Winning, Losing and Uncle Toms.

It should come as no surprise that Jalen Rose was capable of getting under the skin of longtime rival Grant Hill, especially after he admitted in ESPN’s highly-rated “Fab 5″ documentary that he was “a student of trash talk.”

No, the surprise is that the 38-year-old Hill fell for the bait set out for him by the 18-year-old Rose. In a column posted on The New York Times’ Web site today, Hill responded sharply to an unlearned and unfulfilled teenage foe who no longer exists:

I should have guessed there was something regrettable in the documentary when I received a Twitter apology from Jalen before its premiere. I am aware Jalen has gone to some length to explain his remarks about my family in numerous interviews, so I believe he has some admiration for them.

In his garbled but sweeping comment that Duke recruits only “black players that were ‘Uncle Toms,’ ” Jalen seems to change the usual meaning of those very vitriolic words into his own meaning, i.e., blacks from two-parent, middle-class families.

That would be a salient point, if Jalen Rose still felt that way about Grant Hill and had said as much.

But no, what Rose actually said was:

“For me, Duke was personal. I hated Duke and I hated everything I felt Duke stood for. Schools like Duke didn’t recruit players like me. I felt like they only recruited black players that were Uncle Toms.

“I was jealous of Grant Hill. He came from a great black family, congratulations. Your mom went to college and was roommates with Hillary Clinton. Your dad played in the NFL, is a very well-spoken and successful man. I was upset and bitter that my mom had to bust her hump for 20-plus years. I was bitter that I had a professional athlete that was my father that I didn’t know.”

Notice the usage of past tense there. Was. Hated. Felt. Were. Over and over again.

It should be relatively clear that Rose – and his other freshman Michigan teammates – was reflecting on the beliefs of a teenage boy who was jealous of all the trappings of Hill’s upbringing.

In that context, Rose was only being honest and, in many ways, vulnerable. But who among us didn’t have to shed some distasteful convictions as we aged into adulthood? Or maybe even as recently as a couple weeks ago? *raises hand* *raises both of them*

So now that Hill unburdened himself of this baggage and conquered his rival again, maybe someone should tell him that he won. In fact, he even tells us himself near the end of his polemic – “I am proud of my family. I am proud of my Duke championships and all my Duke teammates. And, I am proud I never lost a game against the Fab Five.”

Good for him.

But beyond that one-sided duel, it’s instructive to note the backlash Rose has receieved for merely opening up about an immature moment of his life.

What Rose did took a lot of guts, particularly someone with a cushy gig as a basketball commentator on ESPN.  He had nothing to gain by being honest in that spot. And for that, Rose was rewarded with censure from some of the usual suspects and some new ones and several days of debate about nothing related to his riveting documentary.

It reminds me of Shirley Sherrod, whose honesty about her old racial biases was rewarded with immediate dismissal from her job and days of embarrassment and unflattering publicity.

It’s enough to make me wonder about the cost of being honest. Rose is a tough kid from Detroit, and he’ll tell you so. I doubt that he’ll be silenced going forward.

What about the rest of us? Any open dialogue about race and class going forward would require honesty, right?

But some people don’t want to know why Jalen felt the way that he did. They just know that he was wrong.That he was ignorant.

What he feels about Grant Hill today doesn’t seem to matter much.

As a result, Hill’s victories over Rose ring especially hollow. Because the rest of us lose too.

44 comments to Winning, Losing and Uncle Toms.

  • If there was a Duke documentary where Grant Hill thought that Jalen Rose and the Fab Five were “thugs” or “hoodlums,” I wonder if there would be the same backlash.

  • MH8D

    I think that Grant Hill’s reply was very powerful and also necessary. It was intelligent and classy, but he also twisted the knife inside of Jalen’s wound at the end when he mentioned never losing to the fab five – I love that part.
    I don’t think that Hill wrote his rebuttal for people like you, me, or himself; people who understand that Jalen Rose’s derogatory remarks were made a lifetime ago by an immature kid with a chip on his shoulder and an under-developed view of the world.
    I believe that Grant Hill’s statement was meant to provide a counterpoint and to inform less perceptive and less thoughtful people (the gross majority) who saw the documentary on Sunday. People who heard Jalen Rose’s words from back then, and maybe took them to heart as fact.
    Most people heard what they heard on Sunday night, so regardless of when the statements were actually made or how Jalen Rose may have matured over the years since, that ‘bell’ was rung, loud and clear.
    I think it was important for Grant Hill to offer his thoughts on the topic, especially for the black kids who may have watched the show and are inclined to agree with Jalen’s ‘uncle tom’ sentiments with regard to educated, affluent, or socially conservative black Americans.
    Instead of just letting Jalen’s statement go unchecked, he (very eloquently) explained that traditional family values, education, and prosperity are ALSO a part of the black American experience, it’s certainly nothing to be ashamed of, and yes, YOU can have it too. It is not required of a black man to go through life as a willfully ignorant malcontent and outsider. There is another way to live and choosing to do so doesn’t make you any less ‘authentic’ as a black man.

    • blackink

      So was the part where he “twisted the knife in Jalen’s wound” the classy part?

      And explain to me what traditional family values are, please?

      Because I would actually find it much more offensive that Grant Hill found it necessary to explain that, hey, “black people are people too! We get married and go to school and do respectable things and everything!”

      Who is he explaining himself to? Why would he feel the need to defend the humanity of black people?

      I’d rather him have been mad about being called a bitch.

      • Because I would actually find it much more offensive that Grant Hill found it necessary to explain that, hey, “black people are people too! We get married and go to school and do respectable things and everything!”

        CTFU. (also: church.)

      • MH8D

        Traditional family values are: man, woman, marriage, home, and children – assembled in that order… Are you really not familiar with this, or are you trying to segue into some point about how ‘other kinds of families are families, too’?

        I don’t know that he’s explaining himself to anyone in particular, rather taking the opportunity while people are paying attention to make a public statement from his perspective, because the idea that black people do not ‘get married, go to school, and do respectable things’ is already pretty popular.

        • blackink12

          If that’s true, that’s a pretty f*cking disgusting point to make. It’s obvious and self-evident. We can’t waste time arguing our humanity with folks anymore. Why reward that level of ignorance with attention?

          So if what you believe is true, that would make me even more disappointed in Grant Hill. He fell for the okey-doke.

          And beyond that: he needed 18-year-old Jalen Rose to make that point? He wasn’t skillful enough to do it on his own, without prompting from a documentary that wasn’t even really about him?

          Pretty weak.

          And you hit the nail on the head in regards to my point about traditional family values.

          • MH8D

            You are right, we shouldn’t have to argue our humanity anymore. It would be nice to think that kind of ignorance no longer existed, but it does.
            I think that you are attributing motives to Grant Hill that may not actually exist. Grant Hill felt as though that needed to be said, so he said it. I don’t see where he’s wrong.
            I have read things on this very website complaining about the one-dimensional, shallow, ignorant portrayals of Black Americans and our culture in the media, so I just don’t get why it is so preposterous to you that Grant Hill would feel the need to make this statement, and why it didn’t hurt for him to do so.

            • blackink12

              Actually, *you* were the one who ascribed motives to him. And if those motives you attributed to him are true, then I find them problematic.

              My take on it is that what he said was petty, defensive, trite and, well, very obdurate. And he still doesn’t appear to have a good grasp on the past tense. So you don’t see where that’s wrong, but I do.

              And this post is my singular take on the issue. The writers for PB aren’t part of the same hive mind.

          • MH8D

            And that level of ignorance doesn’t just exist outside of our race with outsiders who hate us, it also persists in the minds of many of our own kind, to their own detriment; and it can be a disservice to us all, on occasion.

            • blackink12

              So? What makes that – us – so different from anyone else?

              Do we need to argue with every fool with an outlet about our humanity?

    • i’m not surprised that people empathize with Grant Hill, but it’s kind of amazing how people are misreading Rose’s comments. There’s almost no way to watch what Rose said, in context, and come away with the idea that his feelings at 18-19 were his feelings now.

      I believe that Grant Hill’s statement was meant to provide a counterpoint and to inform less perceptive and less thoughtful people (the gross majority) who saw the documentary on Sunday. People who heard Jalen Rose’s words from back then, and maybe took them to heart as fact.


      I think it was important for Grant Hill to offer his thoughts on the topic, especially for the black kids who may have watched the show and are inclined to agree with Jalen’s ‘uncle tom’ sentiments with regard to educated, affluent, or socially conservative black Americans.

      first: are we reading the same essay from Grant Hill? because his whole some-of-my-best-mentors-were-influential-black-intellectuals bit seemed pretty defensive and unnecessary, like he had to shore up his Negro bona fides. Hit dogs will holler. (also, “socially conservative”? huh?) Seriously, Grant Hill responds to Rose’s comments with a defensive rant in the New York Times that willfully decontextualized Rose’s statements and he’s the one being “thoughtful” and “classy”? come on.

      Here’s what’s annoying about this reading…Hill’s essay wasn’t all that “eloquent” or “smart.” (“My teammates at Duke — all of them, black and white — were a band of brothers who came together to play at the highest level for the best coach in basketball.”Word? Really?) Indeed, the use of those particular set of words up and down this conversation sort of illustrates a bunch of important points about race, class and how they inform our perception of folks. Grant Hill — who crossed people over, dunked on centers, and glared at them afterward — is not characterized as some brash, arrogant dude the way Rose et al were characterized, and never has been. His upbringing and matriculation at Duke created this simplistic narrative about him as some bookish, upstanding citizen. And I’m not saying he isn’t. But this is the way all Duke players are characterized: smart, responsible dudes with “high basketball IQs” who play the game “the right way.” Now, Duke happens to be a selective, very white college with a reputation for attracting rich kids. Do you think this characterization of its basketball players as “smart” and “upstanding” and “hard-working” — and Grant Hill’s generally agreed-upon status as that kind of guy — is just coincidence?

      • MH8D

        I didn’t use the term socially conservative with respect to Grant Hill in particular. There are some black people who think it is a shameful thing to accept handouts in the form of public housing, welfare, food stamps, etc.; who believe that you need to get a job and get married before you start having children; people who believe that the old-fashioned social customs have some actual constructive and beneficial purpose beyond arbitrarily encroaching on peoples’ personal freedoms and individuality… People like my grandparents.

        And I don’t think that Grant Hill is smart and upstanding because he went to Duke – I’m a bit insulted that anyone would think that my thought process is that simple… I think that Grant Hill’s statement was indeed thoughtful and classy because he didn’t use name-calling and ignorant generalizations, which comprised the grand total of what Jalen Rose said.

        Perhaps ‘eloquent’ was a shade too strong, but I stand by it, because I think that Grant Hill’s statement was well written, logical, concise, and poignant.

        And how does his remark about ‘playing at the highest level for the best coach in basketball’ cheapen the statement in any way? I was never a Duke fan, in fact I always hated Duke, I loved the Fab Five team, and I actually cried tears when Michigan lost the title game that night years ago. I may not personally agree with Grant Hill’s estimation of his team, but having won the national championship that year, Grant Hill has room to make that assertion. What evidence can you, or I present to suggest that they were not playing at the highest level and that Kryzewski was not the best coach in college basketball, at that particular time?

        • I didn’t use the term socially conservative with respect to Grant Hill in particular. There are some black people who think it is a shameful thing to accept handouts in the form of public housing, welfare, food stamps, etc.; who believe that you need to get a job and get married before you start having children; people who believe that the old-fashioned social customs have some actual constructive and beneficial purpose beyond arbitrarily encroaching on peoples’ personal freedoms and individuality… People like my grandparents.

          Oh, i see. so that wasn’t germane to the convo. you just wanted to strawman. Got it.

          And how does his remark about ‘playing at the highest level for the best coach in basketball’ cheapen the statement in any way? I was never a Duke fan, in fact I always hated Duke, I loved the Fab Five team, and I actually cried tears when Michigan lost the title game that night years ago. I may not personally agree with Grant Hill’s estimation of his team, but having won the national championship that year, Grant Hill has room to make that assertion. What evidence can you, or I present to suggest that they were not playing at the highest level and that Kryzewski was not the best coach in college basketball, at that particular time?

          My response wasn’t a qualitative estimation of those Duke teams so much as it was rolling my eyes at the assertion that this sixth-grade tripe is “eloquent.”

  • I agree with MH8D. My sense was that Hill’s comments were not so much directed at Rose as seized as a moment to unsettle the presumption that the only real black folks who struggle are in single-parent, working-class families. Do we need to replay Chappelle’s “When Keeping it Real Goes Wrong,” to remind everyone that too staunch an adherence to this street-code in all situations can have detrimental consequences?

    There is a problem in black popular culture in which (especially for black men), middle-classness starts a domino effect. A bourgie man is not hood; which means he’s not really black; which means he’s not really a man; which means he’s gay, impotent, and a sell-out all at once. This link of associations has become all but automatic, and it undergirds very popular characters from Carlton on the Fresh Prince to Tom DuBois on the Boondocks. It’s ridiculous and it needs to stop, because it’s making the bar ridiculously high in the macho stakes. And that’s not good for anybody because violence is one of the main ways to establish this kind of street cred.

    • April

      Jalen Rose never argued that “the only real black folks who struggle are in single-parent, working-class families.” Hill’s post was not framed as a general argument for the diversity of black life; it was framed specifically as a response to Rose. So basically, Hill’s entire post was attacking a straw man, which, by definition, isn’t eloquent.

    • April

      Also, I seriously doubt Grant Hill was responding out of some great concern for black culture. He was just butthurt.

      • I thank you for your responses. They’ve encouraged me to look deeper into the controversy.

        As part of that, I read more of MH8D’s advocacy in this thread and elsewhere of traditional families–he seems not to realize that the model where the father goes out to work and the mother raises babies and makes dinner is arguably more of a modern European imposition on indigenous cultures than the building block of society since time immemorial. Therefore, I’m also going to have to downgrade my agreement with him from whole-hearted to provisional.

        But back to your comments: I take your point that Jalen Rose’s brief remarks did not explicitly describe middle-class black people as inauthentic. But it does seem that this was the subtext. In addition, while you are right that Rose’s comments were the inciting incident, the way Hill’s letter switches from “I” to “we/our” suggests that he’s tacking back and forth between his personal issue and a larger, social, one.

        Was Hill’s letter perfectly handled? No. Was it possibly an overreaction and even partial mischaracterization of the inciting event? Sure. You and others have helped me see that. However, this entire controversy does speak to a real issue regarding the sometimes detrimental equation of real blackness with street machismo. Both men’s comments — imperfect though they were — can be turned into a useful conversation.

        BTW, I’m not going to touch “butthurt.” Let’s just say, I’m hoping it’s a reference to butt-whoopings dished out by a parent/guardian and not some ill-conceived joke about gay sex (forced or consensual).

        • April

          I think what you mention is a real issue; however, I don’t think this was the proper forum for it. Pretty much all the larger conversation around this has gone back to the notion that Grant Hill/Duke players=upstanding citizens; Fab Five=ungroomed cheats, complete with a rehashing of the Chris Webber money scandal. Any deconstruction of “real blackness” will probably end up lost in that. The media love manufactured controversy, and Jalen Rose and Grant Hill delivered.

          By the way, “butthurt” is a relatively common Internet term meaning “overly, dumbly sensitive.” No gay reference implied.

  • Leslie Waller

    I get Grant and Jalen. It seems to me this is the age old phenomenon of the House Negro versus the field Negro that is embedded in the community of Black Americans. Jalen’s was raised in poverty, his road to success is from hard work( in the fields) to get a piece of the American dream. On the other hand, Grant success was easier, he had access to wealth and education. This was due to his parent already having a piece of the American Dream( the house).

    • MH8D

      I wouldn’t venture to say that Grant’s success in basketball was easier. You could say that he had more resources at his disposal, but nobody makes it to that level of college basketball, or lasts as long in the NBA as Grant Hill has without doing a lot of hard work in the gym.

  • vonda18

    It does seem as though Jalen Rose was referring to his feelings of jealous in the past and not the present. Still, I liked the Grant Hill article because like someone mentioned already, there’s still a lot of ‘Uncle Tom’ sentiment in the Black community that needs to be addressed. I hope that this will open the dialogue more about the differing types of “Black experiences” and that wanting to get an education is not the same as acting White.

  • rikyrah

    I liked Hill’s statement, and I’m glad he made it.

  • Felecia Robinson

    While I understand Grant’s point of view, I didn’t think it was a classy move to criticize Jalen Rose in the manner in which he did. Jalen did speak in past tense, not his present feelings. Jalen is right, Duke recurits only certain types of black players and because they are a very successful team, they are also very hated. Grant is usually a very humbled guy. This is not a humbled statement.

  • Ron

    Yeah, I just don’t think Grant Hill did anyone any favors writing an op-ed, but the media is sure having a blast debating the whole thing.

  • cdg

    Jimmy King and Jalen Rose haven’t really backed off of the sentiment in subsequent interviews, and no number of “field negros” who played for Duke (Chris Duhon?, Sean Dockery?, Elton Brand?, Corey Maggette?, Johnny Dawkins?) can dissuade them. They have backed off of the language. I was mostly pissed over the term Uncle Tom, not the sentiment (mistaken or not) that Duke doesn’t ever recruit inner city kids.

    By the way, King’s twitter response to Grant’s article was “I got 99 problems and Grant ain’t one”. What was the original Jay Z lyric again? Yeah he’s really talking past tense….

    • blackink

      What does Jimmy King’s Tweet have to do with Jalen Rose?

      And I haven’t seen Jalen say anything – at all, in a number of recent interviews – saying he still believed Grant Hill was an Uncle Tom.

      If you’ve got some evidence to the contrary, please share it with us.

      As for Grant, I can’t see where Jalen’s comments merited a public response to a 20-year-old accusation, especially if he had the opportunity to speak with him privately before the release of the documentary. If Jalen apologized to him in advance, don’t you think Grant asked him what the unexpected contrition was all about?

      • cdg

        Grant specifically referred both to Jalen’s and Jimmy’s language in the documentary. I noted that Jalen backed off of the language (“Uncle Tom”) but not the sentiment (Duke only recruits certain players and they’re never inner city kids). King’s tweet apparently stands by the language and the sentiment.

        Honestly, it was Jalen’s language that bothered me more than his sentiment and I’m glad he no longer thinks all Duke players under Coach K have been Uncle Toms. Though even writing that amazes me. The sentiment that K only recruits blue bloods is easily refuted by the fact that he’s heavily recruited so many kids who were anything but, even if not all of them went to Duke. They include Johnny Dawkins, Sean Dockery, Chris Duhon, John Wall, Greg Monroe, Patrick Patterson and the list goes on.

        Neither King’s sentiment nor his language bothered me that much since he attacked an individual, not a class of people. I don’t really care that he hasn’t backed off it. Grant’s a public figure, he can publicly respond and people can judge for themselves whether or not Grant Hill is a bitch.

        • Saying “apparently” shows you’re assuming a lot and filling in the blanks with personal feelings. Is it as possible that Jimmy King meant he didn’t care what Grant has to say about him today? PERIOD?

          Did Grant watch the actual documentary? I don’t recall reading in the op-ed that he did, correct me if I’m wrong.

          Or did he go off of what others told him prior to seeing it, thereby already going in without an open mind?

  • Tony Humphries

    I agree (pro-Jalen) and disagree (anti-Jalen) comments… I ask this one question: Why did Grant feel compelled to respond? What was the point? OK he Carlton Banks-like replied to Jalen’s comments about how Jalen FELT as a 17 yr old boy.

    and CDG – all those players other than Dawkins (who went to a Catholic/Private high school) were all AFTER Jalen’s tenure at Michigan.

    • cdg

      Most were after Jalen, but he, even now, stands by the sentiment that Coach K never recruits kids from cities or public schools or without fathers or whatever his criteria are.

  • L

    If you followed Rose’s career, you know that he excels at f*cling with folks and getting under their skin. It’s how he played, its now how he commentates. He hasn’t walked back his statements at ALL about his perception… Just let people go at it over his verb tense as he enjoys the attention.

    Also… To suggest that someone who made over $100m in his playing career is taking a significant professional risk by doing this seems a bit much. He’s proven, repeatedly, that he don’t give a f*ck.

  • Scipio Africanus

    Somebody said Tamia probably wrote this.

    *rimshot*

    In all seriousness, Grant took it too far and clearly this is an indication that this is a sore spot for him (the idea that he’s a Good Boy/Tom). Hence, his seemingly emotional-driven misreading of Jalen Rose’s plain-as-day actual words.

    I doubt Grant was trying to address some greater audience of today’s youth, though this can have that effect. He was just hurt and lashed out, plain and simple. If I had lived the life Grant has lived I don’t know that I’d do all this any differently than he has.

  • Freddie

    Profoundly weird for you to praise Rose’s trash talk and yet dismiss Hill’s owning him with that last line. The game is to win.

    • blackink12

      You sure “profoundly” was the word you were going for there, chief? Because if so, …. meh.

      Also, I didn’t praise Rose’s trash talk.

  • Hill’s essay was neither intellectually profound or classy. He only furthered Jalen’s point.

    But with the comments I’ve seen posted here and in other places with respect to this non issue, I note that some people are so dense. “None is as blind as he who refuses to see.”

    I’m a family law attorney, who has worked with families of all socioeconomic backgrounds…they all have jacked up senses of morality. So spare me the moral high ground because someone grew up in a two parent home with money.

    Many buy into the “I’m better than you” meme espoused by Grant and others because of this yearning desire to be accepted. And it is a shame.

    Someone posted about some Black people not accepting public assistance. You made a large leap in assuming that everyone who lives in the hood does. Or that every poor person is on public assistance of some sort. I know people who live in the hood and work every day, who have never had a food stamp pass through their hands. But of course many of you wouldn’t know that because you don’t go to THAT side of town where THOSE people live.

    So to the Grant Hills of the world, I say stay away from me and my offspring. Apparently “Uncle Tomism”, as meant by 17 year old Jalen, is contagious.

    • MH8D

      ‘Someone posted about some Black people not accepting public assistance. You made a large leap in assuming that everyone who lives in the hood does. Or that every poor person is on public assistance of some sort.’

      I made that post, but YOU made the leaps of assumption. You associated my moral philosophy with a socioeconomic circumstance that I never claimed. I don’t have to assume what people do in ‘the hood,’ because that’s where I’m from and where I choose to remain. My moral high ground doesn’t come from a ‘two-parent home with money’, because I didn’t have one. I was raised by my single mother and my grandparents in one of the worst parts of North Philly (26th. & Montgomery to be specific – if you know anything about the area)

      You just very clearly illustrated Grant Hill’s point. You are the one making assumptions about other black people and what they have – or haven’t – been through, based simply on the superficial qualities of their lifestyle and/or their views.

      When did Grant Hill say that he was better than Jalen Rose, or anyone? How do you know that he wants to be accepted, and by whom? What makes you think that you know a person’s story based on the views that they express? What makes you think that you know a person’s views based on where they came from? You leap to conclusions with alarming recklessness and seem determined to play the victim: the very same immature thought process that Grant Hill warns against in his written statement.

    • Tomlinson Street Dream

      I like your response CM, especially the first line about Hill furthering Jalen’s point and the line about the yearning desire to be accepted. Those lines covered everything. It’s funny that the mainstream media never talks about the pitfalls of trying to be accepted. If the mainstream even thought about acknowledging that pattern, then the problem would probably be reduced. People just don’t understand that their language (body and speech) is laced with that “I’m better than you” stuff. Every couple of days, I think about how much I appreciated Jalen’s honesty. Unlike him, I still feel like he used to feel, and I always will. The moral high ground is saturated with classism and racism. There would be no media without the exploitation of this problem. A lot of money would be lost if our country systematically embraced the truth. Divide, conquer and promote is the business. Maybe that is what Captitalism is.

      • TSD –

        My experience has been that too often there is an assumption made that black people with middle-class speech and body language are saying with every word and deed: “I’m better than you.” Those who are should cut that ish out. But sometimes paranoia and prejudice kick in, leading to an assumption that solidarity with working-class and poor black people requires that you speak and dress a certain way. I say that’s putting style over substance.

        I think there are two ways of coming to black consciousness. Some of us come into it in predominantly black spaces. Those are the ones who tend to speak and dress like their crew. Others of us come into blackness in the face of racism in predominantly white environments. We might not speak or dress in an obviously black way, but our politics can be on point.

        I talk the way I talk because of how I was raised, where I went to school, and because I teach English! But I don’t look down on others who speak differently. But I am too often accused of being stuck up by other black people. So, trying to be accepted works in both directions — acceptance is not automatic from other black people and it is certainly tenuous with white people. But it takes more than “talking proper” to be sure that someone feels superior to other black people.

  • just a follow up…did anyone see the fake reponse on sicklemaster.com? it’s ignorant, and only partially germane to the conversation, but its funny.

  • [...] on Facebook. PB on Twitter. Top PostsWinning, Losing and Uncle Toms. (42)Black. Male. Feminist? (19)The Invisible Gentrified. (17)Is Our Children Learning? (14)(Threat of) [...]

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>