Oddly enough, the WH says it's time to move on from the Russia probe, and Mitch McConnell says no to independent investigation.

socaliganbear;842838808 said:

---

Oddly enough, the WH says it's time to move on from the Russia probe, and Mitch McConnell says no to independent investigation.

---

"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

sycasey;842838775 said:

---

Missing the point. You don't have to love Comey personally to find the circumstances of his firing highly suspect.

---

I have missed nothing. I do not care that he has been fired. Every firing is suspect in today's political climate. Do I think Trump fired him for political reasons? Sure. I dislike Trump. But whether he fires Comey neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

1979bear;842838812 said:

---

I have missed nothing. I do not care that he has been fired. Every firing is suspect in today's political climate. Do I think Trump fired him for political reasons? Sure. I dislike Trump. But whether he fires Comey neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

---

So you don't care what happens in government unless it directly and immediately impacts you. Cool.

tequila4kapp;842838793 said:

---

At this point there is zero evidence anyone from Trump's camp conspired or coordinated with Russia. Clapper said as much Monday (again). To the best of my knowledge nobody has offered facts indicating otherwise or even said there is evidence to that fact. So this part of the equation to me looks like some smoke but no fire. Could turn out to be something. Could turn out to be Democrat partisans seeing what they want to see and using it for political purposes. TBD.

---

This is just flat out false and requires ignoring lots of information that is in the public domain. The news on Michael Flynn, by himself, is pretty damning. Clapper didn't say there was no evidence, Clapper said he was not privy to the investigation being conducted by the FBI.

btw, we seem to have a BI consensus that there needs to be an independent investigation.

socaliganbear;842838808 said:

---

Oddly enough, the WH says it's time to move on from the Russia probe, and Mitch McConnell says no to independent investigation.

---

Trump does not want to be investigated. McConnell wants the investigation to go away or to control it.
Reminds me of a lot of construction defect situations.
The Builder wants to avoid any investigation of the defective construction. (Problem? What problem? There's no problem.)
The Developer/Selling Agent want any investigation to go away since it will cost them money and lost sales.
The buyers (here the general public) in the long run have to bear the brunt of the deteriorating construction.

dajo9;842838785 said:

---

I am fine with that. Hillary has already been investigated more than 9/11. Don't think you'll find anything there in a legitimate independent investigation. Let's go with Odonto's suggestion.

---

Lynch, Holder, et al

OdontoBear66;842838821 said:

---

Lynch, Holder, et al

---

Let's do it.

Let's investigate everyone, congress loves doing that.

How many Benghazi investigations have there been - 11? Let's get one real investigation of all this Russia garbage before we complain that it's too much.

tequila4kapp;842838781 said:

---

Be dismissive all you want. My opinion is one which ultimately serves to advance the cause of those generally on your side of the isle.

---

An apt and hilarious typo/misspelling.

sycasey;842838792 said:

---

In all seriousness, wouldn't you say that the timing of the Comey firing lends more credence to the former interpretation (Yates fired for investigating Flynn)? It's not proven, of course. But these coincidences can add up.

---

I would say that the more likely scenario is that this White House is run by bunch of amateurs who cannot seem to get anything right. There is no way this could have been handled any worse. If I thought the Spicers, Conways and Priebus of this world had any true political talent, I would be more worried. If this was more than Trump throwing a fit and the sycophants not stopping him, I would guess they would have handled this in a lot more artful manner, would have been coordinate better after greater strategy and with additional buy-in from the Senate. This is a case bunch of untalented sycophants who have no idea how to run an administration but instead fighting for praise of a narcissist screwing up another thing that is probably much more innocuous than they are making it out to be by messing this up in the worst possible way. I am so tired of this administration, but no amount of amateur hour surprises me anymore. I am just counting the days.

CB93 - I hope you are right and that they are just incompetent because that is certainly the best possible outcome at this point. Of course, incompetence is a problem on its own - see Hillary's email server.

Best case scenario, our electorate learns from this mess and focuses more on substance in future elections, but unfortunately I think the opposite will occur. Newt Gingrich's success in the 90's proved that partisanship and bluster prevail over truth and substance. There are no "rules" any more and decorum is so far gone, I don't see it coming back. There was an interesting article about a new surprise potential Democratic presidential candidate - Chris Murphy - almost entirely because he was skilled in launching attacks on twitter.

Unit2Sucks;842838842 said:

---

Best case scenario, our electorate learns from this mess and focuses more on substance in future elections, but unfortunately I think the opposite will occur. Newt Gingrich's success in the 90's proved that partisanship and bluster prevail over truth and substance.

---

LOL the Contact with America was probably the most substantive policy statement ever made in the run up to an election in the United States, Gingrich was a bit of a hack but to say the 1994 takeover by the GOP was the end of truth and substance in our body politic is fucking absurd. The Democrats have no truth or substance emanating from their ranks these days, the GOP doesn't either but they have a strongman in Trump, which leaves the Democrats with...?

The inability of the Democrats to produce any succinct policy statement or direction is why they are a rump party in this country, they are anti-Trump, and nothing else. Substance is lacking, but not dead in our political system, and their failure to capitalize is astounding.

Strykur;842838848 said:

---

LOL the Contact with America was probably the most substantive policy statement ever made in the run up to an election in the United States, Gingrich was a bit of a hack but to say the 1994 takeover by the GOP was the end of truth and substance in our body politic is fucking absurd. The Democrats have no truth or substance emanating from their ranks these days, the GOP doesn't either but they have a strongman in Trump, which leaves the Democrats with...?

The inability of the Democrats to produce any succinct policy statement or direction is why they are a rump party in this country, they are anti-Trump, and nothing else. Substance is lacking, but not dead in our political system, and their failure to capitalize is astounding.

---

I was recently speaking to a Republican friend of mine (former Marine, Trump was first Republican Presidential candidate he did not vote for) and he was saying the same about Gingrich and how he changed the political atmosphere for the worse. His view was that both sides needed to take a step back from the vitriolic partisanship Gingrich weaponized.

Strykur;842838848 said:

---

The inability of the Democrats to produce any succinct policy statement or direction is why they are a rump party in this country, they are anti-Trump, and nothing else. Substance is lacking, but not dead in our political system, and their failure to capitalize is astounding.

---

Republicans were a "rump" party in 2008 (Democrats had even bigger margins in both houses than Republicans do now). These things can change quickly. The worst assumption you can make is that politics will always remain exactly as it is now.

Also, I'm not sure how Democrats were supposed to have "capitalized" by now? The next round of national elections are in 2018. That's when we'll see if they have.

dajo9;842838853 said:

---

I was recently speaking to a Republican friend of mine (former Marine, Trump was first Republican Presidential candidate he did not vote for) and he was saying the same about Gingrich and how he changed the political atmosphere for the worse. His view was that both sides needed to take a step back from the vitriolic partisanship Gingrich weaponized.

---

On a scale of 100 for severity of national division, 100 being the civil war, in your opinion(or anyone on this board), what would be the average score Americans would cite? I think people on average would probably put us at over 90. IMO that would be an inflated estimate based on people's inability to really put thinks into perspective. I think we are at 50-60 at most. Has there been a time in our lifetime where there wasn't division/culture war between seemingly everyone?

Unit2Sucks;842838842 said:

---

CB93 - I hope you are right and that they are just incompetent because that is certainly the best possible outcome at this point. Of course, incompetence is a problem on its own - see Hillary's email server.

Best case scenario, our electorate learns from this mess and focuses more on substance in future elections, but unfortunately I think the opposite will occur. Newt Gingrich's success in the 90's proved that partisanship and bluster prevail over truth and substance. There are no "rules" any more and decorum is so far gone, I don't see it coming back. There was an interesting article about a new surprise potential Democratic presidential candidate - Chris Murphy - almost entirely because he was skilled in launching attacks on twitter.

---

Incompetence is a huge problem, but not criminal. I am having a hard time picturing these bunch of clowns engaging in some complex James Bondish sabotage. Roger Stone is a clown - can you imagine an actual spy collaborator mouthing off like he is? Page looks like a patsy and acts like one too. Flynn is a walking irony (how is that "lock her up" working out for him?). They may have been inadvertent tools (not that Russia is the boogeyman we are thinking they are - China is a much greater and more silent potential world power) but they probably screwed that up too. The person that just got fired is one of the main reasons (other than HRC's own incompetence) for where we are today, not Russia.

dajo9;842838853 said:

---

I was recently speaking to a Republican friend of mine (former Marine, Trump was first Republican Presidential candidate he did not vote for) and he was saying the same about Gingrich and how he changed the political atmosphere for the worse. His view was that both sides needed to take a step back from the vitriolic partisanship Gingrich weaponized.

---

Pretty much this.

He proved that obstruction was a better path to regaining a majority then compromise. It's also why we ended up with the 95 and 96 government shutdowns which were the most severe to date. In fairness to Gingrich, he may very well have believed that he was acting in the best interests of the country in taking extreme measures to flip the majority in order to enact legislation that he genuinely believed would improve this country, but the end result has been continual obstruction and brinksmanship. Even now, Trump is talking about having a good government shutdown this fall - when we have many months to negotiate a compromise, if only Trump could get out of his own way.

calbear93;842838858 said:

---

Incompetence is a huge problem, but not criminal. I am having a hard time picturing these bunch of clowns engaging in some complex James Bondish sabotage. Roger Stone is a clown - can you imagine an actual spy collaborator mouthing off like he is? Page looks like a patsy and acts like one too. Flynn is a walking irony (how is that "lock her up" working out for him?). They may have been inadvertent tools (not that Russia is the boogeyman we are thinking they are - China is a much greater and more silent potential world power) but they probably screwed that up too. The person that just got fired is one of the main reasons (other than HRC's own incompetence) for where we are today, not Russia.

---

A lot of people seem to think that Hillary's incompetence was criminal - as you've alluded to "lock her up" statements and those have come from conservatives in the highest levels of the government. I don't disagree with most of what you've written but I would point out that criminality isn't the only factor. Incompetence could lead to a war with North Korea without any criminal activity. I'm actually a lot more worried about what Trump's incompetence will result in then his criminal conduct. I'm pretty any criminal behavior would just be to line his pockets or keep him in the white house whereas his incompetence could massively derail our economy or endanger American lives.

sycasey;842838855 said:

---

Republicans were a "rump" party in 2008 (Democrats had even bigger margins in both houses than Republicans do now). These things can change quickly. The worst assumption you can make is that politics will always remain exactly as it is now.

Also, I'm not sure how Democrats were supposed to have "capitalized" by now? The next round of national elections are in 2018. That's when we'll see if they have.

---

You're just looking at Congress, nationwide at the federal and state levels, the Democrats under Obama lost over 1,000 seats of power. The Democratic Party is effectively centralized in a few states and urban centers, and that's it.

https://apnews.com/21dbd1254fea4738b662a12612c5fbf1/obama-accomplished-policy-goals-his-party-floundered

Democrats are empty suits, or so the public thinks at this point. Pelosi and Schumer obviously do not have a clue.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/04/democratic-party-out-of-touch-obama-wall-street-speech/524784/

dajo9;842838817 said:

---

This is just flat out false and requires ignoring lots of information that is in the public domain. The news on Michael Flynn, by himself, is pretty damning. Clapper didn't say there was no evidence, Clapper said he was not privy to the investigation being conducted by the FBI.

btw, we seem to have a BI consensus that there needs to be an independent investigation.

---

March 5, Meet The Press, James Clapper: "No evidence" of collusion between Trump advisors and Russia:
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/full-clapper-no-evidence-of-collusion-between-trump-and-russia-890509379597


Transcripts from the Monday Senate sessions:
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/05/08/full-transcript-sally-yates-and-james-clapper-testify-on-russian-election-interference/?utm_term=.3339c2d012a3)

GRAHAM: (long quote so I'll paraphrase: Is what you said on Meet The Press that there's no evidence of collusion still accurate?)
CLAPPER: It is.
-----
GRAHAM: What I don't get is how the FBI can have a counter- intelligence investigation suggesting collusion, and you, as director of National Intelligence not know about it, and the FBI sign on to a report that basically said there was no collusion.
CLAPPER: I can only speculate why that's so. There wasn't — the evidence, if there was any, didn't reach the evidentiary bar in terms of the level of confidence that we were striving for in that intelligence community assessment.

----
YATES: If I could try to clarify one answer before as well, because I think, Senator Graham, you may have misunderstood me. You asked me whether I was aware of any evidence of collusion, and I declined to answer because answering would reveal classified information.

I believe that that's the same answer that Director Comey gave to this committee when he was asked this question as well. And he made clear, and I'd like to make clear, that just because I say I can't answer it, you should not draw from that an assumption that that means that the answer is yes.

* * *

To the best of my knowledge, there may be evidence that Flynn broke OTHER laws and lied to Pence about his contacts with Russia. That IS NOT the same thing as colluding with Russia to interfere in our election on behalf of Trump. These Wash Post / NPR citation are representative:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/25/jason-chaffetz-elijah-cummings-michael-flynn-russi/
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/04/25/525568470/lawmakers-say-it-appears-michael-flynn-acted-illegally-in-taking-russian-payment

* * *

If there are citations proving otherwise regarding evidence of collusion, please post them because I am not aware that any exist.

calbear93;842838858 said:

---

Incompetence is a huge problem, but not criminal. I am having a hard time picturing these bunch of clowns engaging in some complex James Bondish sabotage. Roger Stone is a clown - can you imagine an actual spy collaborator mouthing off like he is? Page looks like a patsy and acts like one too. Flynn is a walking irony (how is that "lock her up" working out for him?). They may have been inadvertent tools (not that Russia is the boogeyman we are thinking they are - China is a much greater and more silent potential world power) but they probably screwed that up too. The person that just got fired is one of the main reasons (other than HRC's own incompetence) for where we are today, not Russia.

---

[video=youtube;vETxuL7Ij3Q][/video]


"The truth is these are not very bright guys and things got out of hand."

burritos;842838856 said:

---

On a scale of 100 for severity of national division, 100 being the civil war, in your opinion(or anyone on this board), what would be the average score Americans would cite? I think people on average would probably put us at over 90. IMO that would be an inflated estimate based on people's inability to really put thinks into perspective. I think we are at 50-60 at most. Has there been a time in our lifetime where there wasn't division/culture war between seemingly everyone?

---

On their board, 90. In real life, 34

Strykur;842838862 said:

---

You're just looking at Congress, nationwide at the federal and state levels, the Democrats under Obama lost over 1,000 seats of power. The Democratic Party is effectively centralized in a few states and urban centers, and that's it.

https://apnews.com/21dbd1254fea4738b662a12612c5fbf1/obama-accomplished-policy-goals-his-party-floundered

Democrats are empty suits, or so the public thinks at this point. Pelosi and Schumer obviously do not have a clue.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/04/democratic-party-out-of-touch-obama-wall-street-speech/524784/

---

Yes, Democrats took their eye off the ball on downballot races.

It remains to be seen if things remain this way post-Trump.

Strykur;842838862 said:

---

You're just looking at Congress, nationwide at the federal and state levels, the Democrats under Obama lost over 1,000 seats of power. The Democratic Party is effectively centralized in a few states and urban centers, and that's it.

https://apnews.com/21dbd1254fea4738b662a12612c5fbf1/obama-accomplished-policy-goals-his-party-floundered

Democrats are empty suits, or so the public thinks at this point. Pelosi and Schumer obviously do not have a clue.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/04/democratic-party-out-of-touch-obama-wall-street-speech/524784/

---

Which begs the question, with all the power amassed by republicans, and influence at every single level of governement, we got Trump? Is he really the pinnacle of conservatism at this point? I'm not sure who his election looks worse on tbh, republicans or democrats.

It goes without saying that democrats had a short bench.

sycasey;842838816 said:

---

So you don't care what happens in government unless it directly and immediately impacts you. Cool.

---

I choose not to concern myself with things that are so far out of my control. Am I going to join a street protest? Write letters to my Congressman? Send money to someone who opposes Trump because of this? No. I see the Comey firing has your attention. Cool. Look, you are not going to affect any part of what happens with this and neither am I. This is politics in this country right now. I has been this way since at least the 2000 election, and some of us older guys think it has been longer than that. A handful of educated and generally well-informed Cal folks on a message board are not going to change this in any meaningful way. Lament this if you choose. I choose not to. On a more important note for you, the Senate is extremely unlikely to change the ACA or pass the rubbish the House just sent up. Not all is lost.

Unit2Sucks;842838860 said:

---

A lot of people seem to think that Hillary's incompetence was criminal - as you've alluded to "lock her up" statements and those have come from conservatives in the highest levels of the government. I don't disagree with most of what you've written but I would point out that criminality isn't the only factor. Incompetence could lead to a war with North Korea without any criminal activity. I'm actually a lot more worried about what Trump's incompetence will result in then his criminal conduct. I'm pretty any criminal behavior would just be to line his pockets or keep him in the white house whereas his incompetence could massively derail our economy or endanger American lives.

---

I agree absolutely. That is why I think this focus on Russia (just appoint a darn independent special counsel and get rid of this nonsense) is missing the point. We are messing up on so many fronts, whether scaring our allies with inconsistent rambling, rushing to fix something as critical as health care (Obamacare needs to be fixed but it is not a business deal negotiation and it needs to involve both parties), trade deficit, deteriorating middle class, etc. But the Democrats think that making noise about Russia is going to change people's votes. The revolution is not going to come from the far-left. The revolution has to come from the moderates on both sides saying enough with letting these loud crazies on both sides run our country to the ground. While we may disagree on certain things, we certainly agree more than we do with the extremes on either side.

1979bear;842838868 said:

---

I choose not to concern myself with things that are so far out of my control. Am I going to join a street protest? Write letters to my Congressman? Send money to someone who opposes Trump because of this? No. I see the Comey firing has your attention. Cool. Look, you are not going to affect any part of what happens with this and neither am I. This is politics in this country right now. I has been this way since at least the 2000 election, and some of us older guys think it has been longer than that. A handful of educated and generally well-informed Cal folks on a message board are not going to change this in any meaningful way. Lament this if you choose. I choose not to. On a more important note for you, the Senate is extremely unlikely to change the ACA or pass the rubbish the House just sent up. Not all is lost.

---

Shorter version: "I give up."

Cool cool cool.

sycasey;842838873 said:

---

Shorter version: "I give up."

Cool cool cool.

---

You don't really believe that, do you? Is he saying he gives up? He is saying he is not going to run a fool's errand saying "let's get it done..let's appoint so and so" like others on this thread. Great. Let me know when that has been accomplished. His point is that complaining about every little thing that Trump does on this board and being melodramatic doesn't change a single thing.

So, if the moderates have to win back this country, it is not going to be done on this board, it is not going to be done through saying "pick a side". It is going to be done with people stepping back, getting realistic perspective and not just repeating party lines or saying the other side is the sole problem and deciding at the next election who we truly are as a country.

1979bear;842838868 said:

---

I choose not to concern myself with things that are so far out of my control. Am I going to join a street protest? Write letters to my Congressman? Send money to someone who opposes Trump because of this? No. I see the Comey firing has your attention. Cool. Look, you are not going to affect any part of what happens with this and neither am I. This is politics in this country right now. I has been this way since at least the 2000 election, and some of us older guys think it has been longer than that. A handful of educated and generally well-informed Cal folks on a message board are not going to change this in any meaningful way. Lament this if you choose. I choose not to. On a more important note for you, the Senate is extremely unlikely to change the ACA or pass the rubbish the House just sent up. Not all is lost.

---

The Senate is extremely unlikely to change the ACA, at least in some small part, because of civic engagement from constituents like you.

sycasey;842838873 said:

---

Shorter version: "I give up."

Cool cool cool.

---

But in the house of BI, let the OT flame wars burn ad infinitum.

calbear93;842838875 said:

---

You don't really believe that, do you? Is he saying he gives up? He is saying he is not going to run a fool's errand saying "let's get it done..let's appoint so and so" like others on this thread. Great. Let me know when that has been accomplished. His point is that complaining about every little thing that Trump does on this board and being melodramatic doesn't change a single thing.

So, if the moderates have to win back this country, it is not going to be done on this board, it is not going to be done through saying "pick a side". It is going to be done with people stepping back, getting realistic perspective and not just repeating party lines or saying the other side is the sole problem and deciding at the next election who we truly are as a country.

---

"Look, you are not going to affect any part of what happens with this and neither am I." . . . "A handful of educated and generally well-informed Cal folks on a message board are not going to change this in any meaningful way. Lament this if you choose. "

His point is that we here aren't going to affect the politics in this country. Which is true. But that's not how forums work. This is not a place where we only discuss things we will have a direct effect on. We discuss plenty of things we can't actually control, and likely always will.

Your point is that you're tired of people complaining about everything Trump says and does.

socaliganbear;842838880 said:

---

"Look, you are not going to affect any part of what happens with this and neither am I." . . . "A handful of educated and generally well-informed Cal folks on a message board are not going to change this in any meaningful way. Lament this if you choose. "

His point is that we here aren't going to affect the politics in this country. Which is true. But that's not how forums work. This is not a place where we only discuss things we will have a direct effect on. We discuss plenty of things we can't actually control, and likely always will.

Your point is that you're tired of people complaining about everything Trump says and does.

---

That is not my point. People do have basis for complaining about everything that Trump says and does. It is justified. However, the battlefield is not this board. The people who will actually matter in what gets changed are not those who exaggerate what is already unfortunate and has never deviated from their party position. My point is that it is unfair for 1979 to be criticized for not engaging in the mental masturbation here. It's all empty talk here. It's fun sometimes and that is why I engage. However, not a single thing has been accomplished by someone picking a side here (despite emphatic directive to do so from others) or saying "let's pick Holden, etc, done". So to say that someone has given up because they choose not to engage in meaningless discussions here as if this is the real driver of what will change the country is unfair. I can't think of a single person whose perspective has really changed from the persuasive (or often times not so persuasive) arguments here.

Is there a chart that maps out the sunshine pumper/negabear and the pro/con arguers in this thread?

Read the whole thread, interesting stuff.

It is so hard to wade through partisan bickering to try and get at what is the best path forward for the country.

Agree with '79. How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World - spend my energy on what I can control.

I think we are seeing the effects of the networked society playing out in our politics, oscillations become more rapid and extreme. Our governments seems to largely function for the enrichment of those in office, a drain on all of us (seemingly excepting certain Northern European countries). The race to secure wealth via the legislative path is a cancer which corrupts.

Think globally, act locally.

calbear93;842838875 said:

---

You don't really believe that, do you? Is he saying he gives up? He is saying he is not going to run a fool's errand saying "let's get it done..let's appoint so and so" like others on this thread. Great. Let me know when that has been accomplished. His point is that complaining about every little thing that Trump does on this board and being melodramatic doesn't change a single thing.

---

It wasn't just about this board, though. Here's the beginning of the comment:

"Am I going to join a street protest? Write letters to my Congressman? Send money to someone who opposes Trump because of this? No. I see the Comey firing has your attention. Cool. Look, you are not going to affect any part of what happens with this and neither am I."

All of that stuff mentioned there is what citizens can do to affect change OUTSIDE of this board. All were pooh-poohed. To me that seems like a call for disengagement.

This message board is just another public space, like discussing things with your family or your co-workers or whatever. Does that have direct impact on the workings of the government? No. But it can help to ensure that people are informed about what is happening and what people close to them think about it. How do you think political opinions are formed in the first place?

sycasey;842838886 said:

---

It wasn't just about this board, though. Here's the beginning of the comment:

"Am I going to join a street protest? Write letters to my Congressman? Send money to someone who opposes Trump because of this? No. I see the Comey firing has your attention. Cool. Look, you are not going to affect any part of what happens with this and neither am I."

All of that stuff mentioned there is what citizens can do to affect change OUTSIDE of this board. All were pooh-poohed. To me that seems like a call for disengagement.

This message board is just another public space, like discussing things with your family or your co-workers or whatever. Does that have direct impact on the workings of the government? No. But it can help to ensure that people are informed about what is happening and what people close to them think about it. How do you think political opinions are formed in the first place?

---

He apparently disagrees with you that those things are effective. I tend to agree. I tend to think that how you are with others in real life, things you do within your community, and helping others is a lot more effective and meaningful than saying you support something on a message board or writing to your senator. What do I think is effective? Lead by example. Act to affect those whose lives you can actually affect. No one is going to be impressed with partisan regurgitation.

And this board is not a shaper of any opinion. Who has changed their position based on what anyone has written here? Let's not inflate what we do here beyond what it really is. And I trust 1979 to do more for his community and have more affect on real people than some of those who would bash him here because he is not engaging in political busywork.