Memo to John McCain, Don't be a dickhead, please….

It seems that ol’ Juan McSame is wanting to live up to the image that the Democrats are painting for him. A senile, cantankerous old man.

This little gem, comes Via TIME:

For years, John McCain’s marathon bull sessions with reporters were more than a means of delivering a message; they were
the message. McCain proudly, flagrantly refused direction from handlers, rarely dodged tough questions and considered those who did
wimps and frauds. The style told voters that he was unafraid, that he had nothing to hide and that what you see is what you get. "Anything
you want to talk about," he promised reporters aboard the Straight Talk Express in Iowa back in March 2007. "One of the fundamental principles
of the bus is that there is no such thing as a dumb question." When asked if he would keep the straight talk coming, McCain replied, "You
think I could survive if I didn’t? We’d never be forgiven … I’d have to hire a food taster, somebody to start my car in the morning." Even
after he won the GOP nomination, he demanded that his new campaign plane be configured to include a sofa up front so he could re-create
the Straight Talk Express at 30,000 ft.

However, this has changed quite a bit here as of recent, here’s the transcript of ol’ McSame being a total ass to the media:

And so when TIME’s James Carney and Michael Scherer were invited to the front of McCain’s plane recently for an interview, they were ushered
forward, past the curtain that now separates reporters from the candidate, past the sofa that was designed for his gabfests with the
press and taken straight to the candidate’s seat. McCain at first seemed happy enough to do the interview. But his mood quickly soured.
The McCain on display in the 24-minute interview was prickly, at times abrasive, and determined not to stray off message. An excerpt:

What do you want voters to know coming out of the Republican Convention — about you, about your candidacy?

I’m prepared to be President of the United States, and I’ll put my country first.

There’s a theme that recurs in your books and your speeches, both about putting country first but also about honor. I wonder if you could
define honor for us?

Read it in my books.

I’ve read your books.

No, I’m not going to define it.

But honor in politics?

I defined it in five books. Read my books.

[Your] campaign today is more disciplined, more traditional, more aggressive. From your point of view, why the change?

Iwill do as much as we possibly can do to provide as much access to the press as possible.

But beyond the press, sir, just in terms of …

I think we’re running a fine campaign, and this is where we are.

Do you miss the old way of doing it?

I don’t know what you’re talking about.

Really? Come on, Senator.

I’ll provide as much access as possible …

In 2000, after the primaries, you went back to South Carolina to talk about what you felt was a mistake you had made on the Confederate
flag. Is there anything so far about this campaign that you wish you could take back or you might revisit when it’s over?

[Does not answer.]

Do I know you? [Says with a laugh.]

[Long pause.] I’m very happy with the way our campaign has been conducted, and I am very pleased and humbled to have the nomination of
the Republican Party.

You do acknowledge there was a change in the campaign, in the way you had run the campaign?

[Shakes his head.]

You don’t acknowledge that? O.K., when your aides came to you and you decided, having been attacked by Barack Obama, to run some of those
ads, was there a debate?

The campaign responded as planned.

Jumping around a bit: in your books, you’ve talked about what it was like to go through the Keating Five experience, and you’ve been quoted
as saying it was one of the worst experiences of your life. Someone else quoted you as saying it was even worse than being a POW …

That’s another one of those statements made 17 or 18 years ago which was out of the context of the conversation I was having. Of course the
worst, the toughest experience of my life was being imprisoned, so people can pluck phrases from 17 or 18 years ago …

I wasn’t suggesting it as a negative thing. I was just saying that …

I’m just suggesting it was taken out of context. I understand how comments are taken out of context from time to time. But obviously, the
toughest time of my life, physically and [in] every other way, would be the time that I almost died in prison camp. And I think most Americans
understand that.

How different are you from President Bush? Are you in step with your party? Are you independent from your party?

My record shows that I have put my country first and I follow the philosophy and traditions of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt and
Ronald Reagan. Sometimes that is not in keeping with the present Administration or my colleagues, but I’ve always put my country first,
whether it’s saying I didn’t support the decision to go to Lebanon or my fighting against the corruption in Washington or out-of-control
pork-barrel spending, which has led to members of Congress residing in federal prison. So I’ve always stood up for a set of principles and a
philosophy that I think have been pretty consistent over the years.

Your tougher line on Russia, which predated [the Russian invasion of Georgia], now to many looks prescient. Others say it’s indicative of a
belligerent approach to foreign policy that would perhaps further exacerbate the tensions being created with our allies and others around
the world under the Bush Administration. How do you respond to that critique?

Well, it reminds me of some of the arguments we went through when Ronald Reagan became President of the United States. I think Russian
behavior has been very clear, and I’ve pointed it out for quite a period of time, and the chronicle of their actions has been well known
since President [Vladimir] Putin came to power, and I believe that it’s very important that Russia behave in a manner befitting a very strong
nation. They’re not doing so at this time, so therefore I will criticize and in some cases — in the case of the aggression against
Georgia — condemn them.

You were a very enthusiastic supporter of the invasion of Iraq and, in the early stages, of the Bush Administration’s handling of the war.
Are those judgments you’d like to revisit?

Well, my record is clear. I believe that the world is better off without Saddam Hussein. I believe it’s clear that he had every
intention to acquire and use weapons of mass destruction. I can only imagine what Saddam Hussein would be doing with the wealth he would
acquire with oil at $110 and $120 a barrel. I was one of the first to point out the failure of strategy in Iraq under [former Defense
Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld. I was criticized for being disloyal to the Republicans and the President. I was the first to say I would lose a
campaign rather than lose a war. I supported the surge. No observer  over the last two years would say the surge hasn’t succeeded. I believe
we did the righ
t thing.

A lot of people know about your service from your books, but most people don’t know that you have two sons currently in the military. Can
you describe what it means to have Jack and Jimmy in uniform?

We don’t discuss our sons.

Look McCain, if you want to be President, you’d be learn to deal with the damn media AND Bloggers. Because if you continue this little trend of being a total prick to the main stream media, you might just find yourself beaten in a election, because the way I see it, as an Independent Conservative, I feel that if John McCain cannot handle the media, how is he going to handle Russia, How is he going to handle Iraq? How is he going to handle the daily grind of the day to day operations of the White House?

Of course, I expect that Mr. McSame will again use his P.O.W. status, which McCain and his campaign has been using as a damn crutch, as an excuse to be an grotchity old fool. Sorry, but this Conservative isn’t buying that line of nonsense.

In other words, change the attitude or get the hell out of the Presidential race sir.

New McCain Ad nails Obama on the kneecaps. (or worse….)

(H/T to Ed over at HotAir.com)

The deadly quote in this entire Ad is:

You know, I am a believer in … in knowing what you’re doing when you apply for a job. Uh, and I think that … if I were seriously to consider running on a national ticket, I would essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the Senate. Now there may be some people who are comfortable doing that, but I am not one of those people. — Barack Obama, 2004

Ouch!

Now some would say that McCain’s team is using words from before his decision to run for President. Which is a fair criticism, however, for those paying attention to this whole race, this could do some serious damage.

Now personally, I think that this is classic Republican fear-mongering. It could work, and then again, it could backfire. Because the only thing that team Barry would have to do, is put out an ad reminding America that George W. Bush had intelligence warning about attacks from Al-Qaeda, and basically did nothing, and then tie McCain to Bush. That would be deadly. But would be very effective.

My advice to McCain is step very lightly on this subject, because it could come back to haunt you. Especially using the terrorist images.

Others Blogging:
The Corner, Dr. Melissa Clouthier, Althouse and Macsmind

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A movie that every American should watch, before voting

(H/T to AP at Hotair.com)

This movie, if it caught on in the Media would ruin Obama’s chances of being elected President.

Trailer 1:

Trailer 2:

Wow…. I don’t think Barry will have to worry about snipers. He’d better worry about this movie.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

B. Hussein Obama the new Greek god?

Could it be? Could this be some sort of attempt to paint this guy as some sort of new Greek god?

Sure seems that way.

ABC NEWS Reports:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s big speech on Thursday night will be delivered from an elaborate columned stage resembling a miniature Greek temple.

The stage, similar to structures used for rock concerts, has been set up at the 50-yard-line, the midpoint of Invesco Field, the stadium where the Denver Broncos’ National Football League team plays.

Some 80,000 supporters will see Obama appear from between plywood columns painted off-white, reminiscent of Washington’s Capitol building or even the White House, to accept the party’s nomination for president.

He will stride out to a raised platform to a podium that can be raised from beneath the floor.

The show should provide a striking image for the millions of Americans watching on television as Obama delivers a speech accepting the Democratic presidential nomination.

This my friends is unbelievable. Is this man’s ego that broad, that he must be painted to be the next Greek god, that will come to save the World from it’s troubles?

Please. This moronic tool is the product of an unconstitutional civil rights act, that was passed in 1964, by a Communist infiltrated congress. Which sought to broaden the Governments powers and to legislate morality in this country. This bill was not signed by a congressman, of whom I have the uttermost respect for, and that was Senator Barry Goldwater Sr.

The truth is that B. Hussein Obama is a Marxist. He has ties to some of the most corrupt in Chicago Illinois. He also has ties to William Ayers who, with his group weather underground committed acts of horrific terrorism upon this Nation and it’s people.

If this Nation elects this Negro man, it would be one worst disasters in this Nations history. I will not be voting for him, I assume that many that read this blog will not be either. Of course, electing John McCain will not be much better, because he is one of the most liberal Republicans out there. John McCain is soft on illegal immigration, John McCain’s Neo-Conservative polices are too close to the imperialistic George W. Bush, but B. Hussein Obama will be the worst disaster in the world, if he elect him.

Others Blogging: Macsmind

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Let it go, Bill, Let it go…..

Bill Clinton just cannot shut up about his wife’s loss, can he?

Bill Clinton in Denver again undercuts Obama (TheHill.com)

Bill Clinton appeared to undermine Sen. Barack Obama again Tuesday.

The former president, speaking in Denver, posed a hypothetical question in which he seemed to suggest that that the Democratic Party was making a mistake in choosing Obama as its presidential nominee.

He said: “Suppose for example you’re a voter. And you’ve got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don’t think that person can deliver on anything. Candidate Y disagrees with you on half the issues, but you believe that on the other half, the candidate will be able to deliver. For whom would you vote?”

Oh like Hillary Clinton would be able to “deliver” on the issues any less than Barack Obama. Please. 🙄 That sounds a bit racist, if you ask me. he can’t deliver? Because he’s black?

This quote also struck me as funny as well:

Former Clinton aide and Democratic strategist Paul Begala, however, told The Hill that the former president is solidly behind Obama’s candidacy.

“He’s totally for Barack,” Begala said Tuesday. “He’s totally for Barack.”

Yeah, He’s for Barack Obama alright, he’s for Barack being strung up in a tree, with a noose.

I mean, What further prove do we need, that Bill Jeff is nothing more, than one of many racist bigots of the old school Democratic Party?

Sorry Bill, but your idiotic mouth gives you away, every time. Please, just go away. For good.

Others: Booman Tribune, The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room, The Hill’s Pundits Blog, The Politico, Ross Douthat, The Moderate Voice, TownHall Blog, Rocky Mountain News, ABCNEWS, The Campaign Spot, Weekly Standard Blog, Wake up America, Donklephant, Taylor Marsh, Truthdig, The New Republic and Hot Air and more via Memeorandum

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Can the Clintons get over it? They should.

Video (via Politico):

Quote:

Hillary Rodham Clinton is over it — at least when people are watching.

Within days of losing the Democratic nomination to Barack Obama, her aides said she was all business, returning to her Senate duties, telling people she would do whatever Obama asked her to do in the general election.

Bill Clinton is not over it. He’s trying, his associates say. He’s slowly getting to a better place. But his resentments from the bitter campaign battles of last winter and spring are many and diverse, and people who have spent time with him recently said they fester just below the surface.

As I have Blogged before on here. Hillary Clinton has baggage, Lots of Baggage. Obama simply did not want that sort of stigma on his campaign. He knew, for a fact, that if he had Clinton his ticket, that the Far Right Wing of the Republican Party would attack him for it.

The Clinton’s issues with Barack Obama are:

  • Obama has taken the minimum public steps necessary to accommodate the Clintons, including giving them prime-time speaking spots.
  • But he has taken few of the extra steps that Clinton allies say would have gone miles toward fostering goodwill.
  • He did not work hard to help her retire her $24 million campaign debt.
  • He did not make a high-profile statement repudiating any suggestion that Bill Clinton played “the race card” in the nomination contest — an allegation that the former president considers grossly unfair and that continues to infuriate him.

Well, can you blame him? There were a TON of tepid, awful and down right nasty things that she did. Let’s review shall we?:

Clinton saying that she didn’t think that Obama was a Muslim, as far as she knew.

The Video:

Her very stupid comment about her staying in the race, in case Obama is assassinated.

The Video:

Which drew this fiery special comment from Keith Olbermann:

There are a many, many more, but I think this suffices.

So, quite frankly, Senator Clinton is owned nothing, she, in her self centered attempt to try and divide this party, all in the name of feminism and identity politics. She has brought this snub by Obama and his followers all upon herself, despite her attempt to spin this, she is the reason that this is happened to her.

The best advise I can give Senator Clinton is to address the convention, release her delegates and simply fade away and hope that she is able to salvage what little reputation that she has left. Because quite frankly, she is nothing more than a hindrance to that Democratic Party.

Until this happens, the Democratic Party will continue to be the divided Party that it is. Which will do nothing more, but put another Neo-Conservative in the White House.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Conservative Blogger Michelle Malkin Harassed by 9/11 Truther Alex Jones – Update: To be clear, Alex Jones DID NOT threaten Malkin….

Here’s the Video, Via The People’s Press Collective:

The protesters were hollering “Kill Michelle Malkin“. The Denver Police did nothing.

This is absolutely inexcusable. I always knew Alex Jones was a nutcase, now I know this to be the case. Alex Jones you are disgrace to America, you ignorant asshole, son-of-a-bitch.

My question is, why was not Michelle’s entourage armed and ready for something like this? I would have stuck a gun in Jones’s face and told him to hit the road. I most likely would have went to jail for murder too. 😡

Mr. Jones, you are history in my book. I’ll never go back to that nut-job’s site. Hell, I’m a Paleo-Conservative, but that man goes beyond that, he’s a freakin’ nut case.

I am all for the Freedom of Speech, but this idiot crossed the line and the feckless idiot police in Denver did nothing at all. Alex Jones belongs in jail, period.

Update: Some readers here have pointed out, and some elsewhere have pointed out that the persons saying “Kill Michelle Malkin” were not with Alex Jones. This may be the case. But still, Alex Jones has NO RIGHT to stalk and scream at people like that. If were there, I have maced the guy in the face, or worse, if need be. My point is, the dude is still an Nut Job and should be in jail, period.

Others: Gateway Pundit

Update: Welcome Infowars.com readers! If you’re looking for a nice Paleo-Conservative Blog, written by someone, who doesn’t run around with a megaphone and his head up his ass. This is the place to be. Also, there’s a Donation button. Please hit the tip jar. I do this full time. Thanks! 😀

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

So Much for all that Democrat Party Unity…..

According to Hillary, everything is just okie dokie, hope change and all that:

“Every one of us could stand up and recite all the reasons why we must elect Barack. The Supreme Court is at stake; our educational system needs the right kind of change. We’ve got to become energy independent; we have to create millions of new green collar jobs. We’ve got so much work to do around the world."

"None of that will happen if John McCain is in the White House. I just want to make it absolutely clear we cannot afford four more years of George W. Bush’s failed policies in America and that’s what we would get with John McCain."

However, The Washington Post reports:

A number of Sen. Hillary Clinton’s top advisers will not be staying in Denver long enough to hear Barack Obama accept the nomination for
president, according to sources familiar with their schedules.

Clinton will deliver her speech Tuesday night. She will hold a private meeting with her top financial supporters Wednesday at noon, and will
thank her delegates at an event that afternoon. Former president Bill Clinton will speak that night. Several of Hillary Clinton’s supporters
are then planning to leave town. Among them, Terry McAuliffe, Clinton’s campaign chairman, and longtime supporters Steve Rattner and Maureen
White. Another of Clinton’s top New York fundraisers, Alan Patricof, did not make the trip to Denver.

Robert Zimmerman, a Clinton supporter who is trying now to navigate between the two camps, will be staying for Obama’s speech. But he said
in an interview that it would be unrealistic to expect there would not still be some tension between the two camps — he noted that the same
was true with supporters of Gary Hart and, to a lesser extent, Howard Dean.

"This convention provides a very important opportunity for the Obama campaign to bond with the constituencies that supported Hillary Clinton," Zimmerman said. "It’s not about Barack or Hillary. It’s about bringing in the people here who voted for Hillary Rodham Clinton. Senator Obama and Senator Biden are, without question, qualified to do that."

While the words of the Democratic Party might be Hope, Change and Unity. Their actions say a totally different story. Which is sad. I feel that if you are going to say something, mean it. Don’t say something and mean something else. It is hypocritical.

Others: :
Power Line, MSNBC, Flopping Aces, Political Machine, Hot Air and michellemalkin.com

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sean Wilentz speaks from the heart

I have been sitting here for the last hour or so, trying to figure out how to Blog about this article.

It is an very interesting article by Sean Wilentz. It appears in Newsweek, who is basically a partner with MSNBC.

In this rather revealing article, Sean proceeds to lay out the factual history of the Democratic Party and it’s struggle to wrangle the White House out of the control of the Republican Party. Sean also shows how, how Kennedy and other Democratic Presidents was not only well known for their speaking ability, but also known for their substance as well.

Sean writes:

The convergence is revealing. As Republican strategists have begun to notice with delight, Obama’s liberal alternative to the post-Bush GOP to date has much in common with Carter’s post-Watergate liberalism. Rejecting “politics as usual,” attacking “Washington” as the problem, promising to heal the breaches and hurts caused by partisan political polarization, pledging to break the grip that lobbyists and special interests hold over the national government, wearing his Christian faith on his sleeve as a key to his mind, heart and soul—in all of these ways, Obama resembles Jimmy Carter more than he does any other Democratic president in living memory.

In other ways, Obama’s liberal vision appears clouded, uncertain and even contradictory. During his four years in Washington, he has compiled one of the most predictably liberal voting records in the Senate—yet he presents himself as an advocate of bipartisanship and ideological flexibility. He has offered himself as the tribune of sweeping change—yet he also proclaims national unity, as if transformation can come without struggle. He has emerged as the champion of a new, post-racial politics, even though he has only grudgingly separated himself from his pastor of 20 years, who every week preached a gospel of “black liberation theology” that has everything to do with racial politics.

The most obvious change to liberal politics Obama has to offer is the color of his skin. Some of his supporters have, whether wittingly or not, been candid enough to say, as Sen. John Kerry did last March, that Obama’s blackness is the rationale for making him president. But it is difficult to square such claims with Obama’s appeal to a liberalism that transcends race. And when Obama himself subtly and not so subtly draws attention to his color, and charges that the John McCain Republicans will try to scare voters by saying he “doesn’t look like all those presidents on the dollar bills,” he turns voting for him into an intrinsically virtuous act, proof that one has resisted base appeals to racism (which, in fact, the McCain campaign has not made).

Much of Obama’s appeal to the left stems from what might be called the romance of the community organizer. Although his organizing career on Chicago’s South Side was brief and, by his own admission, unremarkable, it distinguishes him as another first of his kind in presidential politics, a candidate who looks at politics from the bottom up. For the left, community organizing trumps party politics and experience in government. Some even imagine that Obama is a secret radical, and they see his emergence as an unparalleled opportunity for advancing their frustrated agendas about issues ranging from the redistribution of wealth to curtailing U.S. power abroad.

Obama still has a long way to go to describe the kind of liberalism he stands for, how it meets the enormous challenges of the present—and how it will meet as-yet-unanticipated challenges after the election. Nowhere is this more crucial than in the harsh and volatile realm of foreign policy. Last winter, when his candidacy gained traction, Obama’s foreign-policy credentials consisted almost entirely of a speech he gave before a left-wing rally in Chicago in 2002, denouncing the impending invasion of Iraq as “a dumb war.” That speech, made by a state senator representing a liberal district that included the University of Chicago, and that went unreported in the Chicago Tribune’s lengthy article on the rally, was enough to convince many of his supporters that he is blessed with superior acumen and good instincts about foreign affairs. Later comments, such as his promise, later softened, to meet directly and “without preconditions” with the leaders of Iran and other supporters of terrorism, pleased left-wing Democrats and young antiwar voters as a sign of boldness—even as they left experienced diplomats in wonder at such half-baked formulations.

I must say that I admire Mr. Wilentz for having the chutzpah to be honest enough to admit that the one, that the media has pushed forward as the Democrat that will change America, might just be lacking in substance.

I mean, I realize that there are Neo-Conservatives that are loudly snickering, because this man is saying this. But I personally admire the man for having the intellectual honesty to say what he is feeling. It is not a popular sermon to preach, so to speak. Especially in the Church of Obama.

I must say, that I totally agree with his assessment of Obama as well. No, not because of his skin color, that is a simple minded and quite foolish assumption. I agree with it, because it is the simple facts. Obama just does not have the Political Experience that the many other great leaders of the historic Democratic Party.  The Democratic Party saw a title wave and decided to capitalize upon it. This is why Hillary lost, not only just because she ran a lousy campaign. It was because America wanted something new and the Democrats decided that a new, fresh face was more important than depth and experience.

Now whether is was because of Identity Politics or just an outright euphorically charged decision will for the history books to decide.

However, what is known is this, Obama really needs to tighten up his Campaign message, he has to prove, not just to his Democratic base, but to the rest of America, that he is a person of sound judgement and will be able to lead the White House in not only times of peace, but also in times of crisis. This is what Hillary’s message was. However, because the Media was so focused on Obama, they totally ignored that message.

Kudo’s to Mr. Wilentz for having the courage to speak, what many in America, whether Democrat, Republican or Independent are thinking in America today and will be up till the election in November.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Is Fred Barnes on drugs or just abjectly obtuse?

I saw this article and the first thing that popped into my head was, “Does this guy come out of his house often?”

The Democrats Field a Liberal Dream Team (Via WSJ.com)

But what Mr. Obama has done is create an all-liberal ticket — a very, very liberal one, at that — in a nation whose electorate is still center-right. The political mood may be a bit more centrist today than it was in 2004, but it’s still far more conservative than liberal. And liberal Democratic presidential tickets usually lose, as John Kerry did with John Edwards as his running mate in 2004.

Oh really? Since when? Mr. Barns, I am not sure where you reside or even if you reside on the same planet as I. But let me, a normal, every day, common man inform you that this nation has drifted to the left, long ago. This is, in case you have not looked at your calendar as of late, 2008 and not 1984. This Nation, as a whole, has not been “Center Right” or leaning in a conservative direction since the 1980’s.

This is because in the late 1980’s, the Nation realized that Reagan’s nice, inspiring speeches, where nothing more THAN nice, inspiring speeches and containing nothing for the common man. This was confirmed by Ronald Reagan himself, when he fired those Air Traffic controllers, who were simply looking to hold the Government’s feet to the fire and tried forcing them to honor their promises made.

Once this nation realized they had been duped by a Presidential Administration, who quite frankly, did not give a damn about them, they chose the Democratic Party and their supposed agenda for the American people. This proven when Reagan’s successor, George H.W. Bush lost his reelection bid for President.

It was, it is said, to be the ultimate deception of the American people. By the use of the abject pimping of the christian people. It is one that will not ever happen again. Thanks to the internet, and technology, the American people will never be lied to like that again.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,