Dumb Letters: Whatever It Is, I'm Against It

Some of them just leave you scratching your heads. This one is almost entirely incoherent. I have no idea what the writer is really getting at, other than "I'm a concerned citizen and I have something to say." Although the Globe editorial board tried to give it some focus in its title.

I am an unenrolled voter. President Obama did not say anything in his State of the Union address that he should not have said long before, and he could not list a single achievement.

Um, okay. So would he have been better off not saying it at all, then? So you could then complain about how he never said it? And if he had listed his achievements, I'm guessing you would have complained that the speech was self-congratulatory and called him an arrogant narcissist. Right?

He chided the Republicans in attendance, and made a misguided attack on the Supreme Court of the United States, by calling for legislation around its recent ruling on campaign spending.

Some of us don't consider this misguided. In fact, most of us don't. The Supreme Court has a long history of making bad decisions. And Congress has a long history of passing laws to mitigate the effects of Supreme Court decisions, most recently the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay act. Often the Supreme Court makes a ruling in a certain way because Congress has not been clear on what the law should be and so the court reverts to the closest constituional interpretation they can make. If this doesn't sit well with Congress, they clarify the law. If the court doesn't like this, they strike the new law down when a case comes before them. It's called checks and balances. Don't like it? Get a new country.

Oh, and if anyone ever deserved a good chiding, it was the Republicans in attendance. He said nothing out of line about them. In fact, under the circumstances, he was downright charitable towards them. He's done nothing but reach out to them to try and work with the minority party. He's received nothing but scorn (and zero votes) for his efforts. It takes two to tango. And one party isn't dancing. GWB was much much worse when it came to chiding the opposition party over not following his demands.

He promised to open up the rolls in the military to special interests, which
should be the military’s call.

And who is the commander-in-chief of the military? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? And how much do like that "special interests" business? Exactly which "special interest" are we discussing here? The oil lobby?

President Obama has a long way to go, and continuing to put down traditional
American values will not get him far.

If anyone can point to a single instance of Obama doing anything of the sort I haven't seen it. Exactly what "traditional American values" are we talking about here? Fairness? Equality? (Whiteness, maybe?) This dude is making this up. And I'm not sure how "far" he wants to go, but right now he's the POTUS. And he didn't get there by being anything other than what he is right now.

The nation has woken up, but the current leadership has not.

When did this happen? Woken up from what? The implication here is that the 2008 election happened in some kind of drunken stupor and that cute flight attendant has turned out to be, in the harsh light of day, not only 15-20 years older than we thought but also of dubious gender. And married to a member of the Gambino family. Now that we're all right and sane we don't like what we really liked just a year ago. Okay, bud. Whatever you say.

There is still time for the president to lead and prosper. However, his State of the Union address was unconvincing as to his willingness to put country first.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Which country was he talking about when he said "my fellow Americans" and "God bless the United States of America"? Slovenia? This was the McCain campaign's slogan and they proved how country-first they were by picking an uneducated spokesmodel to be one rather irregular heartbeat away from the presidency. If Obama isn't putting country first, then what exactly is he doing? Is there some agenda that we don't know about that is ahead of the country's? The writer doesn't say. Which is par for the course.

Lieberman Finds More Knives with Which to Stab His Party

Wow, I'm so glad that Barack Obama and Harry Reid supported Joe Lieberman after he stumped for John McCain. "He's with us on everything except the war," they said. Well, that's like saying "He's with us on everything except rape." I've had enough of this shithead since his pathetic showing as a running mate for Al Gore. He was a terrible choice as Democratic standard-bearer then and he's only gotten worse since then. Way worse. Progressively worse. (I shouldn't say "progressively". He's been anything but progressive.)

What was that about "everything except the war"? Oh yeah, and health care. Not just "I won't vote for the bill" not with us. More like "I will actively support a filibuster" not with us. Feel better now, guys? See what that gesture has gotten you?

Someone please tell me why this person who lost a Democratic primary, no longer has a D next to his name and campaigned for the candidate with an R next to his name -- who also happened to support every George W. Bush policy and picked an empty-headed spokesmodel as his running mate -- still has positions of leadership within the Democratic party.

What will it take, people? Does he have to actually try to assassinate the president? Kick him out. Kick him way out. He is not one of us. He can stay in the Senate if he wants. He won his seat (sort of) fair and square. But let an actual Democrat take over his leadership positions. I don't care who. He is the bottom of the pile. Please please please. Go blow, Joe.

Meet the Press and Play It for a Sucker

If you have the stomach for it, watch this lengthy clip. It's hard to sit through just a few minutes of it, but I managed to hold my vomit in and make it to the end. It saddens me to report that I am not a better person for it.

But, if you want to know what the problem with "bipartisanship" is, this is a fine place to start. Representative (and House minority leader) John Boehner and senator Lindsay Graham are, how shall we say it, not exactly dealing in good faith here. And, as someone has pointed out previously, bipartisanship is a two-way street. And the traffic's only going one way right now.

These guys are regulars on shows like this. But if any of these shows had any journalistic standards at all, they'd be laughed off the sound stage on a regular basis. There's spin and there's complete bullshit and Mssrs. Boehner and Graham are way on the stinky side of that equation.

David Gregory occasionally interjects The Tough Question, as he always does to make himself look like a real journalist, but when one of his guests says something patently false, he just lets it go. This is why shitheads like this love these shows. It makes them look like they've run the gantlet, when they've done nothing of the sort. They control the message totally.

Here's the video. Have the Tylenol ready. And the Rolaids, for that matter. What the hell, get the whiskey too.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The transcript is here, if you can't handle looking at the crumbs. And believe me, it's tough.

Some choice moments, refuted (naturally) by Yours Truly.

BOEHNER: And if you look at what the president has been supporting, it’s this big government plan that has some 51 new agencies, boards, commissions, mandates that is going to get in the way of delivering quality care to the American people.

And your evidence for this is...what? How exactly is this going to "get in the way"? Are they going to be in the hospitals telling doctors not to treat patients? Like the insurance companies do now? We'll never know because Gregory doesn't ask.

GRAHAM: The president is selling something that people, quite frankly, are not buying. He’s been on everything but the food channel. Just a few weeks—you know, last week he was addressing the nation.

His problem is when he says the public auction—option won’t affect your healthcare choice, people don’t believe that. ... It’s about the president selling something that people inherently believe sounds too good and doesn’t add up.

People? What people? Here's what a Harris poll said last week.

Based on what you've read, seen or heard, how would you rate the health care plans proposed by each of the following?

President Obama: 53% good, 47% Bad
Democrats in Congress: 46 / 54
Republicans in Congress: 35 / 65

See, Lindsay, you would be one of those "Republicans in Congress" up there. You too, Boehner, FYI.

BOEHNER: Americans today are getting more news about what’s happening in their government than they have ever gotten before, and Americans are genuinely scared to death. Scared to death...

And if this is one of those "news" sources, I can see why. Imagine how scared they are if they watch Fox News, where you guys are the only ones whose "opinions" are considered worthwhile.

BOEHNER: There’s been no bipartisan conversation on Capitol Hill about health care. At some point when these big government plans fail—and they will, the Congress will not pass this—it’s really time for the president to hit the reset button, just stop all of this and let’s sit down and start over in a bipartisan way to build a plan that Americans will support.

You lie! There have been over 160 Republican amendments added to the current bill. Well beyond this, the "public option", which doesn't even seem to be on the table anymore, was a compromise to begin with. If the Democrats had any brains in their heads, they would have started with single-payer (which 60% of doctors support, by the way, those radicals) and the public option might have been a disappointing but fair compromise, not that they deserve one. This is a complete failure of politics.

And you know what, fuck you guys. You didn't give a shit about being "bipartisan" when you were in the majority. Public opinion is not on your side, and yet you speak as if it is not only on your side, but overwhelmingly so. Piss off.

This next one is my favorite.

GRAHAM: [Obama]’s changed his rhetoric because the speech was a disaster. What he’s trying to sell to the American people, they don’t buy. ... So the president’s saying things that people want to hear, but the details don’t add up.

Really? His approval rating went up after the speech and support for a public option, which was always at least in the 50% range before all of the bullshit started spewing, went up again too. To 76%. The speech was only a disaster if you wanted those numbers to go in the other direction. No honest person would ever call it a disaster. And no honest person would ever call Lindsay Graham an honest person. The American people, apparently, are buying it. But you'd never know it from watching "Meet the Press".

Today in Hypocrisy

You can't make this stuff up.

Apparently, the folks who went to Washington to complain about all of the government spending are upset that the government didn't spend enough to make it easier for them to complain about government spending.

You have to read this from the Wall Street Journal. Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) has a bit of a beef with our nation's capital and its woeful lack of amenities for him and his crew of nutjobs and racists. There weren't enough trains! Oh no!

It gets better. The stimulus package had millions for improvements for the Metro. Guess who voted against it? Oh, here it is.

"We shouldn't be giving people free stuff! Hey, where's my stuff?"

Meet Joe Wilson, Professional Asshole

What is there to say about Representative Joe Wilson's jaw-dropping breach of decorum at President Obama's health care speech? It defies belief.

Even if he really thought that BO was lying (he wasn't, by the way; not even a little), this was not the place to say so. This wasn't a debate, it was a speech. The Dems sat and listened to The Idiot lie to them about much more important things for eight years and never once did they do what I was doing at home. Which was standing up and saying exactly what Joe Wilson did to Obama. But I can call my TV screen a liar in the privacy of my own home. And even in a sternly-worded letter to my local newspaper. If I were in that chamber, I'd have to sit on my hands. It's proper.

What's even more ridiculous than one idiot heckling the president is the (inevitable, I suppose) defenders of the outburst. We were lectured on "respect for the office" for eight years until, conveniently, we didn't need to respect the office anymore. Because now things are different. Now we have some kind of un-American radical in office. Who just happened to have been elected mere months ago by a clear majority of American voters. But truth must be told. And Joe Wilson is our hero.

Oh, and pre-2000 respect for the office wasn't such a big deal either. Remember that? But 9/11 changed everything. Until it changed black. I mean, back.

The Right has become unbelievably unhinged since their worldview has come crashing down. Thomas Frank has a great piece in the >shudder< Wall Street Journal today detailing the steps that we've skipped on the road to outrage. Good stuff.

Wilson's outburst was stupid on several levels. First off, it was just culturally stupid. Decorum. We've covered this.

Second, his charge was based on a perceived loophole in the bill, not any fundamental issue with the bill. (It's actually pretty hilarious. Because there is no specific requirement to prove citizenship at the time of treatment, it's feasible that someone could sneak in and get some. Which is tantamount to explicitly offering care to illegals, of course. Bring your passport at all times. You'll need it to get into that ambulance.) So, even if he believed in the loophole, it didn't reach the level of a lie. But hollering "That's not entirely true, sir, and I'll be glad to demonstrate the flaw in your plan if given the opportunity!" is a bit too, shall we say, nuanced, for the current Republican party. "You lie!" is closer to the sixth-grade level they've been floating on lately.

Third, and I'm surprised that no one has talked about this, this was a pretty minor point that he was objecting to. Health care for illegal immigrants? There are so many larger points to concern yourself with, even in this particular debate. And this is the one that he stood up for and blew whatever reputation he had? You know, if I were a member of congress and I had one shot at a big movie moment, I'd save it for something really earth-shattering like, say, "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction". As it is, Wilson just looks like a garden variety racist. Not to mention petty.

As Eugene Robinson notes, Wilson's was the worst, but hardly the only, breach of decorum. But here we are. Enjoy your devoted cult following, GOP. The rest of us think you're a bunch of petulant, childish assholes.

UPDATE: E.J. Dionne has now talked about the thing that I was surprised that no one was talking about. Read it here.

Edward M. Kennedy

No biographical details should be necessary here. That's been covered extensively elsewhere, in print and in video. (I'm not even bothering to link. If you're connected, you've seen it all.)

Ted Kennedy was the senator in my home state since before I was born. Think about that. The same man has held that seat for my entire life. But just holding a senate seat is not that difficult. The power of incumbency only grows with time. At some point, unless you do something really horrible like try to pass a bill mandating abortions for every woman due to give birth on a Tuesday, it's a lifetime position like the Supreme Court. But what you do with that position is what makes you.

Teddy was a bit of a goof in his younger days. Not a great student and prone to bad behavior. But, unlike some other children of privilege who were goofs in their younger days and went into politics based on their family name, he worked hard to become a legislator of the top order. And beyond that a fighter, a real and true fighter, for unabashedly liberal causes. When Reaganism was in vogue (and still is, among a certain subset of our brainwashed nation) he defended not just the word "liberal", which had become, and continues to be, a dirty word to some, but the ideals behind it. He was not ashamed to say that compassion meant more than just feeling for others but acting on their behalf. This was the "great work".

No one expected much of Ted. But he ended up being the most consequential of all the Kennedys (Eunice being a possible exception). Even after the scandals of Chappaquiddick and his nephew William Kennedy Smith, he proved that there are second (and third and fourth) acts in American lives. The totality of Ted Kennedy, even with his personal disgraces, was overwhelmingly a net positive. You can thank him if you have a disability, or are a woman, or a child, or care about civil rights, or if you just happen to have a body. His death may re-focus energy on passing some form of useful health care legislation.

In our corporate-controlled government, Ted's example will not be followed by many. But a true government of, by and for the people would be populated by a lot more Ted Kennedys and a lot fewer John Boehners and Mitch McConnells.

Goodbye, senator. And thank you. You will be sorely missed.

You Call This a Debate? Take Out the "t" and Add a "cl".

Hello, people. I haven't been around much lately. I've been thinking about stuff, just not writing about it.

One of the things I've been thinking about is health care. (Really? You're, like, the only one. Nobody's talking about it.)

You know, we all had a lovely series of moments when Obama was elected and took office. Hurray, America. We elected a black man. The Bush/Cheney era was ending. It was cleansing. It was wonderful. A new day was dawning.

Bullshit. Utter fucking bullshit. We are now seeing just how dishonest and depraved this nation really is.

Obama was never a flaming liberal. He was always a pragmatic centrist "liberal". I knew he was in trouble almost immediately upon taking office when the stimulus bill, for which Obama spent a lot of time attempting to get Republican buy-in got, oh, zero Republican votes. The red flag was not that the bill got no Republican votes. I kind of expected that. The red flag was that Republicans and their enablers in the supposedly liberal media howled with fury about how partisan Obama was being. "He never consulted us! This bill was supposed to be bipartisan and it's the most partisan bill ever! He's a fraud!" I knew at this point that nothing would be easy and that there was nothing, literally nothing he could do to get anything worthwhile done. Bipartisanship requires two willing parties. And we were at least one short. Country first? Nuh-uh.

And here we are at health care, a big issue for folks and one for which there is broad support among the American electorate. Here's a lovely New York Times poll showing that 72% of Americans support a government-run health plan. 72%! Do you have any idea how difficult it is to get 72% of Americans to agree on anything? We can't get 72% of Americans to agree that torture is a bad thing. Yes, torture, which is unequivocally and unambiguously illegal under domestic and international law, not to mention immoral and ineffective. But 72% were for a public plan. And 7% had no opinion in the health care poll, which means only 20% of Americans opposed it. That's slightly more than the number that like Dick Cheney. And athlete's foot.

And yet, where are we with the public option (which, by the way, is only a shadow of what we should be moving towards, which is universal single-payer)? Well, it's about to be killed. Why? Because of a few people shouting at town hall meetings, per the direction of a few right-wing and corporate-sponsored groups, and media ass monkeys all around the joint.

I really don't have the strenght to go into the details right now, which you undoubtedly know already, but suffice it to say that every single argument I've heard against a public plan, let alone single-payer, has contained at least one whopping big fat honking lie. Not an untruth, not a stretch, not a minor prevarication, but something grossly, demonstrably false. Death panels! 6-month waits! No choices! Government takeover! Tyranny! All of it patently untrue and promoted relentlessly by the insurance industry and Fox News. Surprise surprise.

For crying out loud, they took out end-of-life care counseling (counseling!) because apparently it was easier to do so than to just explain why the death panel idea was a lie. How low must your opinion of the American people be when you can't debunk something so easily debunked?

Not low enough, apparently. Because now they're talking about taking the public option out of the mix. Why? Because lying works. That's how stupid we are. Congratulations, insurance industry. This is an absolute triumph of propaganda. You've managed to take a topic about which there was broad consensus and make it seem like an apocalyptic gummint nightmare to which the villagers were revolting with the pitchforks and the torches in an inspiring show of democracy in action.

Hey, Congress. If you're thinking of passing a bill that can't even include something so modest, and for which there was such support, for fear of pissing off a few yahoos and the corporations whose bidding they do, don't bother, okay? I can't bear the thought of you and the president congratulating yourselves for doing something worse than doing nothing.

I have officially lost all of the good feelings I had about this country around the turn of last year. My opinion of this country is actually lower than it was during the nightmare that was the Bush administration. And that is really saying something.

The Specter of Pennsylvania

Holy crap! Arlen Specter is jumping off the Republicans' sinking ship and joining the Donkeys.

For a while now, Specter has been one of those on-the-fence types of guys that can occasionally be counted on to weigh reason and Republican talking points and come down on the side of reason. Not always, but enough of the time so that he and the two Distinguished Ladies of Maine are the ones with the fullest voice mail inboxes in Washington. Not much point in trying to get James Inhofe to talk about anything. Those three? They're swayable.

Of course, Specter is looking ahead to the next election, in which he was looking like lunchmeat to the Republican Party as they tried to run a right-wing challenger in the primary. So his stated reasons for switching were probably secondary, even if valid. But take it where you find it.

The downside to this? Norm Coleman and his crew are going to fight even harder to delay seating Senator Al Franken. Oy.

The other downside? He just went from being a moderate Republican to being a conservative Democrat. Do we really need another Joe Lieberman to gum up the works? Eh, it beats having another James Inhofe. But it does prevent a more liberal Democrat from maybe unseating him next year. Oh well. We'll take the vote now, thank you.

Welcome aboard, Senator. Please enjoy your stay.

John McCain Is Quite Insane

Remember when John McCain was somewhat respected by people across the political spectrum? Long time ago, it seems. He gets more and more full of crap all the time. It's at the point now where I don't know what we ever saw in the guy.

Here he is on "Meet the Press" lying his ass off about "bipartisanship".

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Here's the transcript of the important part.

(Videotape, November 4, 2008)

SEN. McCAIN: I urge all Americans who supported me to join me in not just congratulating him, but offering our next president our good will and earnest effort to find ways to come together, to find the necessary compromises to bridge our differences.

(End videotape)

MR. GREGORY: Have Republicans heeded that call, and do you think President Obama has heeded that call?

SEN. McCAIN: I think neither side, perhaps, has done it as much as maybe we should. But you establish an environment. Really, bipartisanship is sitting down across a table from each other and negotiating, recognizing there's got to be compromise. And in all due respect to the incoming administration, the speaker said, "We won. We wrote the bill." There was never any serious negotiations over the stimulus package, over the omnibus spending bill. Now there doesn't seem to be any on the budget. Those are all party line votes. There's not the negotiations. And I--look, I'll take blame on our side for maybe not being more forthcoming, but really the president does beat the drum and sets the pace. And so far there has not been not an instance where they sat down across the table and said, "OK, what do you want? What are you demanding here? What do you think is best?" And including some of those concerns as we come--as we move forward with really large, encompassing packages about the future of this country.

So, Obama sits down with Republicans and asks them what they want. He includes billions in tax cuts that Democrats had no intention of including in an attempt to be "bipartisan" and get broad support. Then, in spite of this, not a single House Republican votes for the bill. They never do take those tax cuts out. (A move that I was supporting.)

And then John McCain goes on national television to lie about it. This is not spin. This is not stretching the truth. This is a bald-faced lie. John McCain should be ashamed of himself.

By the way, David Gregory never followed up with anything in the way of, "Mr. Senator, that's a load of crap."

Fun With the Republican'ts

Hooray for bipartisanship!

So BO spends time and energy wooing Republicans in congress in order to get them on board for the economic stimulus bill. He even waters down the bill so that it includes some tax cuts, which, as we've already seen over the past 8 years, have done nothing to "stimulate" the economy. He doesn't need to do this. Democrats are in the majority and they win a party-line vote no matter what. But BO wants to walk the walk. This is admirable and refreshing after our recent history.

So the unnecessarily watered-down-to-please-the-minority bill comes up for a vote and it passes. Hooray! And how many of those nice Republicans voted for it? [pause for dramatic effect] NONE!

Holy fucking crap. Not one of those creeps voted for it. Not one! 178 Republicans voted against it. 0 Republicans voted for it.

The math is not complicated here. If they're not going to vote for the bill no matter what, then why the hell is there anything in it that is just for them? It is utter foolishness to pass a bad, or merely inadequate, bill that was cheapened for votes that didn't materialize and weren't needed in the first place.

I'm all for compromise when it's appropriate and I applaud BO for trying to make it happen. But they've shown that they're clearly not interested. The first big FU has officially been dropped. Should they be rewarded for this? Come on. Take the bill back. Fix it. Make it the Republicans' worst liberal nightmare. Remove all of the tax cuts and add a lot more infrastructure spending. And even more family planning spending.

If this is how they're going to be, screw them. Do the country's work and let them worry about it.

"Bipartisanship" has two meanings, it seems. 1: When the Republicans are in the majority, Democrats should bend over, lube up and take it in the spirit of unity. 2: When the Democrats are in the majority, the Democrats should bend over, lube up and take it in the spirit of unity. This has to stop. Now.

The difference between "obstructionist" and "principled" depends entirely on which party we're talking about. Democrats were "obstructionist" when a few of them piped up and said maybe we shouldn't let lawbreakers off the hook or give lots more money to people who don't need it. Republicans, of course, are never anything less than brave fighters standing on principle.

I'm not looking forward to another congressional session of partisan shitstorms, but I'm sick and tired of the Democrats just getting rooked by these people. You guys run the show, Dems. Toss them a bone every now and then but don't get suckered into letting those who had their chance and failed miserably continue the same bullshit. Let 'em cry all they want. We voted for change. Now give it to us. No lube necessary.

AN UPDATE: Glenn Greenwald says pretty much the same thing here, only better. Not that this was some kind of original thought of mine or anything. Be sure to read the link in Greenwald's second update for a good laugh.

Joe Lieberman: Douchebag Extraordinaire

So, let's just say I'm your pal. I'm such a good pal that you let me use your car. And you let me join that exclusive club you belong to. And you let me hang out with you even after I slagged your new friend and then convinced our other friends to keep me in the club even after I was voted out. Okay, you forgave me and for that I thank you. Mighty big of you.

So, next your biggest enemy comes along and says that you're a total pud and that you do the nasty with your mama. So what do I do? Well, I say, "Yeah, he's a total pud and I heard about that mama thing. It's scary, dude. And ya know what else? The whole club's a bunch of puds. Fuck those fucking puds." Then I let your enemy drive your car and crash it while he's drunk. And then blame you for it.

What's your next move? Tell me to piss off? Why no, of course. You give me the keys to your new car and whole-heartedly welcome me back to the club. Why?

Because you're a congressional Democrat, that's why.

Why the fucking fuck is fucking Joe Lieberman still in charge of anything? I know, I know. We're all in the spirit of bipartisanship. Fuck bipartisanship. Bipartisanship for the past 8 years has meant "everybody do what the president wants." Don't complain. Don't argue. You wouldn't want to be "partisan" now, would you? Bullshit.

Now we're all supposed to be "bipartisan" even after the criminals are being bounced out. Why? Because the wrong people are in power now, apparently. Partisanship is only good if it's not Democrats who are engaged in it.

Joe Lieberman is a goddamn traitor. And not an honorable one. He is more than welcome to believe anything he wants. He is more than welcome to support whomever he wants in any election. He is more than welcome to say anything he damn well pleases. But why on earth is he being rewarded for it? What kind of jellyfish does that?

It's bad enough that he supported McPain and slagged Obama throughout the whole election. You can make the argument that stripping him of his chairmanship for that would be petty. Although I'd argue with you there.

But the entire time he chaired the Homeland Security and Government Affairs committee he did nothing (NOTHING!) about the Bush administration's continual lawbreaking. The man did not do his job. In fact, he aided and abetted criminal behavior when he was charged with calling it out and exposing it. This alone is grounds for dismissal. And censure, if you ask me.

Simply put, he didn't do his job. He was worse than ineffective; he was destructive. A normal person in a normal job would be fired for such a thing. And yet here we are, with Joe Lieberman in exactly the same place he was in same time last year. (Oh, wait, he lost one little subcommittee chair. That'll show him.) The man is not a Democrat. And he does not believe what Democrats believe. At least not in the department in which he holds power. Fuck him and the horse he rode in on.