Obama, Iraq, Twitter, and Stupid

Okay, let's do this again.

Last night I saw a stupid tweet. I know, I know, they're ubiquitous. This one said:

Obama's JV ISIS blows up ancient Arch of Triumph because... Obama. http://t.co/VIOvwR59S8 pic.twitter.com/uFShjBFiXr

— Rufus Kings ® ™ (@RufusKings1776) October 5, 2015

I was feeling plucky and thought that maybe - maybe - if someone had just pointed out to him that he was wrong, then he would be enlightened. :P

So, yes, stupid, but reminds me how ignorant America still is about Iraq. So let's review, shall we?


Getting Out of Iraq

Bush started it. Seriously, this is not a blaming thing; it was a good thing. Bush started the negotiations to get us the hell out. Why? Iraq wanted us out.


International Negotiations

Barack Obama is not the only guy, and the US is NOT the only country, despite the idiocy of the talking points of the detractors.

Long story short: Iraq said GTFO. ALL the countries said "Um, okay," with the US saying "Ummmmm, okay."

So we left.


BLAME OBAMA!

Obama was there when we were leaving. To some detractors and morons, that means Obama pulled out of Iraq. Because the international pull-out resulted in a vacuum, many ignorant people resort to the information in the tweet.


The Facts

We were part of an international coalition. Iraq said GTFO. We did. IF we had stayed, we'd be basically invading a sovereign nation, and subject to the penalties of one nation invading another. We'd be not at war with insurgents, but the nation of Iraq itself - as well as any other nations who thought of or were aligned with the defense of Iraq.


The Troll

Rufus blocked me. I wasn't terrible, but I was rude. He (she?) ran away in the end. And this is what we deal with every day. Every day, ignorant awful spewmouths put forth the day's agenda and talking points. And then block you when you apply intelligence.

That's a part of America that makes me sad. Every day.

Everything You Need to Know About "American Sniper"

I saw American Sniper this weekend. This is a quagmire wrapped in a clusterfuck, cream-filled with a shitstorm of feels, mostly because people can't separate the different aspects of the conversation. Some include: Rogen's comments, Moore's comments, accuracy of the film, quality of the film, themes of the film, Kyle's hyperbole, legitimacy of critiquing a veteran, and legitimacy of the Iraq war.

Unfortunately, most critic detractors pack it all into a lazy box of stupid and say things like "no liberal can claim to support the military" or "LOL Moore's crew are all fat tards" or "you are an idiot traitor of America!" (Things I've read online in the last three days.)

So let's break this all down and make sure we understand the differences between the pieces parts.


American Sniper as a Movie

SPOILERS!

American Sniper was a little short on development. I think Clint Eastwood got a little too ambitious in trying to cram all that graham and still have room for the honey. The husband-wife relationship was rushed. We never see real development in their pairing beyond what we might have seen in a flashback. The inter-war bits of their lives were almost filler as we watched him go from tour to tour.

The war bits were more vivid, more fleshed out, but still rushed. We saw tough choices, partial relationships, and even a moment with Kyle's brother that showed war as disheartening.

And when he came home, Kyle's regeneration was pinned down to a couple scenes. Then he was happy. Then he died.


Sloppy Filmmaking

Aside from the stuffing mentioned above, there are a couple sloppy mentions:

After tour three, Kyle's wife says "If you go back, we won't be here when you return." HUGE words. But a hug and it's all good and he's off?

The Butcher and the Sniper: Tour two and three were based on finding "The Butcher" so they could find the "bad" sniper. Fail both time. But then four was the money shot on the sniper and The Butcher was ...where? Nothing.

Ring switch: Kyle wore 3 different wedding rings throughout the movie: a small silver one right after his wedding, a small gold one during his service, and a large silver one after discharge. Why?

Fucking fake baby. Really? For a blockbuster movie? Producers noted Baby #1 had a fever and #2 didn't show. You're Hollywood. Only two babies in Hollywood? No, Cooper gets no props for acting with a plastic baby; Eastwood gets shit on for putting him in that position. WTF?

Texas: In this scene, we're moving to Texas. Not really mentioned where we lived when not at war before, but now we're in Texas because ...that's where Kyle dies?

Final scene: A SEAL sniper who is a complete expert on the use of firearms walks through the living room with what very much looks like a real revolver. He shushes the kids and walks into the kitchen where he not only points the gun at his wife but cocks it. In play. This is either stupid or a commentary on how socilization of veterans makes them forget everything; either way, it's wrong. And then they focus on him putting the cocked gun on the cabinet. Chekhov's Gun, anyone?


Themes in the Film

America protects freedom. Patriots protect freedom. War can be misdirected. War can tear families apart. War can ruin families. Patriots can crash. War hurts people. America is great. Recovery is difficult. War makes PTSD. We need to help ALL our veterans. Hero is a word. Hero is forever.


Kyle's Hyperbole

This doesn't really hit the movie (other than it's based on the book he wrote), but Chris Kyle is a known a proven fabulist. That means he lied and made up stories. Take it for what you will.


Rogen's Comments

Seth Rogen said American Sniper kind of reminds me of the movie that's showing in the third act of Inglorious Basterds. Rogen was making a goofy comment about how American Sniper was ...idunno... a little hyperbolic? A little hero worship?

Ignore everything anyone says about how it was like a Nazi Propaganda film. That's ignorant talking point bullshit. They probably never saw the movie, let alone the movie in the movie. Here it is:



So Rogen jokingly said this Hollywood movie about a real person was a little "kill all the bad guys" like the movie-in-movie he's referencing. Funny. But why is that bad or crazy? How was it not in jest? Conservatives =/= humor.


Moore's Comments

Michael Moore tweeted My uncle killed by sniper in WW2. We were taught snipers were cowards. Will shoot u in the back. Snipers aren't heroes. And invaders r worse.

Moore's own uncle was killed by a sniper. His family (and probably fam military friends) put that in his head. He said it. And in return, I've heard nothing about how his family suffered or how his uncle was a hero. Instead, we get jokes about how fat he is and is stupid.

Way to honor a fallen soldier, military folks. If you attack his retelling and/or his weight, you know nothing of honor. But enjoy you LOLz.


Eastwood

Maybe: Eastwood saw this as a modern day western, a tale of guns. He didn't give a shit about the real life. The Kyle backstory was chattel to give him a baby. The man in almost-white is hunting the man in perpetual black. The parity moment is when the man in black picks up the phone to leave his apparent wife with the baby. They are the same. If Kyle were born in Syria, he very well could have been his own nemesis. Khaki and black, good and bad, the long con, the long war, with long guns, and the long shot that ended it. Swing a bunch of American flags at the end and beg for an Oscar.

The man spoke to a chair for over ten minutes. Why is that weird?

Nah, speculation ended: Eastwood came out and called the movie anit-war.


Fin

I think snipers are necessary ...but I shouldn't have to agree to that to defend my personal patriotism. I don't think the movie was bad because it was about Chris Kyle. I think that movie was average because of how it was made. I know (proven by a court of law) that Chris Kyle made up stories. Mentioning that does not make me a terrorist or communist. Criticizing what people do in the name of questionable war does not make them against the people who have to fight that war.

There is a difference between respecting the troops and respecting the war. Too many people don't get that. And the war hero and war worship that comes from simple minds who like little boxes is disrespecting every man and woman who put their lives on the line for this bullshit.

Any questions?

Sorry About the SOTU

Eh, wanted to compile a point-by-point, but news moves too fast and that gig is already irrelevant. I provide only the following post.

George Carlin: We Like War

1992. Relevancy like that knows no time. RIP George.

Conservative America Reacts (pt.1, I'm sure)

Osama bin Laden is dead. The USA killed him. We have his body (well, the USA, not, like, at my house).

Pretty sweet news, and while I think Obama should get the cred (as Bush had so many years to do so), I'm expecting a flush of Fox cred for Bush for this as though he were still prez and #winning.

But almost 2 hours after the announcement, and I've been living on the TV and Twitter and FB and someone I follow posted this (I reversed it from the bottom-up feed, so the top was written first - less than 10 minutes from the second).



Shit, man. Is this - WTF? This is your first seal, readers. While knee-jerk reaction is "Obama wins!" it just means it has to get even uglier for them to properly defame him. Strap in. It gonna get stupid(er).

The Madness of the Right: Iraq, Libya, & Puppies

I swear that The Onion is going to go out of business. And it's all the fault of those damn Republicans.

Nine years ago when we invaded Iraq (again), all of us on the left were pretty damn vocal with a very clear WTF? Our question with two wars running? "How can you measure success?"

Today, I heard Sean Hannity wagging idiot-stiffies with Buchanan over how bad Libya was, how much of a debacle it is, a "quagmire (he will be creating a quagmire commercial for tomorrow, FYI)," and Sean was pontificating about what this "invasion" meant. "What is the measure of success?" He wondered what the extension of this would be - would it mean we'd just go willy-nilly into Russia, into China? "What's next? Saudi Arabia?" At which point the world turned upside-down, I was driving on the left side of the road, the guy in the car next to me was getting head from his sister, I wasn't drinking a Mike's Hard, and I vomited out my ass.

Bush drove a fear-of-self-preservation (& freedom) bill through congress and invaded Afghanistan cause we thought a guy who might've planned 9/11 was hangin' out somewhere there - almost 10 years later we don't really know where he might be. We invaded Iraq because of warmongering lies. We DIDN'T attack Saudi Arabia where almost all the terrorists came from. Bush's vague, unicorn-fart version of "finality" was somewhat along the lines of "when we get the terr'ists." And that was an AWESOME answer for everyone on the right and Fox News and Sean and Glenn and Rush and they threw down palm fronds and attacked any rational people by calling them cowards.

But since our president is "the other," since he might be a sekret terrrst, he can't use that. Actually, he can't do anything right. He can't be tough enough or compromise enough. He can't promote war and he can't promote peace. He can't act in concert with an international theater and he can't act unilaterally. But most importantly, he's either too black or not black enough.

As Ezra Klein tweeted, " If the president proposed the ‘More Puppies Act,’ the minority would discover it holds fervently pro-cat beliefs."

(Sidenote: check out Buchanan's website. It sucks my nads. In 1998.)

Middle East DoubleNewSpeak Headache

I was listening to some nondescript AM dial goon today and heard the same thing we've been hearing from the right since Egypt erupted, and now Lybia:

Just because you don't care for a dictator and in the scheme of things they're kind of a horrible person, not-so-friendly to US interests, plenty of human rights violations, bit of a ego-douchebag does NOT mean you can just go in there and take him out. We have no right to force our design or opinions on them. What about the stability of the Middle East? Who's going to move into power? What about our ties with Israel? What about the oil for chrissakes?


Oh, wait. No. Sorry. That was my sentiment before we invaded Iraq. (I'd add Afghanistan, but that was kind of a fucksmack of a whole country because we thought one dude was hiding there and we can't even fart in the direction of Saudi Arabia.)


I guess the fact that they sound so similar is proof positive that we don't really want brown people to have freedom or liberty. We just want to sell them bombs.

Take it Back: I am Hilarious in Iraq

I was lamenting my lack of recent quality photoshops and then I realized: I've got a backlog that started even before I was blogging. OMG! So here's the first in an erratically-appearing series called Take it Back. And, of course, click the Photoshop tag at the bottom of the post to see other things I've posted in the past.

First one's a little rough (read:artifacted), but we're starting from the beginning.


This, of course, is the Ice Cream Mines of Southern Gumdrop Province, Iraq, where ice cream headaches are all-too common amongst these obviously exploited children.

Idiots on the Right and the Chicago Olympics 2016

President Barack Obama went to Copenhagen to pitch Chicago for the 2016 Olympics and the right criticized him for wasting time when more important things were at hand. Fox News highlighted every single local Chicago story that painted the city in a bad light.

Chicago did not get the Olympics.

The right criticized Obama for going to pitch for the Olympics if his administration didn't know whether or not it would be a slam dunk. Glenn Beck this morning compared Obama pitching to the Queen of England pitching. Glenn Beck is apparently ignorant to the fact that the Queen is a relatively impotent figurehead and that Tony Blair - at the time the functional leader of the country - did pitch to win the 2012 bid.

The right, of course, started humming the "If Bush went and failed..." rhetoric. The right is apparently ignorant of the fact that Bush was a failure and embarrassing detriment to any cause, while Obama is viewed as one of the most popular leaders in the world.

Had Obama NOT gone to Copenhagen and Chicago not won the Olympics, the right would have criticized Obama for not doing all he could to guarantee America's success in the eyes of the world. But since he tried and failed, the right is more than happy to roll joyously in the failure feces like a filthy dog or pig, even if it's not the best thing for America. They will then claim that rooting for Obama's failure is rooting for America's success, such as Bill Cunningham did last night, and discount this instance as non-applicable.

The 2016 Olympics did not go to Chicago for 3 reasons:

Visa

It takes people about 3 months to get a visa into the USA. D'oh!


Chicago?

I just spent the weekend in Chicago. I had a fantastic time with friends and family and my brief glimpse was one that was so amazing you feel briefly down from coming back. But it is a big, American city. It is ass getting into the city just about 24 hours a day and traffic is crazy and erratic inside the city at all hours. You really need to know where you are and where you are going, especially at night. Cramming thousands and thousands more people into that wonderful city, already bursting at the seams? Probably not a good idea. Chicago is truly awesome, but I think cramming the Olympics into it would not be good for the Olympics or Chicago.


America The Popular

Some goons on the liberal end were claiming racism had something to do with it. Bullshit. Some claimed Dubya ruined the image of America, which he did; but Obama picked that back up some. From what I could see of the presentations, it appeared that the bid for Chicago was shitty because it didn't focus on what Chicago could offer and how they could make it work, but "Hey, look at all these popular people like Chicago so you totally have to pick it!"

And that's not a Republican thing or Democratic thing but an America thing. We're crackheads for celebrity. Period. And that's how we run things. Unfortunately, while much of the world is also crack-nuts for American celebrity, the IOC is looking for something a little more substantial.


But whatever the right says about what is happening, I have yet to see Obama clearing brush while Americans he sent to Iraq in an illegal war die every day.


And that's my take on the situation. Yours?

Bush's Batshit Crazy War: Chriac, Gog, & Magog

I dug this article up somewhere, and it's not the only place it can be found. But take a look at this:

Now out of office, Chirac recounts that the American leader appealed to their "common faith" (Christianity) and told him: "Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East…. The biblical prophecies are being fulfilled…. This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins."

This bizarre episode occurred while the White House was assembling its "coalition of the willing" to unleash the Iraq invasion. Chirac says he was boggled by Bush’s call and "wondered how someone could be so superficial and fanatical in their beliefs."

If this is vetted - and I've got my doubts - then holy shit why isn't this leading ever newscast in America right now? Why isn't Bush being taken to account not only as a war criminal but a nutbag who started a war because of the Bible?

Holy hell we were in a much worse place than we thought we were when Bush was president.

Some New and Old News - Sex, Religion, Killin'

Octomom porno? I'll wait while you cause yourself great pain to block the memory of reading those words. Reality show? Believe it.

Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) is worried capping CO2 will take away plant food. Seriously.

SHIMKUS: It’s plant food. … So if we decrease the use of carbon dioxide, are we not taking away plant food from the atmosphere? … So all our good intentions could be for naught. In fact, we could be doing just the opposite of what the people who want to save the world are saying.

Even better to watch:


Obama's administration dropped the War on Terror rhetoric. Officially. Hells yeah.

Last week OPEC said oil had nothing to do with climate change. In related news, cigarette manufacturers said smoke is nutritious, and AIG released a report that borrowing money you cannot afford to borrow increases life expectancy.

Bob Barker came close to a career in porn. Just scratch out one eye, so you can read the rest of the post. Unless that happened at Octomom. Better to be blind.

Apparently Americans are still dying in Iraq.

And if I remember my Catholic School upbringing, it's Good Friday, so 9am to 12pm represents the walk up the hill, then Jesus hung out (hehe) for 3 more hours, and it's 2:59, so 3...2...1. Jesus just died.

!SPOILER ALERT!

No worries; he comes back to life on Sunday morning.

Have a happy Easter.

Waiting for the Other Shoe to Launch

When I saw this in a news break yesterday during the finale of Survivor (Yay Bob!), it made my evening. Then it made my day today. Over and over and over again.



Finally, we get someone who wants to disagree with Bush, hand him what he deserves, and it's not some politician who has to play nice and not offend. Unfortunately, Bush probably didn't understand until someone explained it to him what a tremendous insult the sole of the shoe represents in the Arab world.

UPDATE: Al-Zaidi charged for throwing shoes in presence of Maliki, not for aiming at Bush

McCain's Geography

For those of you unaware of some of the nuance of the geography of the Middle East,



...Iraq and Pakistan do not, in fact, actually touch.

Us, Israel, Iraq, Iran

Just to be clear: we're using a country we invaded and are now occupying to give the nod to Israel to stretch their military legs (all three) and practice for a military strike against Iran which will most certainly start another war for which we are not equipped but will certainly become a part.

Either there is some sort of upper-echelon illuminati thing going on or Bush sees us in the Middle East as a kegger: "Hey, it's all good, come on over - byo bombs! Just kiddin' we've got tons more if you need them."

Quick recap: either we or Israel attack Iran and the fold-in begins: China dumps its currency and activates 300,000 troops, crippling us economically, dwarfing us militarily; Russia jumps in on their side with North Korea. And we're done. Because we're already barely managing two fronts - a third would knock us down and 2 new world power enemies would be very, very bad. And once the rest of the world sees us knocked down a peg, it's open season gangbang time.

Every day it's closer. Get your duct tape.

Hey, About that Timeline...

Grumble grumble grumble, quip the administration. Cheese-eating traitor-monkey, grumbles talk radio. How about 100 years, cheeses McBush. How dare you talk about a timeline for withdrawal!

Iraq's national security adviser said Tuesday his country will not accept any security deal with the United States unless it contains specific dates for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces.

Oh shit. They not only realize we're binding them but want to actually throw off the chains. Could we potentially start a war with the unripened fruits of our war simply because we didn't want to stop playing war?

Or we could leave and free up those troops for the upcoming war with Iran.

MoveOn.org "Not Alex" Video

I actually have to thank Andrew Wilkow for alerting me to this video. Of course, he calls it "nonsense" when I find it emotionally compelling. And it's not just McCain's "100 years" comment, but his lackadaisical tossing around of the bombing of Iran that will drive this country past its volunteer military capacity, forcing a draft. And anyone who can't put those pieces together is blinded by their own nonsense.

U.S. Armed Forces = God's Army?

The Real News Network has been doing some great work providing the public with information you can't get anywhere else. This story is about the separation of church and state and how the evangelical movement in the U.S. Military is raping that dry.

Warning: this will make you angry.

Baghdad Disneyland? WTF?

Over at Think Progress, they have a FOX News interview with the contractor tasked with and American-style amusement park. In Baghdad. I can't embed it, but check the link; it's worth it.

They talk about the issues plaguing building an amusement park in Iraq like it's just going up in an economically depressed area. Except it's a war zone. And they're planning it outside the Green Zone, apparently being "fast-tracked" by the Pentagon.

Come to The Baghdad Zoo and Entertainment Experience: Bullets, IEDs, mortars, broken rides, and dead animals! Hopefully your family won't be taken for ransom. But that's part of the Experience!

This is not just the definitive example of lipstick on a pig, but lipstick on a mad, violent boar. We'd be better served to build a "Iraq War Experience" park where the military embeds regular citizens into the war. They'd probably pay more.

What the hell are we thinking?

Ancient Chinese Secret ...for Destruction and, Apparently, Patriotism

Wait, what was I writing about?

Oh, yeah, let's try this:



From those lovely Brits at the Telegraph:

Satellite imagery, passed to The Daily Telegraph, shows that a substantial harbour has been built which could house a score of nuclear ballistic missile submarines and a host of aircraft carriers.

In what will be a significant challenge to US Navy dominance and to countries ringing the South China Sea, one photograph shows China’s latest 094 nuclear submarine at the base just a few hundred miles from its neighbours.

Other images show numerous warships moored to long jettys and a network of underground tunnels at the Sanya base on the southern tip of Hainan island.

I shouldn't have to say this, but there are many, many ignorant "I'm a victim" folks out there, and apparently the Chinese are just as good at misplacing aggression as rednecks are: the following tirade is focused at the powers that be, the oppressive government of China, primarily, that has nothing to do with the Chinese people, who should overthrow their oppressors.

So...Aside from the obvious arch-villain mastermind cave lair issue, let's go over the political basics one more time:

• China fucking owns us because they own a sick amount of our debt. They could shake their money-maker and cause a dip in the Dow. They shuck poison toys, smirking as they shake our hands with shit, smeared in their palms, mouthing "Whatcha gonna do?" all the while eying the vice in which they have out balls clamped.


• China has one man and one woman available for military service for every American alive. Let me say that in another way: China's standing potential army (age 18-49) is well over twice the population of the entire U.S.A., all ages. Those fit for service are just under "twice."


• Based on past diplomatic efforts of the past eight years, China can deal with Russia. Russia can deal with Iran. Iran can deal with China. Iran can deal with Venezuela. Iran can deal with North Korea. Russa can deal with North Korea. They're all kind of buddies in that they think we need to be taken down a peg.


• We really don't want to talk to any of them.

Here's a reminder in the form of a delicious Photoshop I put together a little less than a year ago:



Everyone's heard the phraseology of "America the Bully." True dat. But our world, the playground, if you will, has recently seen some kids bulk up. And they're all talking in the corner. They may not have the abilities or the technology or the know-how on their own, but they can MacGyver it if they needed to, and together the numbers are in their favor.

And the US is just kind of mindlessly, dreamily staring at the sandbox. Invested, he'd whisper, were he asked.

And it has suddenly become very quiet, but US doesn't really notice.

So when the beatdown comes, we know who'll throw the first couple punches. But when US is bent over a little, when those accosting have proven weakness beyond a reasonable doubt, who else will join in? Who will come out of the woodwork? Who else will align with a potential "new bully?" Who else will come out with baseball bats or sticks or hat pins to give a whack "because it's about time?" or "just because?"

(pause)
I think the more frightening, "reality" question is: should this paranoid thought experiment play out as proposed, how would I react? I complain about America and I try to better America and I write and I vote and I participate in activism when possible and I do all these things because I do love and want to protect the freedom to do these things of which I speak.

So if America was the object of a military, world-wide, gang rape, would I leave my wife and daughter and take all my tech savvy and voice and passion and intelligence and potential firearm acuity and strap one on and blow the fuck out of anything that actually threatened this country and all that it stands for? To make this world safe for my daughter to blog and piss and moan about what's wrong with America?

You bet your ass I would.

Just like if the zombies attack.

Fuck. I think I just got all patriotic. And maybe emotional. Not to worry; it's a feeling, not a flag or a pin or a gun, so few will actually recognize it.

Shit, I've got to get a gun.

Let's just keep this between us.

Wal-Mart and Debbie Shank: Tragedy, Horror

Oh yeah, and Wal-Mart is the fucking Devil. Have your heard the story of Debbie Shank?

Debbie Shank breaks down in tears every time she's told that her 18-year-old son, Jeremy, was killed in Iraq.

Even though the 52-year-old mother of three attended her son's funeral -- she continues to ask how he's doing. When her family reminds her that he's dead -- she weeps as if hearing the news for the first time.

Shank suffered severe brain damage after a traffic accident nearly eight years ago that robbed her of much of her short-term memory and left her in a wheelchair and living in a nursing home.

It was the beginning of a series of battles -- both personal and legal -- that loomed for Shank and her family. One of their biggest was with Wal-Mart's health plan.

Eight years ago, Shank was stocking shelves for the retail giant and signed up for Wal-Mart's health and benefits plan.

Two years after the accident, Shank and her husband, Jim, were awarded about $1 million in a lawsuit against the trucking company involved in the crash. After legal fees were paid, $417,000 was placed in a trust to pay for Debbie Shank's long-term care.

Wal-Mart had paid out about $470,000 for Shank's medical expenses, but in 2005, Wal-Mart's health plan sued the Shanks for the same amount.

The Shanks didn't notice in the fine print of Wal-Mart's health plan policy that the company has the right to recoup medical expenses if an employee collects damages in a lawsuit.

The family's attorney, Maurice Graham, said he informed Wal-Mart about the settlement and believed the Shanks would be allowed to keep the money. Video Watch this couple's story »

"We assumed after three years, they [Wal-Mart] had made a decision to let Debbie Shank use this money for what it was intended to," Graham said.

The Shanks lost their suit to Wal-Mart. Last summer, the couple appealed the ruling -- but also lost it. One week later, their son was killed in Iraq.

"They are quite within their rights. But I just wonder if they need it that bad," Jim Shank said.

In 2007, the retail giant reported net sales in the third quarter of $90 billion.

No, that doesn't really need any further commentary.