Letter Carrier President: “We Call For The Immediate Removal Of The Postmaster General”

The Associated Press is reporting today some good news for those conservative Republicans who have been hell-bent on killing the Constitution-authorized post office:

The U.S. Postal Service will stop delivering mail on Saturdays but continue to deliver packages six days a week under a plan aimed at saving about $2 billion annually, the financially struggling agency says.

In other words, the Postal Service will stop serving most of its customers on Saturday, a day in which about two-thirds of American business are actually open for, uh, business.

Taking Saturday service out of the Postal Service will allegedly “save” $2 billion a year (although the USPS has alternatively and falsely argued that it would save much, much more). I suppose if we then later took Monday through Friday service out of the Postal Service we would never again have to worry about its finances. But then all we’d have left would be a bunch of empty buildings and rusting vehicles and 650,000 folks without jobs—which, of course, is the goal of a lot of think-tank conservatives, who for years have wanted to privatize mail delivery.

Fred Rolando, President of the National Association of Letter Carriers, issued a statement on this downsizing scheme that included this:

This misguided and counterproductive decision is in keeping with the Postmaster General’s slash-and-shrink approach to dealing with the Postal Service’s financial challenges. Instead of offering a real business plan to tap the full potential of this essential American institution, he is offering a plan that will doom USPS to failure.

To give just one example of how that failure might occur, consider the following items that I found on a page on the Postal Service website designed to explain what will happen if this 5-day delivery scheme is actually hatched:

No scheduled box collections Saturday/Sunday, except Express Mail collection boxes

No processing of outgoing mail on Saturday, except Express Mail

Mail accepted at Post Offices will be processed on Monday, except Express Mail

Let me interpret what these items mean: If, say, you drop a letter in a mailbox in Joplin (if you can find a drop box these days) on Friday, after mail has been collected for the day, it will sit in that box until Monday and won’t leave Joplin until Monday evening. That’s three days sitting in a box.

Then, on top of that, when the letter is collected and processed, it will take longer to get it to its destination. The Postal Service has already closed processing plants and has had to cut delivery service standards, and cutting Saturday delivery would, as the Postal Regulatory Commission found, “delay by two days delivery of 25% of first class and priority mail.”

So, drop a letter in a box on Friday and it may not get where you sent it until the next Friday. That kind of “service” may, as Fred Rolando said, doom the post office and, if nothing else, make it a ward of the government in the future.

Rolando finished his statement with an unusually blunt request:

America’s letter carriers condemn this reckless plan in the strongest terms. We call for the immediate removal of the postmaster general, who has lost the confidence of the men and women who deliver for America every day. And we urge Congress to develop a real reform plan that gives the Postal Service the freedom to grow and innovate in the digital era.

Speaking of Congress and the removal of the postmaster general, the AP story had this odd sentence in its reporting:

It was not immediately clear how the service could eliminate Saturday mail without congressional approval.

It’s not clear because, as NALC President Rolando pointed out,

This maneuver by Mr. Donahoe flouts the will of Congress, as expressed annually over the past 30 years in legislation that mandates six-day delivery, which remains in effect today. In the last Congress, which ended in January, a bi-partisan majority of Representatives co-sponsored legislation backing the continuation of Saturday delivery.

And the Postmaster General himself, Patrick Donahoe, knows he needs congressional approval to stop serving his customers six days a week. In 2011, he told PBS’s Gwen Ifill that he wanted Congress first to let the Postal Service take over its employee retirement system and “operate it just like a private business.” Then, he told her this:

The second thing we need Congress to do is give us the authorization to eliminate Saturday delivery.

So, as the AP pointed out, it is unclear how Donahoe can do what he claims he is going to do in six months, unless, of course, the little general is planning a coup d’état.

In the mean time, the main fix for the Postal Service’s financial problems would be rather easy, were it not for Republicans in Congress. From the AP story:

The agency’s biggest problem — and the majority of the red ink in 2012 — was not due to reduced mail flow but rather to mounting mandatory costs for future retiree health benefits, which made up $11.1 billion of the losses. Without that and other related labor expenses, the mail agency sustained an operating loss of $2.4 billion, lower than the previous year.

The health payments are a requirement imposed by Congress in 2006 that the post office set aside $55 billion in an account to cover future medical costs for retirees. The idea was to put $5.5 billion a year into the account for 10 years. That’s $5.5 billion the post office doesn’t have.

No other government agency is required to make such a payment for future medical benefits. Postal authorities wanted Congress to address the issue last year, but lawmakers finished their session without getting it done. So officials are moving ahead to accelerate their own plan for cost-cutting.

Not only did Republicans in 2006 saddle the USPS with the onerous pre-funding of health benefits (for workers who haven’t even been born yet!), but Republicans refused to move and fix it at the end of last year.

The strangest thing about all of this to me—a member of and former activist in the National Association of Letter Carriers—a substantial percentage of union members (I estimate more than 50% here in Southwest Missouri) actually voted for the Republican Party that is standing in the way of actually fixing the Postal Service without killing it.

And that is not only a problem for the Postal Service, but a problem for the letter carriers union and for unions in general.



  1. LisaF

     /  February 6, 2013

    Go to the post office on a Saturday and there is not a parking spot to be found. The line is out the door because, as you point out, most people are off on Saturday. This change is just another nail in their coffin.

    This conservative attack on the Post Office has been happening since can remember, I remember listening to a tape of oil tycoon H. L. Hunt in the 40’s grumbling about privatizing the postal service. At this point, I can not help but think both parties are for privatization. It is the only thing that seems to get accomplished in the US. After all, not one House Democrat voted against the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act in 2006.

    Isn’t it odd how backwards we are. We scream about loosing out “liberty and freedom” if we can not buy every available gun on the planet but we do not care it a constitutional authorized agency is systematically destroyed.

    We need massive protests. I tell my local post office workers to name the place and I will be there. People do not understand this issue. UPS and Fed X do not deliver to all locations, only the post office does and you will never mail a letter for under $1 again if privatized.


    • Lisa,

      Excellent points.

      And speaking of UPS and FedEx, both of them stand to lose from the demise or slow disintegration of the Postal Service. According to one business news source, FedEx flies mail for the post office and that represents “around 60% of FedEx Express’s US domestic air freight revenue.” FedEx was the USPS’ number one supplier, to the tune of almost $1.5 billion. UPS supplied $102 million.

      Additionally, both UPS and FedEx use the Postal Service for the “last mile” of delivery. The link above includes this quote:

      30.4% of FedEx Ground shipments are delivered by the United States Postal Service.

      Think about that!  I remember standing on the post office dock many times when the UPS guy dropped off a pallet of packages for us to deliver.

      Finally, here is important and relevant information from the link above:

      Here’s Lauren T. Andrews, writing in the William & Mary Business Law Review:

      For example, the USPS is charged by governmental decree with providing universal service to all parts of the country, even in areas that may not be profitable. Private companies, on the other hand, can essentially ignore and avoid areas that may not be profitable, areas where they may otherwise be forced to serve if the postal monopolies were lifted and regulations put in place. Furthermore, companies such as UPS and FedEx would likely have no interest in the delivery of “letters,” primarily because it is not as profitable as larger parcel and package delivery. In fact, a UPS Spokesman, Norman Black, stated, “We believe that the government plays a role in terms of ensuring that every mailbox is reached every day …. That is not a responsibility that UPS would want.”

      And, not only would they not want it, David Hendel says they couldn’t do it.

      “Neither FedEx or UPS are even in the same league as the Postal Service, which goes to 100 million addresses every day,” he tells me. “What they do, they do well. But they don’t do what the Postal Service does.


  2. ansonburlingame

     /  February 6, 2013

    Some many comments I COULD make, but refrain for even trying.

    But…. here are two points.

    Whether or not the Postmaster General can legally stop Saturday mail delivery on his own is a legal point and I am sure will be argued in a court of law, where it should be so argued. I will defer to such future court decisions and ignore you “lawyers” herein arguing one way or the other on that point.

    More important however is how important is Saturday mail delivery in America today. Very few modern businesses rely on the USPS for time sensitive business documents any longer. They use other means now available thru new technology. So the real question seems to be is Saturday mail delivery a convience that many are used to or instead is it a matter of real NEED, particularly business needs.

    My wife for example is an online shopping “nut” and all of those packages come either by FedEx or UPS (not USPS). Most of it is “free” as well for her, or so say the ads!!!

    As for personal mail, how much of that mail that might no longer be delivered on Saturday and maybe later in the following week is something that average Americans simply cannot do without. They will still get the mail it will just take a little longer, a day or so it seems. There is NOTHING that I put “in a box” when I have to worry about how long it sits in that box, postal box I mean of course.

    I do not try to argue against a constitutionally mandated mail delivery service. But that service must change with the times, use modern technology to improve its service and not just be a traditional job shop for union workers, or non-union supervisors as well. It must be “run like a business”, like all government should be run. Government exists to SERVE, not just hire workers, needed or not!

    All you liberals want to “cut DOD spending” a lot. But I don’t hear you worrying about all those “military workers” that might be laid off or not “hired” in the future!!! There are more of “them” (military workers) than there are postal workers.

    As for a “$1 dollar a letter”, forget it. Hell I don’t like paying the current 43 cents or whatever it is. I use email almost exclusively for all my personal correspondence today like most Americans and I sure don’t need a “thank you note” on a Saturday if it costs $2 Billion to deliver it then!!



    • Anonymous

       /  February 7, 2013

      AB, I am not sure what to think of your response. It sounds as if your lone experience with a a union years ago has reared it’s ugly head again. Or is it you simply do not like the fact that Duane was a Postal Worker? Either way, your assessment that few “modern businesses” rely on the USPS seems very short sighted. What do you consider a modern business? Numerous small businesses in Joplin rely on USPS to pick up and deliver literally thousands of packages each week. Also, many newspapers and other publications rely on the USPS. Drug companies rely almost exclusively on the USPS. Many local companies request and rely on their advertisements being delivered specifically on Saturdays.
      In today’s copy of the USA Today groups such as Nat.Newspaper Ass., Ass. of Magazine Media, various publishers, Net Flix, Cadillac News, and others were mentioned and had comments of disappointment in the unilateral decision by the USPS to cease Saturday deliveries with such short notice. So, do you consider these to be not quite modern enough?
      Your mention of “you liberals” wanting to cut DOD spending makes absolutely no sense. You fail to mention that DOD spending is taken directly from tax dollars, while the USPS is funded from its revenue, not tax money. And as far as employing military personal, the USPS is the number one employer of Veterans. I find it ironic that someone that I assume had employment reliant on tax funds wants to see another government agency that is tax free destroyed. I say this based on past discussions from your defense type work.
      Lastly, I would challenge you to find one local business owner that could turn a profit while being forced by Congress to put 12% ( 5.6 B/ 67 B) of its revenue into an already OVERFUNDED pension fund (45 B) and not be allowed to touch it no matter what happens for 75 years! And then have to listen to these same Congressman say that the business is broken and incompetent. Congress has simply set up the USPS for failure so they can sell off the real estate that is worth much more than is being reported.
      Now, if you do not need the USPS, good for you. You and others that claim they do not need the USPS please remove the box from your house and both sides can get on with themselves.



  3. writer89

     /  February 6, 2013

    The Republicans know exactly what will happen when the USPS is finally forced out of business: The millions of cards and letters that people send every day for 45 cents (or is it 46 now?) will cost $5 or more to send by UPS or FedEx or DHL or any of the others. (Not everybody uses email or texting, or evne wants to.) Competition might bring that down a little, but without the regular mail routes that the USPS runs, it will be impossible to do it for anything even close to that price. So what happens? The same thing that happened when they allowed UPS and FedEx to cherry pick the most profitable package shipping functions of the USPS: Some big companies will make billions more in profits, and the people will pay for it.

    Hey, try getting the kid next door to deliver a note to somebody down the street for 45 cents! Ha! The Post Office, however, will deliver it to anywhere in the U.S. for that price. And they could make money doing it, too, if Congress would get off their backs. Republicans just can’t stand it if an actual government program is successful. The same with Medicare and Social Security. If people really understood how well these kinds of programs can work, they might start talking about nationalizing the energy industry or health care. Then were would their big corporate sponsors be? Huh?


  4. Treeske

     /  February 6, 2013

    We had medicine sent overnight from Neosho to Las Vegas; Fed X was $74:00, USPS:$18:00. Mailed noon, arrived LV 10:30 Am next day. No complaints with USPS!


  5. Anson, thanks for not protracting this derailment: “Some many comments I COULD make, but refrain for even trying.” Running Tab look forward to seeing new movie you in with Lone Ranger and big horse.

    I share Jesse Lichtenstein’s thoughts concerning the United States Postal Service:



  6. HR2309 proposed by Representative Darrell Issa is being pushed as a remedy to the problem Congress created with passage of HR6407
    Issa claims he is striving to save the USPS yet he is ignoring expenses that can be deleted without disrupting the service.
    #1. The Postal Accountable and Enhancement Act needs to be rescinded. In 2006 the PAEA signed by Bush, mandated that the USPS fund 75 years of retiree health benefits in 10.
    #2. Overpayments of 50 to 75 Billion the USPS made to the Civil Service RetirementService should be returned.
    #3. Overpayments the USPS made to FERS need to be retrieved.
    #4.The USPS needs to charge more for delivering UPS parcels to places UPS don’t.
    #5. Adjust the ratio of managers to workers.
    #6 Quit giving deep discounts to large businesses. Issa’s solution is to cut the workforce by at least 100,000, and make Postal Workers’ wages and benefits depend on a separate board when a contract isn’t agreed upon. This is a case where Issa’s cure would cause the death of the USPS as a public service and have it revived as a business with lower paid workers, higher rates and less service. .http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09ybkkiH2Ho


    • Well said, Paula. Why anybody would think Darrell Issa knows how to solve any problem is beyond me. I wouldn’t hire that chowderhead to shovel my driveway.


  7. ansonburlingame

     /  February 8, 2013


    I reply only to your comments because they are good points.

    Yes, USPS is a “business”, not a direct drain on tax dollars. Thus it should be run “like a business”. When revenues are less than costs, what do you expect any business to do?

    Now for pension funds. Why did Congress enact such legislation? It seems that Congress, exercising its democratic authority over a constitutionally mandated government “business” was concerned about the abiltiy of USPS to pay future pensions and thus…… But they did it democratically for sure, the “will of the people” if you will.

    IF the USPS is now solvent and the pension funds does not need such Congressional “protection” then there is no reason for Congress NOT to change the law, democratically. Some may agree or disagree, but that for the moment has little to do with Sat. mail delivery.

    Sat. mail delivery is a business decision trying hard to keep the business solvent under existing laws. This action has also been talked about for months, even years at this point and everyone has had a chance to get their oar in the water. Now barring Congressional action or a law suit, it seems likes a “businessman”, the Postmaster General, has made a decision.

    The basic objections raised by Duane to that decision are in two parts, it seems to me. One is he believes America NEEDS Sat. mail delivery. I disagree if such mail delivery costs $2 Billion a whack, money that will eventually come out of tax payer pockets if the USPS goes under as a business.

    But more important, the NEED for Sat mail delivery is not an argument to keep or hire more workers. That is a labor argument, we NEED something simply to keep workers employed.

    I heard exactly the same arguments in dealing with two unions long ago. We NEED something (or don’t WANT you to do something) because it will impact JOBS. I never looked on Rocky Flats and the employees for whom I was responsible there as a jobs shop. We had a far greater responsibiility, cleaning up and shutting down a nuclear mess, 8 miles from a major city.

    Inevitably, unions got in the way of such a “job” by demanding things on occassion that impeded “doing the job” as cost effectively and quickly as possible. So I have heard “Duane-like arguments” many times before. No I am not an expert on labor matters, but I do have some experience about trying hard to “get the job done”, just as it seems the Postmaster General is trying hard to do, today, and not allow USPS to go bankrupt under existing laws.

    I am in no way “anti-union” as a principle. But when unions use such arguments as above with the motive (at least as I see it) to “protect jobs”, well you can expect similar reactions from me all the time in any business/labor dispute. PROVE the business leader is making a bad business decision, and I will listen however, and sometimes take the “union side” as such. I have done such before without fanfare or major upheaval in the work place as well.



  8. Anonymous

     /  February 8, 2013

    AB, As far as the PMG making sound decisions, that seems debatable to me. The NALC has hired Ron Bloom, a Wall Streeter, to evaluate the USPS business model and to advise the NALC on whether or not the business was worth fighting for or not. I would urge you to read his writings on the USPS. His evaluation basically says that USPS management’s only answer is to destroy it’s own business, which seems strange to me. I f they destroy themselves, they destroy their own jobs.
    The NALC , on the other hand is offering ideas to grow the business, such as with advertising on vehicles and using postal vehicles to gather information while on duty for example. The USPS should stop giving its boxes away as well or charge a deposit to insure that they are used for postal mailings, not by other delivery companies. Yes , USPS GIVES its boxes away! Not a Union idea, that is for sure. Also, several years ago the NALC had offered a plan to eliminate all full time employees from working Saturdays and accomplishing Sat duties with part time employees. Of course, this was rejected by management.
    One area that I will credit the PMG is the fact that he has put the ball squarely in the hands of Congress, whom are the ones responsible for this mess. The Senate has passed a bill that somewhat takes care of the pension funding issue which is the number one problem facing the USPS today. The bill also evaluates the Sat delivery issue in 2014 to give businesses time to adjust.Congress has blocked this bi-partisan bill in favor of a more destructive bill. There is enough in this fund now to reach the 75 year goal if it simply makes 5%. Senator Bernie Sanders has made this evaluation., I have no reason to distrust him. You have to realize, since this payment was required there are more than 150,000 less employees, but the payment has not changed.
    One last thought. When discussing the USPS you need to forget all you may think you know about Unions. The USPS operates in a rather strange fashion. I truly believe that NALC President Fred Rolando could do a better job expanding postal revenues than the current regime operating the USPS now, or in the future. Cut and run is no way to run a business. The union cannot strike and has won several battles fairly through arbitration under his leadership. We do not hold the USPS over a barrel in other words.



    • Anonymous

       /  February 8, 2013

      AB, please realize that this 5.6 billion $ payment is paid to the Treasury Department. This is used by Congress to help balance its budgets, as this is added income. What business or organization could survive this? Answer- NO ONE! That is why they do not want to change it.



  9. ansonburlingame

     /  February 9, 2013


    Now you raise legitimate arguements over the ability of current “management” to effectively run the ‘business” of USPS. I don’t know enough about how the business is currently run to provide any valid critique, one way or the other, about such matters.

    Basically NALC is saying THEY can do a better job as managers than can the PMG and his team. Maybe, maybe not is my only input for now and I doubt I will get into the details to make a choice either way. Also it sounds as if NALC is suggesting an “employee owned company”, rule by committee of employees. Again, maybe, maybe not, in my view.

    The same would apply to the size of the pension fund contribution now demanded by Congress. I have no idea how the math works in this case and what the previous performance in managing the older pension fund setup was handled, or by whom.

    Both are details in the debate between PMG and NALC and certainly sound like many labor debates of older times…… Management is screwed up and we can do it better. Again, maybe, maybe not as far as I can tell.

    The only position that I take at this point is Sat mail delivery seems like a “nice to have” but not a mandate. And as stated before, simply arguing about jobs instead of the best way to run a business is a lame argument from labor, in my view.



  10. ansonburlingame

     /  February 9, 2013

    Kabe, again,

    Shortly after posting the above I read an AP article in today’s (Sat.) Globe providing some “numbers” related to USPS. Last quarter it LOST $1.1 Billion (compared to a loss of $3.3 Billion in same quarter of previous year). Additionally the “operating costs” were actually $100 Million below revenues, last quarter. The money that promoted the loss was due to payments for healthcare and pension funds.

    In other words if USPS as a business did not have to pay for HC and retirement, well it would make money. But the cost of such benefits drives the “company” into deficit financing.

    Does that sound familiar to current overall federal government “business”?

    As well, if you saw a previous graph related to USPS in the Globe from several days ago, it showed 1st Class mail dropping from some 230 (Billion?) letters per….. to about 159. In other words the “money making” part of USPS has gone down by some 35%-40% (or so). Yet I bet the USPS remains “staffed up” to handle the much larger volumn of 1st Class mail from previous years.

    No business can function very long with such a drop in the volumn of money making sections of the business and thus must adjust to reality of today, called the Internet in the case of USPS.



    • Anonymous

       /  February 9, 2013

      AB, As far as business dropping the fact that parcel business is up 15% gets lost in all this. You are right on in saying our current quarterly loss is directly from the unfair pension payments. As I have said, it is over funded and the schedule of payment amount needs to be lowered so the USPS can use these funds to pay their debts like any other business would.
      Staffing has been reduced on the workroom floor as far as union employees. As I have said, by over 150,000 employees. Now, the employee to management ratio is still an issue that needs to be addressed. It appears that it will be as they turn many small offices into part time jobs. These small offices are manned by Post Masters, not union workers.
      Lastly, Fred Rolando addressed some of us last year in Kansas City. This was during contract negotiations. He said that the PMG was on board with most of the language of contract issues-which included lower starting pay for new hires, but the PMG could not agree to anything because he was worried about being fired by the BOG. It appeared to me that the USPS was stalling until after the election when they thought they would have more leverage after the Republicans took control, which didn’t happen. The PMG to me has no real authority, he just carries out the will of this Congress, which is to destroy the USPS.



    • Anson,

      Although Kabe has addressed your criticisms quite well, I will add a few things to it, not mainly for your enlightenment (you don’t seem to be all that interested in the facts), but for others who might read the comment section.

      1. By statute (Postal Reorganization Act of 1970), the Postal Service is not a profit-making entity. Thus it cannot run like a traditional “business,” no matter how many times you assert it should. True, it has some attributes of a business, like entering into contracts and purchasing and selling property and other functions, but it is otherwise not a business. Related to that, please read this from Title 39, Section 101.1 of the United States Code:

      a) The United States Postal Service shall be operated as a basic and fundamental service provided to the people by the Government of the United States, authorized by the Constitution, created by Act of Congress, and supported by the people. The Postal Service shall have as its basic function the obligation to provide postal services to bind the Nation together through the personal, educational, literary, and business correspondence of the people. It shall provide prompt, reliable, and efficient services to patrons in all areas and shall render postal services to all communities. The costs of establishing and maintaining the Postal Service shall not be apportioned to impair the overall value of such service to the people.

      (b) The Postal Service shall provide a maximum degree of effective and regular postal services to rural areas, communities, and small towns where post offices are not self-sustaining. No small post office shall be closed solely for operating at a deficit, it being the specific intent of the Congress that effective postal services be insured to residents of both urban and rural communities.

      If you bothered to read just those two provisions, perhaps you might, I said might, be able to understand what those of us on this side are trying to say.

      2. You apparently don’t understand how outrageous the pre-funding issue is. It is unprecedented and it presents a burden on the USPS that, particularly in hard financial times, is crippling. If it weren’t for that issue, we wouldn’t even be having this exchange.

      3. Comparing what you did at Rocky Flats to the mission of the Postal Service is, well, ridiculous.

      4. No, you are not anti-union in principle, just in practice.



      • ansonburlingame

         /  February 11, 2013

        Reading the law, thank you for posting it, does not change my view. By your logic it is of course OK to run a deficit all the time in any federal agency providing a “service”. Legally, that is perhaps a good point.

        But it sure is not “wise government” to always run a deficit, particularly when the government revenue to operate comes directly from such services as the USPS is at least “suppose” to do.

        Your point on operating small post offices on deficit spending is of course sound reasoning for small post offices. But when the whole agency is going down the drain fianancially and may later have to be bailed out at taxpayer expense, then what is Congress suppose to do to prevent such from happening?

        Congressional dictates to ensure sound financial management is on the right track in my view. The broader debate however is now “over there”.



  11. ansonburlingame

     /  February 9, 2013


    Your only “unreasonablness” in this exchange in the continuing point of someone trying to destroy the USPS. I reject such intent, out of hand.

    I have decided to post a blog along these lines and have done so call Pension Fund Management. You may comment therein if you so choose so we don’t bore everyone else herein.



  12. Anonymous

     /  February 9, 2013

    AB, It is not unreasonable from an employee perspective. The PMG is going along step by step with those that want to do the most harm as possible to the USPS. The PMG rarely mentions the pension issue as the real problem for us, he stalled negotiations for political reasons. His “ideas” are in line with Rep Darryl Issa (CA) and Rep Dennis Ross (FL). Issa is responsible for the delays and blocking Bi -partisan legislation from going to a vote. There is no responsible explanation for doing this. I will take a look at your post.



  13. ansonburlingame

     /  February 11, 2013


    The debate has now shifted to my own blog, just in case anyone was wondering herein.

    But I do make this point. Listen to Jane’s Reaction views on military retirement, my militiary retirement, for example. I do not accuse him, her or it of trying to “destroy the militiary” however. Even she, him or it, is not THAT……!!



%d bloggers like this: