The NHS

As theTelegraphcorrectlypredicted, yesterday the Health Secretary admitted at the dispatch box that his personal crusade to change the Health Service was having the brakes applied by the Prime Minister. While most questioners on the government benches did their valiant best to support Mr Lansley, the most interesting intervention came from Stephen Dorrell, tory Chairman of the all-party Health Select Committee with counter proposals reported here.

The Government came badly unstuck when a BMA survey showed that doctors are "uncertain whether the benefits of the government's plans to reform the NHS in England outweigh the risks". When Liberal Democrats rebelled big changes were indicated. Others have now taken-up the fight including the campaigning group 38 Degrees encouraged by their success in the forestry sell-off campaign.

Why Mr Lansley thinks that GPs are best placed to spend £80 billion of tax payers money because 'they know their patients' is a mystery after many have spent years getting as remote from patients as possible with nurse-led clinics and 'out-of-hours' care handed to God knows who.  As for patient choice, if Mr Lansley wants to base the case for change on his personal experience, his is unlikely to be mirrored by others. How many patients have sufficient independent advice to be able to make a judgement and if they do, would they want to upset their GP by claiming to know better? Personal experience suggests not.

There are problems in the NHS but there is no mandate from the electorate for the major changes being proposed. For most people the NHS, despite its failings, is amongst the best of what is left of Great Britain. If not signalled in party manifestos major changes should be made only with all party agreement not driven through as part of a personal crusade.

Read More

Carry on nursing

Newspapers arereporting today that nurses have been banned from wearing outfits showing “excessive cleavage” or too much leg. Coming on top of constant reports of poor hygiene among nurses and medical staff one has to ask what has gone wrong with the nursing profession.

I confess that I found Susan Stephen sufficiently attractive in her regulation uniform without showing what was underneath but in my day, mystery had its own attraction. In my more advanced years I can also see that Joan Hickson, in her pre-Miss Marple days, had something about her in her starched apron and lace cap! Showing "excessive cleavage" would have been impossible in those regulation uniforms and the sight "too much leg" would certainly have been counter-balanced by the regulation black shoes nurses were obliged to wear.

From 2013 nurses will need a degree in a move that is is "aimed at improving patient care". What absolute twaddle. That is an insult to the older generation of nurses who entered the profession with a vocation to nurse and care for the sick. I have not spoken to one State Registered Nurse who trained on the ward who thinks patient care has improved since the system was changed. More stories like this appear inevitable unless nurses carry on nursing as they used to.

Postscript

An interesting account from the Telegraph here. Some of the comments are as good if not better than the article in highlighting the problems faced.

Read More

An Ordinariate in Wales (2)

Way back in December 2010 anyone interested in exploring the development of an Ordinariate in Wales was asked to register on a new blog. Since then, nothing! But it appears that the seeds planted may be about to germinate.

Before leaving for his Summer holiday, Fr Michael Gollop left this tantalising comment on his Blog:

"While the blog is quiet for the next few weeks, you could do worse than keep an eye on the Welsh Ordinariate site (link on the right). A usually reliable source tells me to expect some kind of announcement about future developments after the middle of the month. See you in September!"

In February 2010 the Telegraph's Damian Thompson published an article under the title "Why it doesn't matter if the Pope's Ordinariate for ex-Anglicans is small at first". Since then there have been many developments In England with those in Wales apparently left out in the cold. Perhaps things are about to change. From little acorns....!

As suggested, I for one shall be watching this space.

Read More

Living in the past?

The Telegraph reports that "The BBC's [Muslim] head of religion has accused the Church of England of "living in the past" and said that the corporation should not give Christianity preferential treatment".

Fortunate for him that he enjoys the hospitality of a Christian country and is able to express such views but 'Living in the past' is not something Church of England bishops can be justly accused of, nor for that matter the bishops of the Church in Wales where their Archbishop makes a habit of saying that the church has to be relevant to society today. So relevant in fact that they no longer have room for their so called "traditionalist" minorities.

But now the bishops have been caught with their cassocks up. They have been so busy making their church relevant to society that it is now regarded as even less relevant than it was before. No surprise there then.

Postscript

In his Blog the BBC's Head of Religion posted the following response to the Telegraph article:

"The Sunday Telegraph article quotes me as saying that the BBC should not give Christianity preferential treatment. The question I was actually asked was whether minority faiths should be treated differently from other faiths - to which I replied that all faiths should be treated in the same way and that I don't believe in treating any faith differently."

An interesting observation but does Aaquil Ahmed seriously believe that the faiths of 3% and less of the population should receive the same coverage as that of around 78% of the population?

The 2001 census figures illustrate the point:

Read More

Gay “Marriage”

Reports that Gay and Lesbian couples could soon be allowed to “marry” in church strike a wrong note. According to The Times, “senior bishops in the Lords have [said] that they will support an amendment to the Equality Bill next month that will lift the ban on civil partnership ceremonies in religious premises. The amendment would remove the legislative prohibition on blessings of homosexual couples and open the door to the registration of civil partnerships in churches, synagogues, mosques and all other religious premises.”

Advocates of change will be quick to point out that a blessing is not a marriage but that will not stop a blurring of the ceremonies. In June 2008 The Telegraph reported that two male Anglican priests exchanged vows and rings in a ceremony that was conducted using one of the church's most traditional wedding rites. The report continued, “Although some liberal clergy have carried out "blessing ceremonies" for homosexual couples in the past, this is the first time a vicar has performed a "wedding ceremony", using a traditional marriage liturgy, with readings, hymns and a Eucharist.”

The introduction of civil partnerships righted a serious wrong but that is what they are. To blur the distinction between a civil partnership and a religious ceremony in which marriage is proclaimed in the Anglican Marriage Service Preface as “the foundation of family life in which children are born and nurtured” is nonsense. Civil partners “in good times and in bad, may find strength, companionship and comfort, and grow to maturity in love” but they are not “married”.

Read More

England Expects

According to The Telegraph it appeared that even in defeat England were the winners in the 2010 Six Nations climax in Paris on Saturday “taking the shine off France’s grand slam triumph”. Of course victory would have been complete if the referee had been on England’s side too - and let’s not forget the rain unfairly falling as it was only on the English to disadvantage them. Martin Johnson did his best to sort out the referee at half time but to no avail and his second bite after the final whistle was a late run.

With fifteen players on the pitch, equivalent to sixteen or even seventeen when ‘St.’ Jonny is on, plus three in the studio and, most important of all, the two commentators, Eddie (surely I'm English) Butler and Brian (only my opinion counts) Moore something went badly wrong. Could it be that the French didn’t understand that the English have a divine right to win?

During the 2010 tournament there have been many fine tributes to the voice of rugby, the late Bill McLaren. Did fair play die with him? Whilst naturally wanting our home team to win, a good game was more important. This was evident in Bill’s commentary. Saturday’s match was the complete opposite. It was ruined by one-sided, self opinionated drivel. It’s time for the two stooges to go.

Read More

They’re Off

On 6th May 2010 we will be asked to elect a new House of Commons consisting of 650 honest and true members, up from the current mainly honest and true 646 members. Of those currently sitting, 144 (22%) will not be seeking re-election, an unusually high number, some through disgrace, some taking the opportunity to secure attractive redundancy payments before a likely reduction, and others who have become completely brassed off with the whole thing.

Much has been made of the ‘expenses in lieu of pay’ problem. An interesting historical perspective on this appeared in the Telegraph in November 2009: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/6629911/MPs-expenses-system-created-in-pact-between-Thatchers-ministers-and-Opposition.html

But we the public must take our share of responsibility too. If we were to accept the advice of independent panels set up to consider fair and reasonable remunerations for people in public life instead of giving way to political expediency resulting in changes which, by definition, are less than fair we should avoid many of the troubles we find ourselves in. The ‘What’s in it for me?’ brigade will continue to howl their protests but politics should be about the common good not narrow self interest. A system that is open and fair must benefit us all in the long run avoiding the sort of mess we find ourselves in now.

Read More

Leaders Debate, Round 2

This time I watched the debate on the TV ? Until my wife found me dozing and transferred me to the computer. I don?T think I missed much so I was surprised at the result of the first poll for the Sun showing that Cameron was the clear winner with 36% of the votes, a result not sustained in other polls I should add. This time I thought the combatants more evenly matched indicating that there had been much hard work in the background since last week.

Again I thought the debate illuminating, not for what was said, but watching the facial expressions and body language when the leaders were not speaking. I thought Cameron looked the least confident, though much better than last week, while Clegg looked the most assured and Brown rather awkward. Most of the audience looked bored stiff with one member desperately trying to conceal a huge yawn.

The ?Get Clegg? Campaign fell badly after the Telegraph?S shameful attempted smear with ?Twitters? Picking up the thread and blaming Clegg for everything from the death of Kennedy to responsibility for Samantha?S pregnancy. The desperation of the press may be explained by David Yelland, a former editor of the Sun, who explained that previously the Liberal Democrats were deliberately ignored by the press.

Yelland said, ?Make no mistake, if the Liberal Democrats actually won the election ? Or held the balance of power ? It would be the first time in decades that Murdoch was locked out of British politics. In so many ways, a vote for the Lib Dems is a vote against Murdoch and the media elite.? Hmmm!

Postscript

More than 100 viewers have complained to the broadcasting regulator (Ofcom) accusing the debate Moderator (Sky News political editor Adam Boulton) of breaking strict impartiality rules by raising newspaper reports about political donations paid directly into the Liberal Democrat leader's bank account. There is no suggestion Clegg broke any rules and bank statements were produced to prove it.

Boulton -> Sky -> Murdoch - Hmmm again!

There's another interesting take on the broadcast in this Blog: http://www.Craigmurray.Org.Uk/archives/2010/04/sky_leaders_deb.Html

PPS

http://www.Bbc.Co.Uk/blogs/newsnight/michaelcrick/2010/04/polling.Html

- Hmmm yet again.

Read More

A sense of proportion

Righteous indignation has greeted the Foreign Office memo which suggested some outrageous activities for the Pope during his forthcoming visit to Great Britain in September but from the coverage by the BBC one would have thought it were Government policy rather than the silly ideas of a junior official produced in a brainstorming session.

The ideas were not very bright especially coming from an Oxford graduate but neither was the idea of circulating the memo which appeared to give it greater credence nor the decision by The Sunday Telegraph to publish it. However, brainstorming sessions force sometimes apparently ridiculous ideas into the open for consideration although on this occasion it should have been obvious that some of them would be considered gratuitously offensive. But to talk of the Pope cancelling his visit over the issue as suggested in the press goes too far. As the Vicar of Christ on Earth, the Pope will be well aware of the wounds people suffer for their faith.

Read More

Muslim Extremist Outrage

In The Telegraph today:

http://www.Telegraph.Co.Uk/news/uknews/crime/7657600/Muslim-walks-free-as-court-told-Osama-bin-Laden-graffiti-not-religiously-motivated.Html

It is intolerable that brave heroes who gave their lives for our freedom should have their memorial treated with such utter contempt. The freedom they died for was not to allow extremists to do as they please but that we should enjoy freedom from extremists.

If the law is inadequate it needs to be changed and quickly.

Read More

Campaign castrated

Before dinner I was watching the George Alagiah show at 6 o?Clock on BBC1. He referred to today?S Gordon Brown ?Bigot? Gaffe four times. First in his preamble, then in the main story which was again summarised after the mid-show break (during which gesticulating George as the star of the show shuffles and sometimes signs his papers, pretending that he is not reading the idiot board), then finally in his closing summary. This from the BBC which the Right claim has a Left wing bias!

Having dealt reasonably deftly with a chance encounter with a certain Mrs Duffy, she and Mr Brown went their separate ways on good terms. Mr Brown climbed into his official car with his microphone inadvertently switched on and effectively castrated his new ?Communicating with the people? Campaign with a careless aside made in private, so he thought.

One might argue over whether the Prime Minister should have made such comments but leaving that aside, what did broadcasting a private conversation achieve? The effect on Mrs Duffy being forced to listen to hurtful comments eagerly egged on by one of Murdoch?S Sky reporters was devastating judging from her televised reaction. A struggling widow concerned about the future of her grandchildren, she had been justifiably pleased that she had done her best for them by expressing her concerns directly to the Prime Minister. Now she is left dazed at the centre of a media scrum with policemen guarding her door.

As ever The Telegraph has been at the forefront reminding the public of previous gaffs by public figures but let’s face it, many of us make comments which we wouldn’t want broadcast, sometimes in vain attempts at humour, other times out of sheer annoyance just to let off steam. Things said in the heat of the moment rarely add anything meaningful to debate. The issues remain the same and, in this instance, with the same question: Who is best placed to sort out the problems we all face? If it were Gordon Brown (I am not suggesting that he is) what service has been provided by divulging information that should have remained private? We are no wiser, nothing has been solved and a poor widow has been reduced from elation to despair. What a good show!

Round dua

From yesterday's Fabian Society Blog, Next Left:

"The Sun's political editor has been reported saying "It is my job to see that Cameron ****ing well gets into Downing Street?.Despite earlier rumours, BBC political editor Nick Robinson has suggested tonight that The Sun did not, after discussions, buy the story or any exclusive interview with Mrs Gillian Duffy after today's political storm after Gordon Brown's insult, because they did not think it was "interesting" enough."

Need one say more?

Read More

Turn the Other Cheek David

While The Daily Telegraph continues to take its few pieces of silver for disclosing what it judges to be wrongdoing, there is news from The Guardian that David Laws could play an informal role in advising Danny Alexander who replaced him as Chief Secretary to the Treasury. Good news indeed putting our recovery above self and a good lesson for The Daily Telegraph as it continues to put profit above the stability of the coalition Government in its struggle to put the country back on its feet.

This solution was first suggested to me by an old friend after The Telegraph ran its story but I thought the notion too unlikely an outcome. The idea has many attractions not least for David Laws who has been considering whether to stand down as an MP. That would be disastrous not only for his supportive constituents but also for himself in losing a second chance of an input to the job he felt called to do.

If he goes the country will the loser. He made no profit from his financial arrangements, in fact the tax payer could have paid out more if other arrangements had been made, and he was not living in a partnership in the way the rules were drafted. As ever in this country people are so obsessed with what others do in the bedroom that they are blind to the important things in life.

David Law’s resignation speech was a model of integrity. If he can be persuaded to turn the other cheek and stay on as an advisor the slap would be felt by his accusers.

Read More

Bedroom Farce

Pity poor David Laws, the latest victim of British stone throwing.

He sacrificed a lucrative career as a city banker for public service. In doing so has become the latest victim of the Thatcher government?S MPs Expenses scheme. The rules were open to interpretation and many MPs have already paid the price. In a statement Laws said "At no point did I consider myself to be in breach of the rules which in 2009 defined partner as "one of a couple ... Who although not married to each-other or civil partners are living together and treat each-other as spousesdanquot;.

Those with the great British gift of hindsight are already screaming for his scalp but here is a man with a Cambridge double first in economics and top level experience in the financial sector who was admired on both sides of the House for the mastery of his brief in the Queen?S Speech debate. In a time of severe national crisis should we sacrifice a highly competent Chief Secretary in response to another journalistic scoop by The Telegraph over a technicality? If the same attitude had prevailed during the war no doubt Churchill would have been ousted.

Any doubt over the interpretation of the rules could have been sorted out by having a quiet word to resolve the matter without its sensationalist accompaniment. In their exposure The Daily Telegraph claimed that there was no intention to disclose Mr Laws' sexuality, but in a statement issued in response to questions from this newspaper, the minister chose to disclose this fact?. How very noble of them.

Postscript

So David Laws has resigned with honour and humility, a lesson not just for the Telegraph but for us all:

http://news.Bbc.Co.Uk/1/hi/uk/10191673.Stm

Read More

“One Church, one Faith, one Lord”

In my youth, our church choir used to sing the last line of each verse of Thy hand, O God, has guided, with great gusto: “one Church, one Faith, one Lord”, lingering lovingly on those last words.

The fifth verse said much:

And we, shall we be faithless?

Shall hearts fail, hands hang down?

Shall we evade the conflict,

and cast away our crown?

Not so: in God’s deep counsels

some better thing is stored:

we will maintain unflinching,

one Church, one Faith, one Lord.

Reports from Wales indicate that their politically obsessed Archbishop is to dine out in celebration of inter-faith dialogue "aimed at promoting understanding and tolerance across the country in the wake of international terrorism fears."

http://www.churchinwales.org.uk/dynamic/press_releases/display_press_release.php?prid=4955

Our church is dying while her leaders play politics. Faith needs to be nurtured; it is much more than a history lesson. Our ministers both sacred and secular must act quickly before it becomes no Church, no faith, one Lord.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Legendry101#p/a/F374EFA5EB9DCAD5/0/WtZ5JrDd8OE

The Church’s one foundation

is Jesus Christ, her Lord;

she is his new creation’

by water and the word;

from heaven he came and sought her

to be his holy bride,

with his own blood he bought her,

and for her life he died.

In some predominately Muslim schools mentioning Jesus is now regarded as unacceptable. The God of Abraham has to be the same God for Jews, Christians and Muslim or there would be three gods so if “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” why do we deny that truth by not proclaiming the Christian message? As another hymn aptly puts it:

Tolerance and understanding are fine but we are not all playing by the same rules. Christianity is being undermined in our own country.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/7805772/Schools-failing-to-teach-children-the-core-beliefs-of-Christianity-says-Ofsted.html

Rather than ‘maintain our church unflinching’, the Anglican church has become irrelevant to most British people except for rites of passage. Ecumenism has given way to inter-faith dialogue while Christians are persecuted abroad. Our tolerance has become our undoing. From The Telegraph: “In non-faith state schools, Christian assemblies are being dropped in favour of multi-faith worship, despite a legal requirement for Christian collective worship, and children are no longer taught the Lord's Prayer” according to an Ofsted report:

Read More

The Telegraph Fiddles while Britain Burns

How much more expenses poison will The Telegraph drip-feed in its attempt to kill off ministers and derail the coalition Government’s attempts to sort out our economic mess? Not satisfied with getting rid of possibly the best person for the job they are now after his successor. Who next? We must draw a line under the expenses saga.

If The Telegraph has evidence of wrong doing why have they held it back? We need to move on. If there are further stories which they think the public should know about, keep them until the economy is back on its feet. Then they can try to recoup the £110,000 they reportedly paid through a middle-man to the mole who illegally obtained the stolen data on MPs expenses.

Happy to profit from their stolen goods I heard one Telegraph columnist on Sky News suggest that they couldn’t not print a good story. Why? There are precedents, the Duke of Windsor’s affair and Churchill’s drinking to name but two. This is not to cover up wrong doing but to see the broader picture. We are at war with our financial crisis but the small minded in our midst continue to look at the minutia. Let’s have a sense of proportion please.

Read More

We were warned!

Back in 2008, the then Bishop of Rochester, the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, created a bit of a stir when he claimed that "Islamic extremists have created "no-godanquot; zones across Britain where it is too dangerous for non-Muslims to enter". Some agreed while others differed to the point of rubbishing his remarks, most notably the Muslim Council of Britain. From the evidence presented in a recent French TV broadcast, Bishop Nazir-Ali was correct in his warning.

Although I am not familiar with the London Borough of Tower Hamlets itself, I have no reason to think that the programme was biased. Other media coverage, particularly of the Mayoral election process, highlights worrying influences. More information can easily be found on the internet, including a reference to "the loathsome Andrew Gilligan" indicating the amount of politicking involved there. Manipulation for political advantage aside, the more one reads, the uglier it looks with echoes of the reference to taqiyya in the video highlighted in my previous post.

Bishop Nazir-Ali, the only Asian bishop in the Church of England, warned in The Telegraph "that attempts are being made to give Britain an increasingly Islamic character by introducing the call to prayer and wider use of Sharia law, a legal system based on the Koran." Looking around I see plenty of evidence to support his view from the now familiar Muslim dress and occupation of redundant churches and chapels to the defence of their faith at the cost of others. Is that a sign of our religious tolerance or our complacency?

Link (Note the first comment). Link2 (Blog) Link3 (Video)

Read More

Sorry Your Grace

My next Blog entry was to have been a tale of the 'Three Wise Persons' travelling from the East to the land of His Darkness to sort out the troubles that Ab Rowan's sidekick has created there but that will have to wait, although in reality the stories are not unrelated. It's all about women in the Anglican church today or, as my wife prefers, 'some' women.

Ab Rowan ruined my dinner this evening. My wife seethed throughout after reading the Telegraph article 'Women bishops would humanise priesthood'. As Pope Benedict remarked recently there are good fish and bad fish but it hadn't occurred to either of us that the priesthood was 'inhuman'. Such talk encourages false accusations of misogyny when in fact many women are against women's ordination.

A great admirer of Rowan's spirituality her final comment as I went to wash the dishes was, "Rowan has lost me. I have been unhappy for a while but this is the end; he should return to academia." A noted disciple of Dostoevsky, The Observer Review section carried this comment in Ab Rowan's review of Philip Pullman'sThe good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ. "Alluding to Dostoevsky's point that 'Jesus was too radical for ordinary human consumption, and for his memory to survive at all, you have to lie about him". I am not suggesting that His Grace lies about Jesus but is he following the Jesus of 'ordinary humans'  or some academic person moulded to fit current fashion ?

Read More

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Photo: PA/EPA

This weekend the Archbishop of Canterbury hopes to meet President Robert Mugabe to discuss the ugly situation in Zambia. The difficulties Archbishop Rowan face were highlighted in aTelegraph article on 30 September.

The former Anglican bishop Nolbert Kunonga has his own way of doing things in the name of the lord, not Our Lord, but Robert Mugabe, a Roman Catholic! Pope Benedict XVI rightly remarked "the church is a net of the Lord which pulls in good fish and bad fish". Apparently dying of prostate cancer Mr Mugabe shows no sign of softening his stance before he meets his maker.

Nice try Rowan but be prepared for yet another disappointment unless the president is called much earlier than his prognosis suggests.

Read More

Head in the clouds?

As the Telegraph rightly reported, the 'last-minute' conference speech change on "households paying off their credit card debt" was an embarrassment" but not the only embarrassment for the Prime Minister as he appeared for his keynotespeech at their Party conference in a cross-wire against a backdrop showing him with his head in the clouds.

When the average food bill for couple is £60 a week and the PM's wife turns up wearing an outfit in which just the trousers cost £89, is it surprising that someone with no concept of living within his means could come up with the idea of slowing the economy even further by people spending even less - if they could!

In her Telegraph piece Janet Daley appeared to muddle her headline: "David Cameron shows his leadership – with just a hint of the PR man showing through". For me it wasn't 'just a hint of the PR man showing through' it was the complete PR man showing through and with the conference slogan "Leadership for a better future" it looks more like "No leadership, no future!". The image of a man trying to sell me a time-share in Spain was inescapable and that's not just my opinion.Here is the verdict of four top writers.

Read More

Political correctness gone mad.

"Happy Christmas Holiday Thomas!" This is the latest effort of those who prefer to call persons chairs and make everyone feel thoroughly guilty if they don't conform to their overbearingly harsh regime of political correctness.

I missed an earlierreport in the Telegraph which broke the news that the television company which is recording new adventures of Thomas the Tank Engine is re-branding Christmas as "the holidays" to comply with “politically correct” thinking.

The fact that the creator of Thomas the Tank Engine was a priest who said that he was a clergyman first and a children's author second would have little effect on persons who regard political correctness as all. This comes on the top of a bizarre decision by the BBC to drop BC and AD in favour of the non-Christian, BCE and CE – Before Common Era and Common Era.

Irritating as these stories are, for pure crassness the pulpit storming, Peter Tatchell takes the biscuit. In a piece for the Guardian he writes:

"How would you feel if the government banned black people from getting married and made them register their relationships through a separate system called civil partnerships? Most of us would condemn it as racist to have different laws for black and white people. Well, black couples are not banned from marriage but lesbian and gay couples are. We are fobbed off with civil partnerships."

Also, "Don't get me wrong, civil partnerships are an important advance. But they are not equality. Separate laws are not equal laws. Civil partnerships are a sah form of sexual apartheid. They create a two-tier system of partnership recognition: one law for heterosexuals (civil marriage) and another for same-sex couples (civil partnership)."

I guess this all started because our way of life irritated feminists, then Islamists, now LGTB and so on. If I were an Islamist, feminist, lesbian I may be happy but being none of them, like many others I am becoming more and more irritated by these PC persons. I regard civil partnerships as a sensible levelling for those in stable relationships outside marriage and to condemn them as the sexual apartheid of racists is a new low in political correctness but they want it only their way, never mind the rest of us, including children used to looking forward to their Christmas stories.

Read More