# Obama visiting schools to spread socialism. Wow.



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 3, 2009)

Am I the only one who's starting to get frightened at the increasingly brainless mania that seems to be sweeping this country? The teabaggers were bad, then the death panel screamers, and now people are upset that Obama is going to speak at their elementary school because they think he's trying to spread socialism?

Were people always this moronic? Or is it just that they're scared about the economy?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/us/04school.html?hp


----------



## rJames (Sep 3, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Sep 03 said:


> Were people always this moronic?
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/us/04school.html?hp



Yes, always this moronic. I've been wondering the same thing after the last 2 presidential elections. Especially regarding "swift boat," and all of these, "just say it and it is true," mentality.

It is the way that politicians have been controlling elections since the beginning of the country. Its nothing new. It is sad that people are still so gullible or rather that they just want to believe these things.

Its no wonder that state and federal governments are virtually frozen solid.


----------



## lux (Sep 3, 2009)

lol


----------



## Hans Adamson (Sep 4, 2009)

If a President of the United States should not be allowed to address the nation's young - who should a President be allowed to address? Whoever is propagating this nonsense is without a doubt anti-democracy. It would be laughable if it wasn't so scary...


----------



## nikolas (Sep 4, 2009)

I just HAVE to assume that this is a media trick of some sort, because they have nothing else to do, otherwise I would be seriously concerned at people not allowing their kids to hear their president speak ABOUT EDUCATION.

For me this is a question of the following two:
A. Media are fucking morons.
B. People are fucking morons.

I prefer to think that the media are acting like that and overeacting HUGELY to this. If not... well... geez...


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 4, 2009)

Obama- "Kids, education will be your greatest asset going forward. Stay in school and study hard."

America- "Why, that dirty Commie bastid...how DARE he speak to our children that way???"


----------



## Niah (Sep 4, 2009)

you really have to give props to obama, I mean according to some americans he is bringing back socialism and nazi germany in just one go, when was the last time you saw that?

not only that but he is also a muslim who is planing the next jihad so I can really see the concern of these parents, nobody wants their president to spread the hateful message of the koran, right?

:roll: :roll: (o) ~o)


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 4, 2009)

I think what the US needs is a real Socialist party and a real Communist party. That way, the Democrats would be spared the comparison (not that being a socialist is a bad thing per se - it's just the latest US bogeyman scare tactic). Either that, or some people need to be given a spanking and thrown in jail for promoting hatred , starting with Limbaugh and Beck.


----------



## Frederick Russ (Sep 4, 2009)

I don't normally weigh in on these kinds of matters, but here's my take:

"Ignorance is the state in which one lacks knowledge, is unaware of something or chooses to subjectively ignore information. This should not be confused with being unintelligent, as one's level of intelligence and level of education or general awareness are not the same." From _Wikepidea_

Mass hysteria appears to be influentially used as an efficient tool to harbor fear. If it wasn't so insidious it would be considered brilliant. Its an effective way to forward a political agenda that can be easily parroted via ignorance - driving ignorance itself to record lows. Apparently the only way to combat it is through education. The absurd irony is that the entire event was originally concocted to educate. People don't usually prefer ignorance over knowledge but politicians who want power believe the ends (meaning getting elected or re-elected) justify the means (including the use of ignorance fueled by mass hysteria as the fuel to get there).


----------



## jsaras (Sep 4, 2009)

I view it in simple terms of parents rights. Parents have the right to choose what their children are exposed to, period. 

My wife is a middle-school English teacher and she is not allowed to show a PG or a PG13 movie with getting written consent from parents. Why should parents be bypassed?

Put me in the "pro-choice" column on this one.


----------



## jsaras (Sep 4, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Fri Sep 04 said:


> I think what the US needs is a real Socialist party



If taking over the banking system, the automobile and health care industries isn't socialism, then the term has no meaning. Or do you to call that "the transformation of America" as Obama did during the campaign? I am asking this very sincerely as I believe words do have meaning.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 4, 2009)

Taking over?

The banks own the government, not the other way around.

The US auto industry is in bed with the oil companies. The oil companies also own the government.

Health care is too vital to be left in the hands of insurance/drug companies alone. Human beings and their health are not commoditites/goods. Best pull out profit-only fingers from that pie before they f*ck it up completely. Otherwise, please explain how one can balance strangers' health vs personal monetary gain.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Sep 4, 2009)

These events are taking place in Texas: enough said.... (o)


----------



## JohnG (Sep 4, 2009)

jsaras @ 4th September 2009 said:


> If taking over the banking system, the automobile and health care industries isn't socialism, then the term has no meaning. Or do you to call that "the transformation of America" as Obama did during the campaign? I am asking this very sincerely as I believe words do have meaning.



With regard to the banking system and the auto industry, Obama's policies are virtually indistinguishable from those of the Bush administration.

With regard to health care, wise men can differ. Like many, I'm rationed right now, because of cost, even though I'm prosperous and "insured." When I look at how my mother gets treated under Medicare, the existing socialised medicine, I wish I were 65. Besides, State and Federal deficits stem very significantly from runaway health care costs; the resulting deficits damage our currency and raise our taxes.

As far as the President speaking, I am surprised that some people who believe they are conservative seem willing to suppress speech, since free speech / listening to argument is one of the chief tenets upon which America was founded. I think words have meaning too, and characterising a temporary intervention as socialism, particularly when initiated by a very conservative administration, is twisting the term out of recognition. 

In the 1970s, England and many Scandinavian countries imposed 90-plus percent marginal income tax rates and controlled large percentages of the economy. _That_ was socialism, and it has been largely dismantled in favour of more market-driven approaches. Leaving aside health care, the current, temporary intervention in banking and the rest of the economy is a piffle by comparison.


----------



## JohnG (Sep 4, 2009)

David Brooks (a center / right columnist) characterised the current state of US healthcare in an editorial yesterday. Paraphrasing David Goldhill from The Atlantic, Brooks writes:

"...[T]he system hides information, muddies choices, encourages more treatment instead of better care, neglects cheap innovation, inflates costs and unintentionally increases suffering."

It's a nicely balanced editorial, syndicated in many publications. One link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/opini ... ml?_r=1&em


----------



## Hans Adamson (Sep 4, 2009)

This has absolutely nothing to do with socialism. It is plain old racism and a refusal to accept the outcome of the Presidential election.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Sep 4, 2009)

Hans Adamson @ Fri Sep 04 said:


> This has absolutely nothing to do with socialism. It is plain old racism and a refusal to accept the outcome of the Presidential election.



Agree.

Some parents are afraid of their kids being brainwashed, but by keeping their kids at home isn't that what the parents are doing?


----------



## rJames (Sep 4, 2009)

I have to weigh in on jsaras' opinion here. I like the president, I think he will do great things for the country. But I'm not so sure that any president should be given a direct line to children under the age of majority without parental consent.

I guess no one would cover the speech if he made it in prime time. But at least parents could allow their children to watch or not.

I know that means many children will miss out on an inspirational message.

But parents have a right to bring their children up in any way they see fit. It IS brainwashing within the home. And it has gone on for millennium.

This is why most children from a Muslim home will be Muslim when they grow up and most children from Christian homes will be Christian when they grow up.

Too bad that every real issue is discussed with hyperbole and exaggeration instead of common sense and common language.

But when you feel strongly about your convictions (redundant) each side uses debate tactics in the media.

It may be pure racism. But in order to have freedom, we have to allow freedom.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Sep 4, 2009)

I don't recall parents complaining when Bush was touring schools to promote his "no child left behind" initiative" (9/11)


----------



## Guy Bacos (Sep 4, 2009)

It's just the nature of the human being to need to point the finger at someone. In this case Obama is an easy target.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 4, 2009)

rJames, the point isn't that they have a right to want their children not to hear Obama, it's that THIS IS TOTALLY MORONIC!

That's what scares me. The economic situation in pre-WWII Germany was far worse (hyperinflation), but superficially this is the same environment, thankfully on a lower scale, that led to the Nazi rise: people turning off their rational minds when they're scared about the economy. And there's no way you can say that's not being exploited by the political right in the most hideously cynical ways. Not only is that morally wrong, it will lead to violence.

It's a sign of desperation, of course, but the truth is that these tactics are very effective from a Machiavellian point of view. Opposing and shouting down is way easier than constructing.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 4, 2009)

jsaras, the first question is So what if it were socialism? If the entire Republican party and the Blue Dong Democrats were sent back home where they belong, we wouldn't end up with anything remotely resembling Soviet-style repressive political socialism. It's simply not in the national DNA.

Then the second question is Do you honestly believe in your heart of hearts that our elected government should have made a conservative ideological decision rather than a real-world practical one to allow the entire American auto industry just to go away? This is much more than a simple business failure, it's an essential core industry - one of our last remaining sources of manufacturing jobs - faced with the worst economy in our lifetimes. Remember, millions more people would have been out of work, and the bottom line cost of that would have been a lot higher.

As to the banks, people like me were in favor of the government nationalizing them, not just giving them piles of money so they could continue their piggy ways. JohnG put it very clearly: you have to distinguish between a temporary emergency takeover and a political system dominated by an economically repressive government. The word "socialism" applies to both, yet the two are totally different from one another.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 4, 2009)

One more important point: even though I disagree with the way the banking system was bailed out, it has still prevented us from being in another Great Depression.

That's why I keep saying that this is a really bad time to be a laissiz-faire Ayn Rand objectivist libertarian. Yes, we really do need Big Government - forward-looking leadership - at the helm.


----------



## rJames (Sep 4, 2009)

You're preaching to the choir, Nick. I'm as scared as you are.

I think this is indicative of conservative vs liberal. These are not just political divisions. I believe they are divisions in the way people think...the way they perceive the world.

Conservative tends to hold on to the "tried and true," they are more intransigent. Liberal means to be more open to a different opinion, open to change. 

This difference is why the "left" can't do anything as a group. There is no power on the left. There is no "left" dogma. Look at the stalemate in healthcare in congress. Its pathetic. Pathetic!


----------



## jsaras (Sep 4, 2009)

The ONLY reason that anyone who opposes Obama's policies is racism.??.. EVERYONE in Texas is evil//stupid/.racist.??.. Do you realize how foolish that sounds? I can't believe liberals accuse conservatives of seeing issues only in terms of 'black and white' (double entendre not intended...but a little funny).

I for one think B.O is a nice man with good motives and I think that it is a positive thing that an African American (or more accurately, half-African-American) person is president. That said, I disagree with his policies for their content, not because he is a person of color.

The race-baiting B.S. is getting tired. Obama tried that tactic when the Boston Police Department responded to a legitimate police call a couple of months ago. When the tapes of the call were played, Obama and his professor friend looked like fools. No amount of beer can hide that.

As far as Bush's visiting a school on 09/11/2001, it was not a mandatory, nation-wide televised event to be broadcast during school hours. I would betcha that the parents had to give permission for their children to attend, though I'm not sure about that point.

Just because parents chooses to raise their children as good Jews, Christians, Buddhists or Muslims does not make them "moronic". Those religious traditions have true wisdom that has been around for thousands of years. I realize that secular leftists believe their agenda to be superior to religious traditions, but that ony reveals their own arrogance IMO.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 4, 2009)

Now you're going OTT, jasaras, and sidestepping the issues. Can we agree that racism exists but that it's not the whole story?

Good. Now let's hear what you have to say about JohnG's and my posts about your socialism comments. We're not calling you a moron for believing that.


----------



## Fernando Warez (Sep 4, 2009)

> The ONLY reason that anyone who opposes Obama's policies is racism.??.. EVERYONE in Texas is evil//stupid/.racist.??.. Do you realize how foolish that sounds?



I was going to mention this. it seems to me like the democrats are going to play the racist card a lot. i personally haven't seen any evidence of that. I'm sure there are but racist comes from all sides. Some blacks don't like white. Some Chinees don't like white people too.


----------



## Fernando Warez (Sep 4, 2009)

Also, i think Americans have good reasons to fear their government going socialist. The rise of socialism in China killed 600 million people? Same thing in the Russia.


----------



## Hans Adamson (Sep 4, 2009)

Should an American President be allowed to speak to adults ? If so, where should the age-line be drawn where it should be considered unsuitable for adolescents to listen to their President?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 4, 2009)

Fernando, don't you have any better ways of getting attention than posting total bullshit? Not only is what you're saying preposterous and silly, your numbers are off by a factor of ten.


----------



## Fernando Warez (Sep 4, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Sep 04 said:


> jsaras, the first question is So what if it were socialism?



What people like you totally fail to understand is that socialism is not what it appears to be. A lot of people thinking socialism means spreading the wealth more equally etc... but cant see the hidden agenda behind it and it's about power. The secret of power is the capacity to influence and control government. The bigger the government the more control they(the elite) will have. That's why you will find the biggest most influence capitalist behind this so called socialist movement. And once they've set up their "socialist" government it will show it's true colour which is fascism. A lot of Texans seem to understand that.


----------



## Fernando Warez (Sep 4, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Sep 04 said:


> Fernando, don't you have any better ways of getting attention than posting total [email protected]#t? Not only is what you're saying preposterous and silly, your numbers are off by a factor of ten.



Well the lowest #s i hear was 20 millions in Russia. That's still a lot of people. Where's the holocaust museum for these guys? After all, the Bolsheviks were financed by US bankers weren't they?


You know what i said about the dangers of socialism, the problem is people like you have too big an ego to ever admit you could be wrong. Look at yourself, you sound like a fascist more and more. You talk as if you're the only one who's always right and others are idiots.

BTW, i cant believe you agreed to give all this money to these crooks on wall street. You really don't get it do you? These people are robbing America.


----------



## Fernando Warez (Sep 4, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Sep 04 said:


> Fernando, don't you have any better ways of getting attention than posting total [email protected]#t? Not only is what you're saying preposterous and silly, your numbers are off by a factor of ten.



BTW, I'd be quickly label a holocaust denier if i were to say that about the holocaust in Germany. What's wrong with my #s? Is it that they are bigger than the ones in Germany?


----------



## jsaras (Sep 4, 2009)

Hans Adamson @ Fri Sep 04 said:


> Should an American President be allowed to speak to adults?


No. Absolutely not. ..??.. Seriously, has ANYONE suggested this? 


Hans Adamson @ Fri Sep 04 said:


> If so, where should
> the age-line be drawn where it should be considered unsuitable for adolescents to listen to their President?



Young children don't operate heavy machinery, fight wars, buy homes or enter into business contracts. I'm also of the opinion that young children shouldn't be exposed to violence, overtly sexual material, marijuana, nor should they be used as political pawns by their parents or the President. Most parents try to proactively train their children to make good decisions. Parents are in the best position to determine what level of maturity the child is at. As the voting age is 18 in the U.S., I would hope that parents would have been discussing values and principles with their children for as well as educate them about the Constitution (because you certainly won't get that in a public school) so as to prepare them to be responsible, productive citizens. In short, the family is the building block of society.

Are you of the opinion that children are merely wards of the state or that they magically have more wisdom than their parents? I'm not sure where you are coming from.


----------



## jsaras (Sep 4, 2009)

JohnG @ Fri Sep 04 said:


> In the 1970s, England and many Scandinavian countries imposed 90-plus percent marginal income tax rates and controlled large percentages of the economy. _That_ was socialism



If taxation defines socialism we are well on our way. My Federal tax rate is about 35%. California takes an additional 10%. Add in business taxes, DMV taxes, fuel taxes, cell phone taxes, energy taxes, etc, I'd bet that I'm really close to 60-65%.

The overwhelming debt that the U.S. has accrued will make it a near certainty that there will have to be a 100% tax rate. The unfunded Social Security and Medicare obligation is between $60-100 trillion (yes, with a "T"). That Ponzie scheme is about to collapse. That figure doesn't include the national debt. We are currently borrowing money to make the interest payments on the debt. Add to that, Obama announced that he underestimated the debt by 2 trillion dollars..which is more than doubled the debt.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/08252009/po ... 186337.htm

If anyone can suggest a mathematical scenario in which the U.S. doesn't become a wholly-owned subsidiary of China and our children indentured servants, I'd like to see it.


----------



## The_Dark_Knight (Sep 4, 2009)

My perspective on this is...

None of these are real problems. Just a vortex of misunderstanding.

No matter what the source, humans dominating other humans needs to end. Spite and contempt are rotting our lives away and destroying progress. IF someone has a lesson to teach, it should be taught in an organic, personalized manor, respectful to a newly evolved human beings freedom of expression. 

We will embrace a new Networked Paradigm thanks to Technology. We are working on the same objectives with humanities new platform. The platform shift is a newborn and no one knows how it's going to mature for practical purposes. The shifting process doesn't work well for people at all under this economic structure of living. Life involves invention, not finding one way to live the correct life and repeating it redundantly while nature is furiously changing under the surface. Nature has the loudest uninvited opinion over all. It always wins. 

Yes power focused people will always exploit what they can, but they're not as powerful as the engine driving the change. Power is relative. It's subservient to nature's desire in the end.

Repetition and addiction are kissing cousins.

I have news for both parties...the world is in crisis, so it can't stay the same, even though it works great for some. If you are having a good day it's only exploitation in the end, because on the other side of earth a child is being raped and murdered so you can have a nice day, a laptop and a pension. That is why things are changing, pushing for something better....for all. The change is automatically coming from humanities subconscious votes.

Conservatives are well intentioned, looking to retain, preserve quality of life and have respect for tradition as well as life's stages. The problem with mind your own business and privacy is that it gets abused, quickly, whenever I hear the term privacy I just immediately associate wife and kid beating and also substance abuse. You know that humans can't be trusted but you trust the individual over the government. Charles Manson didn't work for the government. It doesn't make sense.

Liberals are well intentioned looking to share quality of life for all. The human costs associated with a push for equality defeats the purpose of a push for equality. It's not supposed to inflict harm. More charming is needed, the faster you push the faster it will fail. Earth scale structural civil agreements are needed. Transparency is needed and is what is happening at the moment. Your long-term solution cannot defeat a conservatives immediate paranoia over the nature of humanities dark side.

There's a bigger bully in the mix, the bully is the results from our good intentions. When our plans go horribly wrong from unforeseen philosophical derivatives and static discharge. The bully has a life of it's own, it's not working towards either agenda. Most of us are arguing with the opposing side while our true argument should be directed at decoding the bully.


----------



## midphase (Sep 4, 2009)

"My Federal tax rate is about 35%. California takes an additional 10%. Add in business taxes, DMV taxes, fuel taxes, cell phone taxes, energy taxes, etc, I'd bet that I'm really close to 60-65%. "

Bullshit bullshit bullshit bullshit bullshit!

Even thought "on paper" it might look that way to you, the US has one of the lowest "actual" tax rates in the world. Since I happen to be from Italy (maybe Luca can chime in here), I can assure you that Italy's taxes (not a socialist country) are absurdly high by US standards. The US tax code allows guys like you (and me) to write off so much that the amount we actually truly pay is closer to 15% (less if you have a good accountant). The US is one of the most business and self-employed friendly countries in the world and I'm getting so sick and tired of this uninformed bullshit coming from guys like you!

Secondly, regarding Obama's "socialist" decision to bail out private companies--you know as well as I that it was a "damned if I do, damned if I don't" choice. If Obama had stopped any government bailout as soon as he got into office, you'd have idiots like Rush, Glen Beck, O'Reilly and probably guys like you bashing him for being "anti businesses" and for not caring about restoring the economy and jobs!

That is EXACTLY what would have happened! You know it, I know it.

Since most Republican pundits are vicious bastards, they knew they could bitch about Obama either way.

Where were you for the past 8 years getting all outraged about Bush and Cheney stomping all over YOUR rights then? Huh?


----------



## midphase (Sep 4, 2009)

I'm sorry for being so strong-worded, but I'm getting so sick and tired that this country of ours is being hijacked by a vocal minority.

It is a vocal minority, I don't believe for a second that these utter morons represent even close to a tiny fraction of the citizens of this country. They are to me like the one grumpy neighbor who everyone hates but who gets all the attention because he's the one who's the most vocal and (since he's probably retired) has all the time in the world to attend town-hall meetings and annoy people there too.

I'm sick of it!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 4, 2009)

And all that stuff about "generational theft" is total conservative hype. We've been through this before here: after WWII we had a much higher debt in terms of GDP, yet we had several decades of unparalleled rise in living standards.


----------



## mf (Sep 5, 2009)

jsaras @ Fri Sep 04 said:


> If anyone can suggest a mathematical scenario in which the U.S. doesn't become a wholly-owned subsidiary of China and our children indentured servants, I'd like to see it.


It looks like the actual mathematical scenario points to a future where Chinese homes will all be equipped with Made in USA microwaves. Not that something like that would be necessarily horrid, but mathematical scenarios don't occur with mathematical precision, do they?

Anyways, I have a non-mathematical scenario that could prevent the doom end you described: Americans drop overconsuming, buying the unnecessary, and living beyond their means. 

You think that's feasible? I think it's inevitable, and the sooner the better.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 5, 2009)

FINALLY! Wake the f*ck up, dudes and speak UP, or you're going to lose your country to a bunch of wackos with guns (or worse)!!!



midphase @ 4/9/2009 said:


> I'm sorry for being so strong-worded, but I'm getting so sick and tired that this country of ours is being hijacked by a vocal minority.
> 
> It is a vocal minority, I don't believe for a second that these utter morons represent even close to a tiny fraction of the citizens of this country. They are to me like the one grumpy neighbor who everyone hates but who gets all the attention because he's the one who's the most vocal and (since he's probably retired) has all the time in the world to attend town-hall meetings and annoy people there too.
> 
> I'm sick of it!


----------



## Niah (Sep 5, 2009)

Fernando Warez @ Fri Sep 04 said:


> Also, i think Americans have good reasons to fear their government going socialist. The rise of socialism in China killed 600 million people? Same thing in the Russia.



wasn't that communism?

socialism is an economic system that is adopted by a political system, either a democracy or communist or facist regime (National Socialism), etc...

I am not really sure if americans should be concerned about the rise of "socialism" but more concerned about how stupid they sound when saying such things


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 5, 2009)

Politics in the new millenium have been defined by who can yell louder on television. The polarization in America is fueled by entertainment masquerading as hard news. The occupation of being a 'pundit' has never been more widespread or lucrative, and the assault is relentless, multiple channels screaming 24/7/365.

I come from a long line of ò8R   ®ûG8R   ®ûH8R   ®ûI8R   ®ûJ8R   ®ûK8R   ®ûL8R   ®ûM8R   ®ûN8R   ®ûO8R   ®ûP8R   ®ûQ8R   ®ûR8R   ®ûS8R   ®ûT8R   ®ûU8R   ®ûV8R   ®ûW8R   ®ûX8R   ®ûY8R   ®ûZ8R   ®û[8R   ®û\8R   ®û]8R   ®û^8R   ®û_8R   ®û`8R   ®ûa8R   ®ûb8R   ®ûc8R   ®ûd8R   ®ûe8S   ®ûf8S   ®ûg8S   ®ûh8S   ®ûi8S   ®ûj8S   ®ûk8S   ®ûl8S   ®ûm8S   ®ûn8S   ®ûo8S   ®ûp8S   ®ûq8S   ®ûr8S   ®ûs8T   ®ût8T   ®ûu8T   ®ûv8T   ®ûw8T   ®ûx8T   ®ûy8T   ®ûz8T   ®û{8T   ®û|8T   ®û}8T   ®û~8T   ®û8T   ®û€8T   ®û8T   ®û‚8T   ®ûƒ8T   ®û„8T   ®û…8T   ®û†8T   ®û‡8T   ®ûˆ8T   ®û‰8T   ®ûŠ8T   ®û‹8T   ®ûŒ8T   ®û8T   ®ûŽ8T   ®û8T   ®û8T   ®û‘8T   ®û’8T   ®û“8T   ®û”8T   ®û•8T   ®û–8T   ®û—8T   ®û˜8T   ®û™8T   ®ûš8T   ®û›8T   ®ûœ8T   ®û8T   ®ûž8T   ®ûŸ8T   ®û 8T   ®û¡8T   ®û¢8T   ®û£8T   ®û¤8T   ®û¥8T   ®û¦8T   ®û§8T   ®û¨8T   ®û©8T   ®ûª8T   ®û«8T   ®û¬8T   ®û­8T   ®û®8T   ®û¯8T   ®û°8T   ®û±8T   ®û²8T   ®û³8T   ®û´8T   ®ûµ8T   ®û¶              ò8T   ®û¸8T   ®û¹8T   ®ûº8T   ®û»8T   ®û¼8T   ®û½8T   ®û¾8T   ®û¿8T   ®ûÀ8T   ®ûÁ8T   ®ûÂ8T   ®ûÃ8T   ®ûÄ8T   ®ûÅ8T   ®ûÆ8T   ®ûÇ8T   ®ûÈ8T   ®ûÉ8T   ®ûÊ8T   ®ûË8T   ®ûÌ8T   ®ûÍ8T   ®ûÎ8T   ®ûÏ8T   ®ûÐ8T   ®ûÑ8T   ®ûÒ8T   ®ûÓ8T   ®ûÔ8T   ®ûÕ8T   ®ûÖ8T   ®û×8T   ®ûØ8T   ®ûÙ8T   ®ûÚ8T   ®ûÛ8T   ®ûÜ8T   ®ûÝ8T   ®ûÞ8T   ®ûß8T   ®ûà8T   ®ûá8T   ®ûâ8T   ®ûã8T   ®ûä8T   ®ûå8T   ®ûæ8T   ®ûç8T   ®ûè8T   ®ûé8T   ®ûê8T   ®ûë8T   ®ûì8T   ®ûí8T   ®ûî8T   ®ûï8U   ®ûð8U   ®ûñ8U   ®ûò8U   ®ûó8U   ®ûô8U   ®ûõ8U   ®ûö8U   ®û÷8U   ®ûø8U   ®ûù8U   ®ûú8U   ®ûû8U   ®ûü8U   ®ûý8U   ®ûþ8U   ®ûÿ8U   ®ü 8U   ®ü8U   ®ü8U   ®ü8U   ®ü8U   ®ü8U   ®ü8U   ®ü8U   ®ü8U   ®ü	8U


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 5, 2009)

I kind of agree with all of that until the end, Larry. Actually I don't, but my disagreements are minor - for example, no duh Affirmative Action has some losers, but do you have a better way of ensuring that disadvantaged people don't remain that way forever?

Anyway, reasonable people disagreeing is vitally important. Instead what we're seeing now in American politics is one side that is almost 100% unreasonable, cynical, amoral, desperate, exploitive, and generally hideous. And no, I'm not talking about the left. 

If greater unity means that we on the left have to move farther to the right, I say let the country remain divided for eternity.

And yes, Sarah Palin really is stupid, and there's zero reason to pay any attention to her. What we have to pay attention to is how dangerous the rising tide of stupidity - fueled by the right, who trot her out - in this country is. It's really frightening.

Don't mistake what I'm saying for ignoring the conservative point of view. Of course it has some points, and everyone who's read anything about political science takes everything you're saying for granted.

But this is not the time to act like we respect people who are so retarded that they think Obama is spreading socialism all over their children. This is the exact same climate that led to the rise of fascism in Europe. The economy isn't as bad, but the brainlessness is identical.

Reasonable people didn't take it seriously then, but this time we need to fight it.


----------



## Hans Adamson (Sep 5, 2009)

NYC Composer @ Sat Sep 05 said:


> Palin isn't stupid. She's not very well informed or educated


You are a true gentleman. ~o)


----------



## Guy Bacos (Sep 5, 2009)

Hans Adamson @ Sat Sep 05 said:


> NYC Composer @ Sat Sep 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Palin isn't stupid. She's not very well informed or educated
> ...



I hardly think not being well informed excuses her. That is her responsibility to be well informed especially when you are seeking the presidential job. Not being conscious of that there is some stupidity there.


----------



## rJames (Sep 5, 2009)

Stupid is a word that we don't allow our young girls to say. Almost as if it were a swear word.

When you call Sarah stupid, you insult all those who identify with her. And if you were alive during the latest presidential elections, you know that there are plenty who do identify with her. As NYC says, that will come back to haunt us.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Sep 5, 2009)

I never said she was stupid, here we go again.... but she acted stupidly way more then her share.


----------



## Niah (Sep 5, 2009)

Guy Bacos @ Sat Sep 05 said:


> Hans Adamson @ Sat Sep 05 said:
> 
> 
> > NYC Composer @ Sat Sep 05 said:
> ...



That is so true.

I like that Larry is being positve and all that but I don't think he has realised the stituation here and how dangerous things can get if we just let it "slide" or respect such unrespectful comments or actions.

I don't think we are talking about moderate and reasonable liberals or consersatives here. These are people that are simply spreading desinformation and hate in a very mediatic arena or in positions of power.


----------



## rJames (Sep 5, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sat Sep 05 said:


> "When you call Sarah stupid, you insult all those who identify with her. And if you were alive during the latest presidential elections, you know that there are plenty who do identify with her. As NYC says, that will come back to haunt us."
> 
> The haunting is already here, so who cares. On a political level I see absolutely no reason to be nice to politicians who only want to oppose progress for their own political gain, the good of the country be damned. The Republicans in Obama's way would much rather see him fail for their own gain next election; they couldn't care less about the 15,000 people a week who are losing their health insurance.
> 
> ...



Once again you are preaching to the choir...but maybe you are also just adding fuel to the flame. That'll be enough colloquialisms for the day.

Take the crazy people seriously, don't make Sarah Palin their martyr.


----------



## midphase (Sep 6, 2009)

"Calling other people 'stupid' and 'morons', yeah, that's the ticket. I'm sure that will further the national debate. "

I can't think of any better definition for anyone who compares Obama to Hitler or who thinks this country is becoming socialist or communist.

(BTW, anyone who calls Obama a Nazi and in the same breath accuses him of being a communist is not only a "moron", but obviously doesn't even know the accurate definition of those terms).


----------



## Ian Dorsch (Sep 6, 2009)

I don't think Sarah Palin is stupid.

I think she is dishonest, power hungry, unethical and devoid of any kind of intellectual curiosity. I think she looks for opportunity in pandering to the worst instincts and basest fears of American conservatives. I think she loves her place at the sharp end of the ideological wedge that is destroying this country. But I don't really think she's stupid.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 6, 2009)

> I'll predict that healthcare reform will be guided by free-market capitalism



If so - shudder - it'll be free market capitalism in name only, because healthcare is anything but a free market.



> The healthcare and drug industry has much more power than our government



Along with other powerful lobbies it does, and I've posted before how I believe we should start with a solution: campaign finance reform. We need to take the vast amounts of money out of all political campaigns. There should be no paid advertising on public airwaves, just mandatory debates - real ones.

The biggest reason politicians are under the spell of lobbyists is that they need vast sums of money to get re-elected - especially in the House, where their terms are only two years.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Sep 6, 2009)

A few post still on Sarah higher up, so just want to say something. 

Whatever word you want to attribute to Sarah Palin, for argument sake let's say it's stupid, it isn't just her who is stupid, it's the entire system, all the people who made it possible for her to get there, all of her supporters. I'm a canadian, and when I saw Bush get elected the 1st time I said, what the f*** were these people thinking? But when he got elected for a 2nd term, my reaction was, half of the voters aren't very bright and you will have to assume the consequences of having a moron lead your country. So I'll be honest and I still love the USA, but I question their judgment level in the last 8 years.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 6, 2009)

I'll go farther than that, Guy- I think this nation becomes less intelligent daily.

Nick, if fighting Nazism involved adopting the same tactics of fear, repression, eradication and murder of disagreeing parties or races ( i.e. conservative Republicans), would you be down for that? Something to think about when you start making omelettes is-how many broken eggs will it take?

I'm not a pacifist, I'm for peace. I'm not against passion, I'm actually pretty passionate about my beliefs-but I'll be damned if I'll stoop to the level of the Glenn Becks of the world to achieve my outlook.

This has all gotten pretty OT- as to the original topic, to talk about the duly elected President of the United States talking to schoolchildren as 'indoctrination' or similar words is absurd blather and should be treated as such. Forget the man, it shows disrespect for the office. I disagreed with G. Bush on practically everything, but I would have had no problem with him speaking to my child's school. Totally absurd[/i],unpatriotic and divisive.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 6, 2009)

Forget about fear, repression, murder, etc. - why would you even think I'm advocating that anyone stoop to the level of Glenn Beck? He's literally a professional jackass - his job is to stay the stupidest and most inflammatory bullshit he can think of so that he riles up his audience and they watch Faux News.

I also think that framing the question of whether people who don't want Obama to speak to their children are right, wrong, within or beyond their rights is barking up the wrong tree. That's treating them as rational, when they're obviously not.

Apart from taking Faux News off the air - which I'm totally in favor of, because disguising vile propaganda as news is about the worst abuse of free speech imaginable - I don't know what can be done to convince the mainstream news media to stop pouring fuel on these flames. They're helping this kind of insanity to spread.

By the way I couldn't care less about the sanctity of the office; what I care about is crazy morons who get to vote and influence politicians - and who are starting to get progressively more dangerous.


----------



## mf (Sep 7, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Sep 06 said:


> But I think it's crazy to try and be reasonable in the face of an opposition that can't be reasoned with.





rJames @ Sun Sep 06 said:


> Right...then we'll take up arms.
> 
> 
> 
> ...or do you have another suggestion?



I have one: grab some beer and head to the White House backyard.

___




Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Sep 06 said:


> But I think it's crazy - by Einstein's definition* ...
> 
> * You know, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome


I do that every time when I go fishing. Am I crazy?

___




Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Sep 06 said:


> I don't know what can be done to convince the mainstream news media to stop pouring fuel on these flames.


That's simple: stop watching it. Don't allow them to waste your time, attention, nerves, and life. They have no power over you other than the one you grant them.

Be the change you want to see in the world.


----------



## rJames (Sep 7, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Sep 06 said:


> - why would you even think I'm advocating that anyone stoop to the level of Glenn Beck?





> He's literally a professional jackass -





> That's treating them as rational, when they're obviously not.





> what I care about is crazy morons who get to vote



While I agree with you, I think that to say these things in conversation is to (at least) begin to scuffle in the mud WITH them.

As the last election was on going, I kept wondering if Bay Buchanan was serious in her apologies for Sarah Palin. She would come on CNN after the latest gaff and Saturday Night sketch and tell us all (straight faced) how unfair we were being to Palin.

There are intelligent people on that side. I want to know why. Then maybe we can do something about it. Some of it (much of it) is religion. There are plenty of people that NEED religion. Some people need a dogma to hold onto.

I don't think the liberal mindset satisfies these people.

I think the deeper question, when trying to come up with a solution to the madness (now you've got me doing it) is to try to understand where these people are coming from and then to address that.

Remember, within this group of Glen Beck fans are policemen, doctors, political pundits and, I might point out, your neighbor who lives three doors down.

To tell these people to their face that they are stupid, if someone in the media did it, would not be constructive.

To point out that no one can actually see Russia from Alaska or that having Putin fly over your house on the way to DC can help you to become a world leader, is more effective.

I think Saturday Night Live has a voice and is using it correctly.

There has been fringe groups in the US since its founding. There will always be (sad to say). Calling them names doesn't change anything except maybe to fan the flames. (now we're really getting that fire analogy going)


----------



## Guy Bacos (Sep 7, 2009)

rJames @ Mon Sep 07 said:


> Remember, within this group of Glen Beck fans are policemen, doctors, political pundits and, I might point out, your neighbor who lives three doors down.



And Hitler had a lot of fans....

Something about Glen Beck that scares me.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 7, 2009)

Understood, Ron, and you make some very good points - especially about peoples' inability to deal with the inherent uncertainties of life. But I think the most important analysis is that millions of people are unemployed. That's what makes emotional but irrational craziness attractive. Taking on their points of view as serious positions is what would be rolling in the mud with them.

And do you have a list of doctors who are Glen Beck fans? If so, please post it - you'll probably save some lives. 

My neighbor three doors down had an Obama sticker, by the way.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Sep 7, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Sep 07 said:


> And do you have a list of doctors who are Glen Beck fans? If so, please post it - you'll probably save some lives.



lol


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 7, 2009)

I think it's interesting that Nick and I agree about just about everything except manner and style. I personally believe there is substance within manner, substance that matters and ultimately divides or joins to a degree. I think there is inherent danger in radicalization regardless of p.o.v. When people stop listening, they also stop talking , then arms ARE picked up.

'I'm right and you're a nutbag and a moron' is probably not a good diplomatic option, and that stretches worldwide.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 7, 2009)

How are you going to use diplomacy with total fricking lunatics?

You use diplomacy when you're dealing with rational people. These people are disturbed.


----------



## mf (Sep 7, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Sep 07 said:


> How are you going to use diplomacy with total fricking lunatics?


If you can't beat them, join 'em.

~o) 

(always wanted to use that cool emoticon)


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 8, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Sep 07 said:


> How are you going to use diplomacy with total fricking lunatics?
> 
> You use diplomacy when you're dealing with rational people. These people are disturbed.



Do you feel the same way about Iran? If so, let the nukes start raining on the innocent and the guilty, yes? I mean, there's no talking to them, ne c'est pas? Fer chrissake, Ahmadinejad is a Holocaust denier. Why bother?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 8, 2009)

The Iranians are totally rational. They have definite interests, and they act on them. We find their behavior totally offensive, of course, but it's not irrational.

A far more accurate parallel would Ahmadinejad's loudmouth rhetoric. It's more violent for now ("Death to Israel" and "Death to America"), but it's no more stupid than "Obama is spreading socialism in schools."

Besides, I don't understand why you think I'm advocating that all liberals remove most of our teeth, hit ourselves on our heads with mallets to lower our IQs, and start shouting almost equally moronic things on our side (which don't exist anyway).


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 8, 2009)

Published on Tuesday, September 8, 2009 by Salon.com
Mr. President, It's Time to Fight
No one's ever conquered Washington politics by constantly saying "pretty please" to the guys trying to cut your throat.

by Bill Moyers


The editors of the Economist magazine say America's healthcare debate has become a touch delirious, with people accusing each other of being evil-mongers, dealers in death, and un-American.

Well, that's charitable.

I would say it's more deranged than delirious, and definitely not un-American.

Those crackpots on the right praying for Obama to die and be sent to hell -- they're the warp and woof of home-grown nuttiness. So is the creature from the Second Amendment who showed up at the President's rally armed to the teeth. He's certainly one of us. Red, white and blue kooks are as American as apple pie and conspiracy theories.

Bill Maher asked me on his show last week if America is still a great nation. I should have said it's the greatest show on earth. Forget what you learned in civics about the Founding Fathers — we're the children of Barnum and Bailey, our founding con men. Their freak show was the forerunner of today's talk radio.

Speaking of which: We've posted on our Web site an essay by the media scholar Henry Giroux. He describes the growing domination of hate radio as one of the crucial elements in a "culture of cruelty" increasingly marked by overt racism, hostility and disdain for others, coupled with a simmering threat of mob violence toward any political figure who believes healthcare reform is the most vital of safety nets, especially now that the central issue of life and politics is no longer about working to get ahead, but struggling simply to survive.

So here we are, wallowing in our dysfunction. Governed -- if you listen to the rabble rousers -- by a black nationalist from Kenya smuggled into the United States to kill Sarah Palin's baby. And yes, I could almost buy their belief that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, only I think he shipped them to Washington, where they've been recycled as lobbyists and trained in the alchemy of money laundering, which turns an old-fashioned bribe into a First Amendment right.

Only in a fantasy capital like Washington could Sunday morning talk shows become the high church of conventional wisdom, with partisan shills treated as holy men whose gospel of prosperity always seems to boil down to lower taxes for the rich.

Poor Obama. He came to town preaching the religion of nice. But every time he bows politely, the harder the Republicans kick him.

No one's ever conquered Washington politics by constantly saying "pretty please" to the guys trying to cut your throat.

Let's get on with it, Mr. President. We're up the proverbial creek with spaghetti as our paddle. This healthcare thing could have been the crossing of the Delaware, the turning point in the next American Revolution -- the moment we put the mercenaries to rout, as Gen. Washington did the Hessians at Trenton. We could have stamped our victory "Made in the USA." We could have said to the world, "Look what we did!" And we could have turned to each other and said, "Thank you."

As it is, we're about to get healthcare reform that measures human beings only in corporate terms of a cost-benefit analysis. I mean, this is topsy-turvy -- we should be treating health as a condition, not a commodity.

As we speak, Pfizer, the world's largest drug maker, has been fined a record $2.3 billion as a civil and criminal -- yes, that's criminal, as in fraud -- penalty for promoting prescription drugs with the subtlety of the Russian mafia. It's the fourth time in a decade Pfizer's been called on the carpet. And these are the people into whose tender mercies Congress and the White House would deliver us?

Come on, Mr. President. Show us America is more than a circus or a market. Remind us of our greatness as a democracy. When you speak to Congress next week, just come out and say it. We thought we heard you say during the campaign last year that you want a government-run insurance plan alongside private insurance -- mostly premium-based, with subsidies for low-and-moderate income people. Open to all individuals and employees who want to join and with everyone free to choose the doctors we want. We thought you said Uncle Sam would sign on as our tough, cost-minded negotiator standing up to the cartel of drug and insurance companies and Wall Street investors whose only interest is a company's share price and profits.

Here's a suggestion, Mr. President: Ask Josh Marshall to draft your speech. Josh is the founder of the Web site TalkingPointsMemo.com. He's a journalist and historian, not a politician. He doesn't split things down the middle and call it a victory for the masses. He's offered the simplest and most accurate description yet of a public insurance plan -- one that essentially asks people: Would you like the option -- the voluntary option -- of buying into Medicare before you're 65? Check it out, Mr. President.

This healthcare thing is make or break for your leadership, but for us, it's life and death. No more Mr. Nice Guy, Mr. President. We need a fighter.


----------



## RiffWraith (Sep 8, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Sep 08 said:


> A far more accurate parallel would Ahmadinejad's loudmouth rhetoric. It's more violent for now ("Death to Israel" and "Death to America"), but it's no more stupid than "Obama is spreading socialism in schools."



A world leader calling for the destruction of another country is on the same level intelligence-wise as people complaining about Obama spreading socialism in schools. Now _that_, ladies and gentlemen, is a completely rational statemant if I have ever heard one.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 8, 2009)

Get off my internet, RiffWraith. Right now.


----------



## RiffWraith (Sep 8, 2009)

Can't I stay just a little while longer....pleeeeeze?!?!?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 8, 2009)

No.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 9, 2009)

That's IT. I've had enough. I'm gonna go inject my steroids and fuck y'all up. I know where you live. Every last one a' yez.

Or maybe I'll just have some nice cantaloupe. Hmm.


----------



## The_Dark_Knight (Sep 9, 2009)

It's really obvious there's a mental breakdown happening on the conservative end. I'd say best to leave them alone, that's pretty much what the president is doing. I understand why they're having a breakdown though, it's because the president is a black, nazi, socialist, white, Kenyan, messiah, racist, the joker, muslim, atheist, fascist, english, false prophet, jew, celebrity and that he's sold the country to asia while selling the country to the new world order, Tony Blair, Israel, Germany, Canada, Monsanto food company and Mexico. He's also building a new fema empire where people will be put in coffins while their veins are injected with swine flue and they'll be forced to listen to soul music 24/7 and watch videos of him playing basket ball as part of indoctrination into worship of the dark prince.

Look it's really simple....Fact or fiction. Present or future. Put the bottle down and drink some fucking kool-aid. They're making stuff up now, this time totally unbelievable stuff and they don't even care because they understand that media just amplifies everything. The more you go tit for tat, the louder it gets. People remember the distortion of cacophony in the long term, not the details. 

Conservatives are fighting a war comprised of schizophrenia and the worst case scenario, just as the bible text clearly states. Liberals are in denial about the side-effects of big government towards liberty as well as drug abuse. Somewhere in the middle is astroglide for all.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 10, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Sep 08 said:


> The Iranians are totally rational. They have definite interests, and they act on them. We find their behavior totally offensive, of course, but it's not irrational.
> 
> A far more accurate parallel would Ahmadinejad's loudmouth rhetoric. It's more violent for now ("Death to Israel" and "Death to America"), but it's no more stupid than "Obama is spreading socialism in schools."
> 
> Besides, I don't understand why you think I'm advocating that all liberals remove most of our teeth, hit ourselves on our heads with mallets to lower our IQs, and start shouting almost equally moronic things on our side (which don't exist anyway).



's funny- I sorta think of Mister Ahmadinejad as, umm...Iran's elected leader? And a Holocaust denier, Anti-Semite, anti American, anti gay, etc etc etc. So, what you're saying is..the IRANIANS are totally rational, it's just their LEADERS, the people with all the POWER, who are nutjobs. Hmm. Cool concept. Power to the people!


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 10, 2009)

Oh, and speaking of us undiscerning lib'rals and our lack of understanding about the non salutary effects of big guvmint, has the Patriot Act been repealed yet? Wait, did that happen on our watch? Well, I s'pose we didn't stop it, neither.

A good primer about the dangers of one overpowering branch of guvmint has been written. It's called 'The Dark Side', written by Jane Meyer. I recommend it for the thrills and chills one gets observing a powerful VP creating a pet Justice Dept. Next to the stuff i read there, National Health Care is a cakewalk.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 10, 2009)

Larry, of course Ahmadinejad is a nutjob. That's my point: his rhetoric is irrational. (And he probably wasn't elected anyway.)

Dealing with Iran as a state is very different. If you listen to, say, Mohammed ElBaradei (the Nobel-winning head of the International Atomic Energy Agency), he'll say straight up that they're extremely shrewd and tough negotiators.

Ahmadinejad isn't the one with the power - he's just a Rush Limbaugh type.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 10, 2009)

Bush wasn't eleò:B   ¯^¸:B   ¯^¹:C   ¯^:C   ¯^‘:C   ¯^’:C   ¯^“:C   ¯^º:C   ¯^»:C   ¯^¼:C   ¯^½:C   ¯^¾:C   ¯^¿:C   ¯^À:C   ¯^Á:C   ¯^Â:C   ¯^Ã:C   ¯^Ä:C   ¯^Å:C   ¯^Æ:C   ¯^Ç:C   ¯^È:C   ¯^É:C   ¯^Ê:C   ¯^Ë:C   ¯^Ì:C   ¯^Í:C   ¯^Î:C   ¯^Ï:C   ¯^Ð:C   ¯^Ñ:C   ¯^Ò:C   ¯^Ó:C   ¯^Ô:C   ¯^Õ:C   ¯^Ö:C   ¯^×:C   ¯^Ø:C   ¯^Ù:C   ¯^Ú:C   ¯^Û:C   ¯^Ü:C   ¯^Ý:C   ¯^Þ:C   ¯^ß:C   ¯^à:C   ¯^á:C   ¯^â:C   ¯^ã:C   ¯^ä:C   ¯^å:C   ¯^æ:C   ¯^ç:C   ¯^è:C   ¯^é:C   ¯^ê:C   ¯^ë:C   ¯^ì:C   ¯^í:C   ¯^î:C   ¯^ï:C   ¯^ð:C   ¯^ñ:C   ¯^ò:C   ¯^ó:C   ¯^ô:C   ¯^õ:C   ¯^ö:C   ¯^÷:C   ¯^ø:C   ¯^ù:C   ¯^ú:C   ¯^û:C   ¯^ü:C   ¯^ý:C   ¯^þ:C   ¯^ÿ:C   ¯_ :C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C   ¯_	:C   ¯_
:C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C   ¯_ :C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C   ¯_:C


----------

