederate white supremacist xenophobic bigoted nativist hatemonger, the accusation is too delicious to deny and if anyone wants the full explanation, they can pay me for it. (I write for money.)

So there you go. Now, let me defend Donkey Cons against my friend David Weigel:

It was an uncomplicated book, its thesis being that if you compared the number of Democrats who’d committed some sort of crime and the number of Republican lawbreakers, the Democrats were, objectively, the more criminal party.

This is an underestimation of the book. It is the most comprehensive chronicle of Democratic Party corruption ever published. In Chapter 2, "Rap Sheet," Lynn took on the task of counting every serious charge of corruption or criminality involving members of Congress since 1976, and found 46 Democrats to 15 Republicans. So it's certainly true that Democrats are the more criminal party -- by a 3-to-1 margin!

Critics of the book simply couldn't get their heads around this immense disproportion. Even some conservative radio talk-show hosts who interviewed us were skeptical. Ever since Watergate, Democrats have benefitted from the notion that somehow it is the GOP that is more corrupt -- even while dozens of Democratic congressmen were either convicted of felonies or censured for ethical violations: Jim Trafficant, Mel Reynolds, Robert Torricelli, Jim Wright, Corrine Brown, Barney Frank and Alcee Hastings to name a few.

That the Democrats would win a congressional majority in 2006 based on their promise to clean up a "culture of corruption" in Washington is a testimony to how little public awareness there is of the extensive tradition of corruption in the Democratic Party, a tradition traceable in a direct line all the way back to the party's co-founder, Aaron Burr.

"Uncomplicated"? Check out Chapter 4, "The Gang's All Here," about the Democratic Party's long association with organized crime, Chapter 5, "Look For the Union Label," about labor union corruption, and Chapter 8, "Scene of the Crime," about the tragic consequences of liberal urban policy.

"Uncomplicated"? A serious accusation! Unfortunately, Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment.

UPDATE: Over at the American Spectator, I congratulate Sarah Palin on her choice:

Congratulations, Governor. If you didn't hire the best writer in the business, at least Lynn is very close to the best writer in the business. She's also got an excellent sense of humor,

Kathy Shaidle also has an excellent sense of humor. I've found a sense of humor indispensible to dealing with this kind of "scandal," because the nature of the accusation is so manifestly absurd. As I explained:

However much I sincerely admire beauty, there are few things that interest me less than who wins beauty contests. Yet in the case of Miss Prejean, we see a perfect example of the totalitarian thought-control impulse of modern liberalism, which marginalizes dissent by coercive approval: Disagreement with the liberal agenda disqualifies one from any position of social prestige, and invites the accusation of mala fides.
In the case of the liberal agenda on gay rights, those who disagree are diagnosed with “homophobia,” a mental illness apparently afflicting a majority of the electorate in 30-odd states which have approved measures prohibiting same-sex marriage. Beyond its implausibility as a psychological disorder -- conservatism as a species of insanity being a favorite theme of the Left at least since Theodor Adorno’s “scientific” study of The Authoritarian Personality -- the problem with the “homophobia” smear is that this allegedly dangerous tendency does not correlate with any actual evil.

Read the whole thing. By the way, I am still the blog king of the "Carrie Prejean nude" Google-bomb (among others of relevant interest that need not be explained here). I mean, you wouldn't want liberals to monopolize that traffic, would you? And because I'm a giver, I shared this valuable knowledge with Marie Osmond's lesbian daughter.

Je suis un bloggeur capitaliste. I'm also a "top Hayekian public intellectual." I write for money. See Rule 5.