Annals of McCain - Palin, XII: monkey business

What I heard at some other blog--I can't remember what one--is that at the greedfuck moneygrab (oops, I mean "financial system bailout") negotiations, Obama totally dominated McCain, and made McCain look like the dumbfuck shithead he is. If that is true, then Obama PWNED!! McCain even before the debate.

In fairness to Matthews, his view was mirrored by many others. The dominant views were

I don't know that I'd be fair to him about that. His paroting of conventional wisdom is one of the most annoying things about him.

A friend of mine is the Mayor of a town in New Hampshire. At one point, all the major Democrat candidates for prez were together at the same fundraiser in this town, and my friend was naturally invited. His opinion was that despite the fact that this really was a meeting of alphas, Obama clearly owned the room. No disrespect at all to any of the other candidates--each was very appealing and larger-than-life in one on one conversation, and of course Hilary won the state--but Obama was the dominant personality among them.

Oh, and as a behaviorist myself, I am very pleased to find another... rumors of our demise are, it appears, greatly exaggerated.

http://clipcast.wpr.org:8080/ramgen/wpr/wau/rt51080329_iraqwar5years.mp3

Better keep that word in mind....Comrade.

derek: I find his most annoying characteristics are his superficiality and ignorance of basic facts. And that he's in idiot. In this case, though, I watched him right after the debate and he came up with the CW all by his lonesome. There was not time to hear from anyone else or even have it whispered in his ear.

"Owning the room" sounds kinda funny, until you see it and feel it up close. I covered the 1976 Democratic Convention for a western television station (didn't do my career any good), and got into a conversation with several other reporters about how Carter's mojo was good enough you could almost feel it. Everybody laughed about it. The night of Carter's speech, we could see Carter's arrival at Madison Square Garden, while watching the floor at the same time. The entire convention seemed to jolt when Carter entered the building. It was really odd.

I caught Carter a couple of other times before the election, and there did seem to be electricity in the air.

I moved to Washington, D.C., in 1979, and the first time I was back in a room with Carter, I thought how astounding that all the electricity was gone. Of course, he lost in 1980.

Monkey dominance, eh?

I don't know monkeys, but I do know dogs. I've been the big dog to a big dog. I see it as this:

Obama = 80-pound Doberman
McCain = 6-pound peekapoo

Does anyone know for a fact -- either way -- if McCain was wearing Depends?

Don't know about monkeys, but my hubby is retired law-enforcement type. When McCain was talking about how he 'warned' the Treasury people about the impending crash, my hubby said he 'lit up' as a liar. Also something to do with the eye blinking pattern of liars.

He's questioned alot of thugs in his life, so I trust his judgement, even tho' he is a republican....

Matthews is not a total bonehead. I have it on good authority that his head contains substantial amounts of fat and Hamburger Helper in addition to bone.

Rove McManus commented that it's pretty common for old white americans to avoid eye contact with young black americans asking for change.

Verbatim Ms. Colasurdo-

The following statement was made by John McCain on the floor of the Senate on May 25, 2005.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, this week Fannie Maes regulator reported that the companys quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were illusions deliberately and systematically created by the companys senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversights report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Maes former chief executive officer, OFHEOs report shows that over half of Mr. Raines compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulators examination of the companys accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Macknown as Government-sponsored entities or GSEsand the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEOs report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEOs report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

Now I dont know how much more plain it can be than that Grace...

You will of course disagree.

M. Randolph Kruger1... good fact check.

Though it is useful to remember that if Fannie and Freddie were not GSEs... OFHEO would not exist to look into their books. They were also privatized and very loosely regulated GSEs, far far different from being nationalized.

I don't know the details of the legislation McCain was endorsing... but I'd bet that it was basically along the lines of making Fannie and Freddie just like any other financial corp. That would give them more strict regulations in some important areas, but we all know how well those regulations were actually being enforced too.

Damn, forgot to add my last 'back on topic' bit...

The primate behaviour explanations are great, and maybe true to some extent. As Cesaer Milan says, a pack leader is "calm assertive". Can't believe I'm citing him, but hey, humans are pack animals ;)

A bit sadly, there is a more mundane and less interesting explanation. The debate format was predicated on having the candidate engage with each other. The moderator was supposed to kick off different discussion topics with his questions, and the candidates would actually ask follow-ups of each other.

This was a very cool idea, and McCain actually pushed it and everyone agreed it was good. Lehrer reportedly even watched the debate episode of West Wing to get ideas.

McCain, intentionally IMO, scuttled the format. He really didn't play by the rules... but since everyone is now used to really crappy debates where the candidates are basically verboten from addressing each other, it looked 'normal'. Lehrer looked like he was trying to pick a fight by encouraging the candidates to engage each other... but that wasn't his fault.

Maybe the intent was to throw Obama off balance. Maybe it was to make Obama look like a rude 'angry black man'. Maybe it was just trying to make the debate itself less memorable and credible. Whatever the intent, it didn't seem to work out too well.

For Grace:

Not to dis anybody, but I've heard of studies that show that law enforcement officers are not particularly good at determining the truthfulness of suspects. For example, this. Of course, your husband may well be above-average in this respect. :)

For what it's worth, I think Orac has had a post or two about John McCain's eye problems--the blinking may have a different etiology than being a psychological manifestation of dishonesty. (Which is not to say that McCain isn't dishonest, but just that the eye-blinking doesn't necessarily reflect that.)

Kind of like the reason he cant use a computers is because his hands were totally messed up by the NVA in Vietnam. Hard to punch them keyboards when your fingers were broken more than once.

I understand that the reason he blinks a lot is because he wears contacts.

Now here is an issue that Obama approved the message on....

http://www.kmov.com/localnews/stories/kmov_election_092808_truthsquad.b…

The very thing that Revere and others postured that would happen under Cheney and Bush is starting before the election can even get started under Obama. Now theres an issue Revere should take a stand on....

Travc-This is what the Republicans were trying to do...get some sort of regulation in there. They reported a 5 billion dollar mistake first and then added to it from there. The guy responsible in one case is the guy working for Obama as his economic advisor. He also very likely tipped Obama to make a speech in July so as to get ahead of the issue so he could say that he was the sole voice of reason. The debate was good in key issues and I think that they BOTH should have been pressed and hard. Looking at Obama? Please.... I would hope that the fate of this nation wouldnt hang on whether someone looks at someone else or not.

Shit, put me in there coach.... I dont wear headgear. I would have been ALL over Obama and he would have had to answer those questions that no one has asked him.

LIberal media bias is going to go down the tubes pretty quick I think. The people are going to start asking the questions and after the fact if elected, Obama may give them answers they dont want to hear.

Randy: Minor point: McCain has nothing wrong with his fingers. It is alleged he can't raise his arms above shoulder height.

Major point: Let's get something straight. I am not pimping for Democrats. Clinton's folks, like Rubin and Altman (now Obama's chief advisor on this) were part of this problem. I oppose the Dem leadership in caving to Bush on this bailout. In terms of this stuff we have only one party in the US, the Money Party. Is that the party you belong to also? If not, stop making this a Republican-Democrat issue and stop pimping for Republicans all the time. In terms of deregulation the Republicans are the really egregious enablers but Democrats are also bad, just not quite so bad. I disagree with both of them on this and agree with the sizable fraction of Democrats and Republicans who both oppose it. Where do you stand?

Pimping for the Republican Party....What else is there Revere? You have gone out of your way on at least 1 dozen occasions now to do what, just denigrate the Republicans or to put the truth out there as you see it. If you arent pimping for the Democrats then who are you pimping for... not the money party obviously. By implication you make the assertion that we would be better off with Obama... far from it in my opinion. Its an opinion thats held by a lot of people.

The Democrats are up to their eyeballs in this stuff and by using the media they are painting McCain/Palin with a large, large brush. Something you are doing very well without any sort of balance or fairness.

I will bring your attention to the failed savings and loan debaucle of the 1980's. Congress stood in the way of voting money for more regulators and we got the S&L issue and we had to bail them bastards out then. Now lets see that was 1980... Couldnt blame a thrift failure on Reagan because he hadnt been in office long enough. Clinton was in office and even had to back down his own party to even try to regulate the banking industry.

Where do I stand? I stand dead in the middle of a disaster as does everyone. Five years minimum to get this racket to quiet down and someone who has never held a real job (Obama) like many career Democrats is poised to take the White House with a liberal Congress, a super lib President in place and possibly appointing the next two or three Supremes. Where do I stand? I see a panicked America doing something that they did in 1976 and that something was electing an idiot-Carter. The difference this time is that we are clearly outmatched militarily in the world and they might not stop at Afghanistan this time around. If Obama is elected I think he will cut spending that is needed for modernization of the military to pay back his political cronies and there are a lot of them.

Everything we know will change if Obama is elected and it will slip so far to the left that this ship might not right itself in time. Russia is fully underway with modernization of its military and we cant get an appropriate for Iraq in under six months in Congress. You think this is about some dumb debate? I wouldnt have gone because they are as everyone said, worthless. They solve nothing, they dont change any votes and havent for years.

This bailout will succeed only partially. They will have to cut spending and cut taxes to get this thing back on track. I dont agree that we should be spending one damned dime but if we do, I dont give one big rat shit about anyone but the investors and certainly not the management. I dont agree that their salaries should be capped and certainly not some damned Democrat that thinks that the money in your pocket belongs to someone else. I certainly do not want them to spend an ADDITIONAL 250 billion for people who had unmanageable mortgages. I didnt sign on the dotted line for them. Stabilize the banks and banking industry and do nothing else.

This is the first attempt at socialism in this country and the Republicans just rolled over on it. I would simply say that the Dems have the votes to do it on their own and that they should. Then the blame for the fallout falls squarely back on the jerks who could have prevented it... Including and especially one Barney Franks and Dodd. Obama's hands are very dirty on this one and should be held accountable for it too.

Bought and paid for every damned one of them.

Randy: Yes, I see the world differently than you do. I prefer Obama by far but I don't agree with him much. He is in fact (rhetoric aside) very moderate in his politics. A natural conciliator. I think he has compromised on some matters of principle I wouldn't have compromised on. That aside, I have often been very critical of him here. You know this. You have read it often. I despise McCain as dishonest and dishonoraqble but you obviously despise Obama so that's a wash. In my view McCain is a child of privilege, having had his life and his education entirely paid for by me. Heis the one that has never had a real job, if by that you mean a job off the public payroll. Obama has had a life outside of government, although you conveniently ignore it.

So I'll ask you again. Do you support the current plan put forth by the Bush administration and the Republican and Democratic congressional leadership? The Money Party. I say, Hell No. And you? A Yes or No will be sufficient.

Oh, and we have been socializing the losses and privatizing the profits for more than a century in this country. Socialism for the rich. And this is another example.

Revere, he was an admirals son and they make okay money but not that much.

NO, emphatic NO.....

Yes, you are right and those Democrats in 77 FORCED the banks to start making sub prime loans...10%. Demanded it, forced it and threatened them if they didnt start. Bank regulators were deliberately causing changes of management at the banks if there wasnt compliance.

Socialism for the rich...Money Party? I dont think that is a fair description because they are all wrapped up in it. Its more like the power party. Pelosi, Franks, Obama, Biden, and a long list of Republicans. Phil Gramm isnt one of them. I can say that. But the Republicans stood up this morning and 95 Democrats with them and said not on your ass. The Dems have been in office for 2 years and we got this...Thanks Barney.

FDIC is 150 billion in the toilet right now. Credit card debt is next. But, were the banks being predatory when they give people cards? Dont have to sign the paper. I got three cards. Amex, MC and a debit card. I also have two kids in the military now and I for one dont want them to have to survive (literally) if Obama gets elected. If there was another choice, a real full blown Reagan Republican then I would vote for them... McCain is the only choice I believe we have.

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=184743

And there is no media bias either.....

http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0908/Matthews_interviews…

Phil Gramm isnt one of them. I can say that.

Phil Gramm -- co-sponsor of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, and vice-chairman of UBS Investment Bank -- is not a member of what Revere is calling the Money Party, or what you're calling the Power Party?!

That may well be the single most ridiculous thing you've ever said here.

The Dems have been in office for 2 years and we got this...Thanks Barney.

Mighty convenient of you to ignore the six years before that. I'm no fan of how the Dems have been acting, but the Repubs have been worse, and continue to be worse.

those Democrats in 77 FORCED the banks to start making sub prime loans...10%. Demanded it, forced it and threatened them if they didnt start.

Pretending for a moment that you're correct, and that the 20 intervening years of GOP rule are irrelevant, who is it that forced the holders of these debts to bundle the mortgages and offer them as collateral for third-party investors?

Bonus question: how many of the homes defaulted on in recent years were primary residences, and how many were investment properties?

MRK, there is another choice ole' friend, his name is Ron Paul.
But everyone here, it appears, gets caught up in the Republican or Democratic party.
Jesse Ventura warned us months ago that we need three parties running for President.
We are being swindled either way and each person who comments here is grasping at straws.

Sorry Phila, but lipstick on a goat still isnt anything but a goat. Thats what Obama is and his attack dogs went after the wrong guy..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

Lets not pretend anymore Phila.....

Lea, unless money becomes totally worthless and I am hedged against that too in more ways than one I dont care how many people defaulted on their loans that they shouldnt have been given, or that they deserved under this Democrat originated program. A man from Galilee once said that there would be poor always, look at the good things you have.... Kind of stuck with me as I cam from pretty humble beginnings and everything I ever got was because I got up off my ass and went and earned them.

I wonder how many of the defaulters take any personal responsibility. Today I heard it all. A cleaning woman in the building at Fox News said she had defaulted on not one, but two 300,000 dollar houses in the last six weeks.

Now someone PLEASE tell me how that works.

I don't know how that works, Randy. Lke I don't know how it works that these banks are defaulting on not just two loans but thousands of them or tens of thousands of them. Just how does that work, old son? Oh. You don't care how many people defaulted unless one of them is a cleaning woman. She probably also lost her cadillac while waiting in the welfare line. Remember what PT Barnum also said: there's a sucker born every minute. Was he born in Galilee?

Lea: It is Randy that turns everything into one of the two parties. As for Ron Paul, he has a lot more to recommend him than Dishonest John, but there is the little matter of reproductive rights and social security and a few dozen other little things. At least he has principles, even if some of them are cracked. McCain/ Not so much.

The McCain Campaign: a Campaign of whiners.

And the campaign of Obama is loaded with criminals....

Take your pick America. I have said it before that I had problems with McCain and this is one of them. Lobbyists have been around for a long time. The guy with McCain cooked his books to get a load of money out of the corporation. McCain sought out a lobbyist to run his campaign. Obama may have to suffer through his guy being indicted. That is unless he fires all of the prosecutors as Reno and Clinton did.

I personally think this might be the last Presidential election ever. Economic collapse, Obama win, Russians go after the rest of Georgia and Ukraine. They supply the Iranians with a nuke to put on their missiles. Yup, I can see where this might be the last one. Might happen if McCain is in there too. But thats okay most of us are too dumb to see whats going on outside of our own little worlds.

Well, Randy, if all of your predictions come to pass, you can always take refuge in Alaska.

No revere, it's not Randy that turns everything into two parties, it's you. And I mean that respectfully and as a friend, or acquaintance as you would have it.

Not much is being accomplished here revere except to tear down one party for another. Except to allow a few commenters, other than MRK, to come in and agree with your political views.
Please revere, tell me clearly, how much change has manifested since your start in the 60's?
Please tell me how much change have you seen that supports your aspirations since the 60's?
Please revere tell me, how has the world, America, improved since the 60's?

In the real world the grand jury's are starting to get their act together. If Obama had prior knowledge of the looming disaster and he acted upon it improperly, he will go to jail. Looks to me like its about to Raines outside now.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/fannie-freddie-get-subpoenas-sec/…

Now here's a really scary thought...... Obama gets elected....he gets impeached...Joe Biden becomes president....Hillary becomes vice president....

How very interesting a thought.

And Revere... dont be surprised if it suddenly gets very warm in and around Natanz.

Lea; The change has been enormous, particularly in race relations, but in almost everything else, too. Gender roles, what you can and can't talk about, religious views. It is a different world than the one I grew up in in the "heartland" (midwest) in the late 40s and 50s. This election would have been inconceivable. Has it improved? Depends on your point of view. It's different, in many good ways and in many bad ways.

Randy: LOL. It's Republicans that will be before Grand Juries, my old friend. REad the newspaper. Obama has never been accused of a crime, unlike others. You are whistling past the graveyard, my good friend. It won't help.

Lets not pretend anymore Phila.....

Again, who forced the banks to securitize subprime mortgages?

Do you even know what that means?

Please revere tell me, how has the world, America, improved since the 60's?

The easiest way to answer this question is to list the things that most social conservatives fought every step of the way, from the greater involvement and visibility and acceptance of women, gays, and minorities in politics and culture; to the advancing reproductive autonomy of women; to the limits on executive power that were put in place after Watergate; to the progress we've made in renewable energy and environmental science.

Who forced the banks to do it? No one did except for the Congress Phila...

Here is a nice paper. You may or may not understand it but it is on a tenth grade level...the same as Congress and their mentality. I think when warned time and again that those Democrats where were in control failed miserably at their duties. Some were even clearly biased.

And by the way.... I think I know far more about it than you do if for no other reason than two family members work at one of the largest hedge funds in the US.

Lets see... Women werent allowed to vote because of what President?

Minorities? Hmmmm...Seems you are out of whack there too Phila. Republicans signed the Emancipation Proclamation, the Supreme Court did the South and the US in Brown vs. Board of Education.

Must of forgotten what President desegregated which school in the South too.

I guess they should have put those limits on Johnson and his Johnson if Watergate was an issue huh? Wouldnt have had Vietnam.

Renewable energy and environmental science. Well still waiting for the viable renewable to show up. Environmental science and its poster boy Al Gore... Sorry but its going down in flames now. His hypocrisy is monumental....

Reproductive autonomy? Only if you ascribe to having no religion in your life as nearly all religions ban abortions ...Tell you what... I'll give you an even up on that one.

But that would be a liberal against a conservative. Why bother pointing out the reality of the world? If we want to go back a bit, everyone got rights in the sixties and kids wouldnt DREAM of back talking a parent. Now they get lawyers. You owned a gun for protection and had the right to use it for that purpose. Now you have the right to not resist and to have the shit kicked out of you for no other reason that a welfare state has created nothing but gangs out of those minorities you profess to have so much concern about.

We lost a war, and we have won two, third one has to be fought yet. We have seen much worse economic conditions twice and rebounded each time as the pendulum swung to the right. We have also seen the media become totally left wing and they dont spend much time beyond whacking up conservatives and vilifying them.

They dont ask questions that are important, only the sensational. We have had the President of the United State lie under oath and get away with it for obstruction and perjury. Wonder what would happen if I did-30 years with sex offender room mate in Maxwell?

We have seen a permanent sub culture in minorities emerge that will NEVER get out of the hood because there is no reason to toe the line anymore. We have the government willing to pay for welfare babies rather than to demand that the fathers of these children perform under the tenets of God and man. But this one you would bail on because it requires accountability. Cant have that now can we?

I have had two home invasions and I live in the boonies. One my two kids handled very nicely the other I wasnt home for but my neighbor the cop with a police car in the driveway handled that one. Talk about having brass cajoonies.

The one all encompassing thing that started this ball rolling was rights...They all got the right to do any goddamn thing they wanted to do and without accountability the system has given us what Lea is referring to today.

So go ahead and spill your leftist bile on me and tell me I have it all wrong Phila... Its going to fall on deaf ears because eventually the system swings back hard and this is the time its going to start again. Obama may win, but if he does the swing to the right will be so hard and violent this next time out that Maureen Dowd may move to Jamaica.

Here is your tenth grade paper Phila...

http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr318.pdf

Randy: Did you really say you knew more than Phila about something because you had two relatives in the business? LOL. I guess that makes me an expert on police, fire and the intelligence business, not mention medical economics, journalism, computers, social work, mathematics, etc., etc. Not only that, but I lunch every work day with an economist with a PhD from MIT. Have for 20 years. I guess that makes me an expert economist, too.

Here's the thing. Instead of throwing links around, you need to argue your case yourself, as Phila has done. I don't see him spewing any bile, either left or right, but I've seen a fair amount of bile from you. The anger and fear is hysterical and nasty and xenophobic. That's the future I worry about in this country. A black President will bring out all the nativist crazies. We'll defeat them, too, just as we defeated the Klan, but it will be nasty and some innocent people are going to be tormented.

In all fairness revere, one time you're asking for links and the next time you're saying don't throw links around. What gives with that?
And you must know Phila better than me as I've read hostility from his/her comments.

I'll admit MRK came on strong in the last comment but it was necessary IMO as Phila invites it.

Pimping for the Republican Party....What else is there Revere? You have gone out of your way on at least 1 dozen occasions now to do what, just denigrate the Republicans or to put the truth out there as you see it. If you arent pimping for the Democrats then who are you pimping for... not the money party obviously. By implication you make the assertion that we would be better off with Obama... far from it in my opinion. Its an opinion thats held by a lot of people.

The Democrats are up to their eyeballs in this stuff and by using the media they are painting McCain/Palin with a large, large brush. Something you are doing very well without any sort of balance or fairness.

I will bring your attention to the failed savings and loan debaucle of the 1980's. Congress stood in the way of voting money for more regulators and we got the S&L issue and we had to bail them bastards out then. Now lets see that was 1980... Couldnt blame a thrift failure on Reagan because he hadnt been in office long enough. Clinton was in office and even had to back down his own party to even try to regulate the banking industry.

Where do I stand? I stand dead in the middle of a disaster as does everyone. Five years minimum to get this racket to quiet down and someone who has never held a real job (Obama) like many career Democrats is poised to take the White House with a liberal Congress, a super lib President in place and possibly appointing the next two or three Supremes. Where do I stand? I see a panicked America doing something that they did in 1976 and that something was electing an idiot-Carter. The difference this time is that we are clearly outmatched militarily in the world and they might not stop at Afghanistan this time around. If Obama is elected I think he will cut spending that is needed for modernization of the military to pay back his political cronies and there are a lot of them.

Everything we know will change if Obama is elected and it will slip so far to the left that this ship might not right itself in time. Russia is fully underway with modernization of its military and we cant get an appropriate for Iraq in under six months in Congress. You think this is about some dumb debate? I wouldnt have gone because they are as everyone said, worthless. They solve nothing, they dont change any votes and havent for years.

This bailout will succeed only partially. They will have to cut spending and cut taxes to get this thing back on track. I dont agree that we should be spending one damned dime but if we do, I dont give one big rat shit about anyone but the investors and certainly not the management. I dont agree that their salaries should be capped and certainly not some damned Democrat that thinks that the money in your pocket belongs to someone else. I certainly do not want them to spend an ADDITIONAL 250 billion for people who had unmanageable mortgages. I didnt sign on the dotted line for them. Stabilize the banks and banking industry and do nothing else.

This is the first attempt at socialism in this country and the Republicans just rolled over on it. I would simply say that the Dems have the votes to do it on their own and that they should. Then the blame for the fallout falls squarely back on the jerks who could have prevented it... Including and especially one Barney Franks and Dodd. Obama's hands are very dirty on this one and should be held accountable for it too.

Bought and paid for every damned one of them.