The Gang That Can’t Shoot Straight

It’s too early to write the history of the Obama administration. But, at this point, it looks like, for the most part, that history may be summed up in three words: coulda, woulda, shoulda. I “coulda” signed an immigration bill, but Congress was too busy shutting down the government. I “woulda” closed the gun show loophole, but the NRA wouldn’t let me. “I “shoulda” done something about climate change, but I just ran out of time.

The one, big exception is the Affordable Care Act. That is the one concrete thing President Obama has accomplished. As Joe Biden would say, that’s a “BFD,” which is why the breakdown of the Obamacare website is so inexcusable. It will be fixed, but it never should have collapsed in the first place.

Launched on October 1, the same day Congress shut down the federal government, problems with the website designed for people to sign up for one of 36 state health exchanges popped up immediately. Customers had to be cleared before they could shop (just the opposite of most commercial websites). The website shut down in the middle of many searches, dropping all stored data, and forcing customers to start over from scratch. Rates were often misquoted, and inaccurate information relayed to insurance providers.

And what was the response of the Obama administration? One pitiful excuse after another. First, they declared that the problem was simply too much traffic. They didn’t expect so many people to check it out, they lamented, so they couldn’t handle the volume, which made no sense at all. How can you preach for years that millions of Americans are eager to buy health insurance — and then say you’re surprised when millions of Americans are, indeed, eager to buy health insurance?

At the same time, the White House minimized problems with the site as the kind of “glitches” every new site experiences, but which would quickly work themselves out. Except that experts soon confirmed that difficulties navigating the site stemmed from serious system failures, and not mere glitches.

Then HHS Secretary Kathleen Sibelius told CNN that part of the problem was that so many people going to the website were not “tech savvy.” Which may be true, but which is also why the site should have been designed as fool-proof and easy to use. Not to mention that countless “tech savvy” people reported they couldn’t find their way around the website, either.

Finally, 21 days after launch, President Obama admitted the problems were serious, expressed his anger and frustrations with the website failures and announced he was bringing in a team of the best and brightest, the so-called “tech surge,” to straighten out the mess. Good move. But, one must wonder, why the best and brightest weren’t hired to design the system from the start, instead of CGI, a Canadian firm, who, according to USASpending.gov, were paid upward of $634 million — for nothing. HHS would have been better off subcontracting the whole operation out to Amazon or ProFlowers. They know how to handle traffic. They thrive on it.

It’s not all bad news. Where the federal government has floundered, state governments have soared. On my show, I’ve heard nothing but success stories from those 14 states — California, New York, Washington State, Maryland, Connecticut and others — where governors have embraced Obamacare and set up their own websites. Under Democratic Governor Steve Beshear, Kentucky leads the pack, signing up an average of 1,000 new health care patients a day. Ironically, it’s only in those states where Republican governors have rejected Obamacare that the administration has run into trouble.

Nevertheless, opponents of the Affordable Care Act are enjoying this meltdown a little too much. They love the fact that the launch is having so many problems. It just reinforces their stale old argument that the ACA should be delayed or dumped altogether. But they’re only kidding themselves. Obamacare is here to stay. It’s already helped millions of Americans. Problems with the website, which is only one part of Obamacare, will soon be fixed. By January, as many as 30 million more Americans will be able to sign up for the health care they need for themselves and their families, at bargain rates never before available.

In the meantime, this isn’t rocket science. The Obama administration should stop making lame excuses, admit they dropped the ball big time, and just get busy and fix the darned thing. Fast!

3033 Responses to The Gang That Can’t Shoot Straight

  1. So you’re scared that Rand paul carried the constitution but you say nothing about obama “burning the Constitution.”. Not my words. They are the words of a long time obama friend, supporter and former staff member Mr. Tribe who is a ” highly regarded liberal scholar of constitutional law, still speaks of President Obama as a proud teacher would of a star student. “He was one of the most amazing research assistants I’ve ever had,” Mr. Tribe said in a recent interview. Mr. Obama worked for him at Harvard Law School, where Mr. Tribe has taught for four decades.”

    “Next week Mr. Tribe is to deliver oral arguments for Peabody in the first federal court case about Mr. Obama’s climate change rules. Mr. Tribe argues in a brief for the case that in requiring states to cut carbon emissions, thus to change their energy supply from fossil fuels to renewable sources, the E.P.A. is asserting executive power far beyond its lawful authority under the Clean Air Act. At a House hearing last month, Mr. Tribe likened the climate change policies of Mr. Obama to “burning the Constitution.””
    Of course now he is persona non grata in democratic circles because he dared to oppose the dear leader. I thought you demokrats were open minded? I guess you drfine open minded as ‘anyone who agrees with me’ which would explain why you inly go to sites that validate your crazy views. No dissenting voices allowed in your world are there bubble girl?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/07/us/laurence-tribe-fights-climate-case-against-star-pupil-from-harvard-president-obama.html

  2. Crooksandliars, you’ve used them as a source before so they must be good:
    http://crooksandliars.com/2015/01/nafta-tpp-clinton-global-initiatives-free

    “The do-gooder aspect of the Clinton family’s CGI — yes, family; the official name of the umbrella organization is “Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation” — obscures its definition of “good.” The organization promotes these “good” things — more carbon emissions in the form of fracked methane (“America’s natural gas”), privately-owned schools, privately-owned public infrastructure like bridges and roads — and it does so by hosting forums presented people like Robert Rubin, fracked methane CEOs, and other billionaire beneficiaries of these policies.”

    “NAFTA, TPP and Hillary Clinton’s CGI
    Back to where we started, I want to tie up this bundle. This is in part about TPP, but it’s also about Hillary Clinton and what CGI says about how she would act if elected. I want to ask three questions:

    ? Is there any question that NAFTA and TPP are good only for billionaires?

    ? Is there any question that the Clinton Global Initiative promotes billionaire policies, including but not limited to job-killing “free trade” deals?

    ? Is there any question that CGI’s activism represents policy directions that all of the Clintons, CGI principals, approve of?

    And a fourth question:

    ? If the answers above are No, No, and No, how is Hillary Clinton the “lesser evil” on America’s most important domestic issue, extreme and worsening economic inequality?

    I’m not sure I can answer that in a way that comforts left-leaning 2016 voters.”

    But hey, this is your pre-selected candidate so I’m sure you’ll start towing the party line when they tell you to….

  3. http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/11/politics/elizabeth-warren-obama-hillary-clinton-trade/

    “Lending muscle to Warren’s opposition is the AFL-CIO, which announced Wednesday that it is freezing contributions to Democratic candidates in order to pump its money into the battle to defeat OBAMA on TRADE ”

    “As soon as Warren’s conference call started on Wednesday, the OBAMA White House was pushing back.”

    “Clinton embraced the Pacific Rim negotiations during her tenure as Obama’s secretary of state, as she led the ballyhooed pivot to Asia — with the trade deal as its economic underpinning. Though her spokesman didn’t respond to questions about her stance on the deal Wednesday, Clinton said the deal could be a boost to U.S. workers and businesses in her memoir last year.”

  4. it wasn’t Obama who pushed the healthcare bill through, it was healthcare lobbyists. Who immediately took single payer off the table.
    This is your speaks, it said, ” no to single payer”.
    Paid for by your corporate Supremecists.

  5. What you’ve got there is just more smoke and mirrors. Nobody likes Hillary. What ever happened to open and free elections? Why does the president need to come the bush crime family or the Clinton crime family.
    There is one overwhelming reason for Hillary as president. That is, the next president will appoint 5 justices to the Supreme Court.

  6. Looks like your candidate is going to do whatever he or she is told to do by the republicans.
    Just like they have been. The poor saps…not a brain between them.

  7. “What you’ve got there is just more smoke and mirrors.”
    What was the smoke and mirrors? Do you disagree that CGI is for TPP? Or do you still think obama is against TPP even though he is the one pushing it? If so provide some proof, not just bat brained theories about reverse psychology. See, the only person who thinks he’s against it is you. Or is he just doing what his masters tell him? Either way it doesn’t look good for yoir support of him. He’s either behind TPP or he’s a feckless imbecile who does what he’s told. I also guess it means you’ll stop using crooksandliars and EPI as sources since all they are providing is smoke and mirrors. I guess Warren is also just using smoke and mirrors to deceive you.
    Did you ever consider that your life was just smoke and mirrors?

    “Looks like your candidate is going to do whatever he or she is told to do by the republicans. Just like they have been. ”
    Just like hillary is? You think she’ll pick a Supreme Court justice her masters won’t approve? What’s interesting about your accusation is that you make it only minutes after you just implied obama did the same with respect to health care, he did what he was told. So really what you just said was meaningless.

    “The poor saps…not a brain between them.”
    Really, is that all you’ve got? in other words you’re losing the argument so you belittle those you oppose. Yet another nazi tactic. Problem they are all far smarter then you could ever hope to be. But then You don’t have a brain so why would I expect more?

    “What ever happened to open and free elections? ”
    Well at least the republicans will have a choice, unlike you. It won’t be Bush either, but you will be stuck with hillary.

    “it wasn’t Obama who pushed the healthcare bill through, it was healthcare lobbyists. ”
    Actually it was obama. When he was having problems getting enough democrats to come on board (remember those reviled blue dog democrats?) obama called in the insurance companies. Single payer was taken off the table well before that because there weren’t enough democrats who would have supported it.
    Try and rewrite history all you want but it won’t change it.

  8. ***Well at least the republicans will have a choice,***
    You’re a fucking idiot.
    Just who have the koch brothers picked for you to “vote” for???
    Wil it be Scott Walker??
    And Jeb Bush??
    The republicans of today don’t really have a party. It’s just a conglomerate of mixed messages.! And lofty innuendo. Filled with more tax breaks for the rich and powerful. For the you know. ” job creators”
    The Republican Party today has gone past the the party of yesterday.
    Now it has 3 kinds of people.
    Millionaires, / billionaires, paid hucksters selling the Republican Party, to the fools and halfwits. That think it’s their party.
    So, which one are you??

  9. And who picked hillary for you?
    You seem to skip over the fact that the democrats appear to have anointed your candidate for president without a single primary vote being cast?

    As far as the kochs other then your fear mongerimg and non existent conspiracies you haven’t actually proven that they’ve done anything. In fact all you’ve done is to be guilty of exactly what you accuse me of…being influenced those who control your party. That’s the problem when you habitually use propaganda as your facts, it allows you to be easily misled.

    “Maybe, but you are not independent of the koch brothers choices.”
    They have a pretty good agenda so I’m all for it! If we listened to them we could actually create some jobs. Of course they Employ over 50,000. How many people has hillary ever created a job for besides her chauffer and maids? Oh, and bills hookers!

    So when you cast your vote for Hillary and her chinese and wall st backers how will you feel? A little bit dirty? Perhaps used?

  10. ***They have a pretty good agenda so I’m all for it! ***
    This is verifiable certifiable proof…..you’re a fucking idiot!,!!
    You didn’t say…..which one are you again???

  11. When you have a house and senate that votes against the wishes of the…we the people….88% of the time , in favor of the 12% koch suckers that think they’re republicans, you have lost control of your we the people government.
    Now…stfu and give the people that really don’t need another tax break………another tax break…….halfwit.

  12. Do you ever answer a question, without asking another question?”
    Don’t you and your world have any questions about…….you and your world????
    Can it be. THAT. Perfect???

  13. and thank you for correcting me. There are no conspiracies. The kochs really love and care about you as an American Citizen, things just keep getting better and better, don’t they??? Halfwit?.”

  14. A little more about your candidate

    “Hillary Clinton’s unannounced campaign for the U.S. Presidency has already failed. Her arrogance (or else stupidity) in having wiped clean the hard drive of the private server she had used for her emails while she was the U.S. Secretary of State adds insult to the injury already done to her incipient campaign by the earlier revelation that she had evaded the State Department’s record-keeping system and had used her private server for all of her State Department emails and not only for her personal emails. (The NYT had headlined March 2nd: “Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules.”)

    CNN, early Saturday morning, March 28th, bannered the big follow-up, “Hillary Clinton deleted all email from personal server,” and reported that, “Hillary Clinton permanently deleted all the emails on the private server she used to do official business as secretary of state.” Ms. Clinton immediately responded to reporters’ questions by saying that nothing of importance to, or concerning, her State Department business, was on that server, and that she had recently sent to the investigator who is looking into this matter “roughly 30,000 emails” that related to State Department business. However, the public, and prosecutors, will now not be able to see the other emails (which she says were approximately 32,000), because she then had that server wiped clean. She says she had had this done because “no one wants their personal emails made public.”

    In other words: the public would just have to trust her assertion that nothing related to government business was in those “personal emails.”

    Private letters from Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and other American leaders, are published in books; but Hillary Clinton does not think that the American public should ever have access to hers. Today’s emails are like paper-and-ink letters in that bygone era; but she has, in effect, burned them. Historians won’t get to see them; neither will the public.

    Even the earlier revelation had caused her ratio of unfavorable-to-favorable ratings in polls to soar.

    On March 19th, Reuters headlined, “Many Democrats want independent Clinton email probe: Reuters/Ipsos poll,” and reported: “Support for Clinton’s candidacy has dropped about 15 percentage points since mid-February among Democrats, with as few as 45 percent saying they would support her in the last week.”

    In the CBS News poll, taken March 21-24, Hillary’s Favorable rating was 26%, Not Favorable was 37%; this had last been polled by CBS on September 12-16 of 2008: 51% Favorable, 35% Unfavorable. Her Favorable is down from 51% to 26%, almost half, since then. The latest Gallup poll on that question was March 2-4 (this year): 50% Favorable, 39% Unfavorable. Assuming comparability of the Gallup and the CBS polls, her figures went from 50% Favorable and 39% Unfavorable just as the first news of this email scandal broke, down to 26% Favorable and 37% Unfavorable just before the latest revelation — the revelation that she had wiped her server clean — and it’s likely to go even lower now, after that second blow.

    Wall Street has banked on Hillary’s becoming President. Her husband gave them what they wanted (the end of the Glass-Steagall Act); and during the past year she has been collecting millions of dollars in ‘speaking fees’ for meeting with them in private.

    According to all accounts of the collections by her nascent campaign organization, money has been flowing into it by the millions.

    And Wall Street is already panicking at the news-reports of her email scandal.

    On Friday March 27th, Britain’s Guardian headlined, “Elizabeth Warren: Banks Could Halt Donations in Protest at Senator’s Plans,” and reported that, “Big Wall Street banks are so upset with Elizabeth Warren’s call for them to be broken up that some have discussed withholding campaign donations to Senate Democrats in symbolic protest, sources familiar with the discussions said. Representatives from Citigroup, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Bank of America have met to discuss ways to urge Democrats, including Warren and Ohio senator Sherrod Brown, to soften their party’s tone toward Wall Street, sources familiar with the discussions said this week.”

    On 19 April 2014, the Guardian had headlined “Wall Street deregulation pushed by Clinton advisers, documents reveal” and reported that, “Throughout the documents, which are among 7,000 pages released by the Clinton library on Friday, there is little discussion of internal opposition to repealing Glass-Steagall,” which was the FDR law, passed in response to the 1929 economic crash, that (up till 2000) blocked banks from ever again gambling with depositors’ money and from their leaving the Federal Government holding the bag (bank “bailouts”) when such bank-gambles produce losses, as occurred again in 2008. Senator Warren wants to reinstate those protections for depositors and taxpayers, and the megabanks are terrified against that possibility.

    Naturally, then, on 21 May 2014, Mother Jones bannered, “Hillary Clinton’s Speaking Circuit Payday: $5 Million (and Counting),” and listed some of the companies that were forking over $200,000 apiece to have private sessions with her (’speaking fees’) while she was “considering” to gear up for a Presidential campaign: Fidelity Investments, Goldman Sachs, the Carlyle Group, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, the National Association of Realtors, etc. Her donors’ list is rich; and it’s all ‘private,’ perhaps just like the emails that she destroyed.

    The only Democrats who will be voting for Hillary Clinton are the ones who are satisfied for Wall Street to own Main Street.

    And Republicans will vote against her because she’s not nominally “Republican.””

  15. “Do you ever answer a question, without asking another question?””

    Now that’s too funny. At least you acknowledge that I ANSWER the question. Unlike you who only ask questions without ever answering one.
    I thought you said in the last you wanted to have a “conversation”? That requires asking and answering questions. You only do the former, and make false accusations that you’re unable to support. Perhaps if you actually answered something, had evidence of your accusations,no wouldn’t have to ask so many questions of you.

    Was I able to do that without asking a question? Damn it!!! Just blew it didn’t I?

  16. “When you have a house and senate that votes against the wishes of the…we the people….88% of the time , in favor of the 12% koch suckers that think they’re republicans, you have lost control of your we the people government.”

    Except that your people controlled the senate and your people as led by Harry Reid didn’t allow anything to come to a vote.

    So..your numbers and claim are BS.

  17. “***They have a pretty good agenda so I’m all for it! ***
    This is verifiable certifiable proof…..you’re a fucking idiot!,!!
    You didn’t say…..which one are you again???”

    Yet I’m not the one asking for the government to support me, You are.
    Who is the idiot, the one who can support themselves or the one that needs to live off the earnings of others?

    Which one am I against? Yours !!

  18. “Now…stfu and give the people that really don’t need another tax break………another tax break…….halfwit.”

    And what gives you the right to decide if someone ‘needs’ or doesn’t ‘need’ a tax break?
    Why is it you think the government, the very same government that you think votes against the people 88% of the time, need to take more money from people?
    youre so concerned about those that do pay taxes getting a break but you say nothing of those of ‘your’ people, 43% of Americans, who don’t pay ANY taxes! Maybe if your people paid into the system they use, instead of using it for free as you do, you wouldn’t be so dependent on those of us who pay.
    Then you have yet to answer a single question but I’ll add to your list of unanswered questions this….where is it that you think you derive this right to take other people’s money to spend on your needs?

  19. Why do your koch brothers think they have the right to take people’s money and never give any back?? Why should the koch brothers think it’s ok to take money from the domestic programs in Kansas to pay for the koch brothers tax breaks??

    Wakey wakey..it’s not the same government.
    It’s been bought and paid for while you were being sold down the river. Your govt only answers to the 12%. Of the 12% , by the 12% , and for the 12%.

    Where should we get the $30,000 /person that we keep giving to the corporations and the Koch brothers??? Where?? Simple question??
    Like the Q above…..which one are you??

  20. ***Yet I’m not the one asking for the government to support me, You are.***
    You are aware that you pay actual money into funds the government holds. ( Jaime dimon) that are supposed to support you in your old age years, right??
    I paid into it, why do you think I’m not entitled to it?
    You think it’s ok to steal the pension funds?? The latest 401k debacle, uh, oh, yeah, that didn’t work out?? That was one of your premium programs was it not?? Oops, sorry, here’s $ 18,000 instead of the million dollars we promised you.
    Makes good sense to you, no??

  21. you always leave out WHY Harry Reid would not bring bills up for a vote. Do you remember why??
    Do you remember the republicans keep stapling nonsense onto the back if the bills. Harry Reid kept asking for clean bills with nothing attached to the back.
    So, the republicans were unable to agree with any bill they could staple something onto.

  22. I see you’re answering questions with a question but not a single answer, isn’t that the sign of a f’in idiot?
    “Why do your koch brothers think they have the right to take people’s money and never give any back??”
    They don’t. Why do you think you have a right to take the koch brothers money?
    “why should the koch brothers think it’s ok to take money from the domestic programs in Kansas to pay for the koch brothers tax breaks??”
    Same answer. Also,who said we have to provide those “domestic” programs? There are a lot of wasteful government run “domestic” programs. Why is asking the government to live within a budget not ok?

    “Where should we get the $30,000 /person that we keep giving to the corporations and the Koch brothers??? Where?? Simple question??”
    Once again we don’t “give” $30,000/person to anyone. Not taking something from someone isn’t giving it to them. You assume that the money a person or corporation makes belongs to the government until the government decides what they can keep.

  23. “You are aware that you pay actual money into funds the government holds. ( Jaime dimon) that are supposed to support you in your old age years, right??”
    Yes moron and I’m not planning on it supporting me which is why I save and invest otherwise, as should everyone. In fact I would prefer NOT to pay into it but because of idiots like you I’m forced to against my will. I could do much better investing for myself.
    If you’re going to keep accusing Dimon of having something illicit to do with this then provide some sort of evidence. If you can’t then quit making false accusations.

    “I paid into it, why do you think I’m not entitled to it?”
    Assuming you’re speaking of social security you are entitled to it. Who said you weren’t? But you’re not entitled to not paying any taxes whilst you accuse others of not paying enough. Youre not entitled to free “domestic” programs that others tax dollars pay for while you pay nothing.

    “The latest 401k debacle, uh, oh, yeah, that didn’t work out??”
    What 401k debacle? Mine is doing just fine. Just because people made poor investment decisions or didn’t invest at all doesn’t equate to a debacle. It equates to poor decisions. How is that anyone’s fault but their own?

    “you always leave out WHY Harry Reid would not bring bills up for a vote. Do you remember why??
    Do you remember the republicans keep stapling nonsense onto the back if the bills. Harry Reid kept asking for clean bills with nothing attached to the back.
    So, the republicans were unable to agree with any bill they could staple something onto.”

    Try again. Harry Reid brought bills with plenty of stuff stapled to them to vote, it was just stuff he wanted. If he thought any republican bill had a chance of passing, he wouldn’t bring it to a vote, even if his fellow dems asked him to. All he did was protect obama at the expense offsetting the people’s elected representatives vote. As far as stapling stuff to bills isn’t that exactly what the dems are doing now yet McConnell is letting them come to vote?
    Anyways harry Reid has admitted to being a liar for nothing more than purely political gain. Just your type of person, ideology over the people.

  24. So nice again I addressed your question but I know you’ll be unable to answer mine. Instead you’ll ask more questions all the while accusing me of asking questions.
    That’s your problem, you don’t have any answers, just accusations based on the propaganda you read. You really need to learn to think for yourself. Perhaps your to old and its to late, or maybe your paranoia runs to deep, but you should try.

  25. Since you’re unable to answer the question of what ‘fair share’ is, even though you want it, maybe this will help

    https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/FairTax.HTM

    An actual “excerpt”

    “What’s fair depends on definitions. Excluding the completely venal and self-serving definitions of fair, I suggest that if you are paying:

    Less than $5,500 in Federal income tax
    Less than $12,000 in taxes at all levels
    Less than 10% of your gross income in Federal taxes
    Less than 20% of your gross income in taxes of all kinds
    …that a little humility might be in order before complaining about other people not paying their fair share.”

    According to this I paid well above my fair share, did you?

    In other news hillary and Melinda gates are apparently buddy buddy. Not good news for your cause. Hillary will probably force you to get a vaccination with someone’s DNA in it and eat GM food. What shall you do?

  26. So your candidate is going to run on inequality while her daughter is wearing $10000 worth of clothes and jewelry, living in a $10.5 million dollar apartment, and gets a $600,000 a year job not based on experience but based on her last name.
    Yeah, she realllly cares about inequality.

  27. “Where should we get the $30,000 /person ”
    And where did you get this number from besides your ass? Even your trusted propagandist Thom Hartmann only puts it at $6000 but even that is wrong. So how did you divine a number 5 times higher? Making shit up again arent you?
    When you have to make shit up to support your argument it means you have a weak argument, and that you’re dishonest by nature. But them aren’t all progressives?

  28. So, your 1/2 of one percent needs another tax cut?? Why?? If the death tax doesn’t kick in until after $5.4 Million has been reached. Why should we give them another tax cut???

  29. “So, your 1/2 of one percent needs another tax cut?? Why?? If the death tax doesn’t kick in until after $5.4 Million has been reached. Why should we give them another tax cut???”

    Answering a question with a question again? Here’s an answer…Because it’s not your money to take. See, I answered it.
    What gives you the right to decide who to take money from and who not to?
    As noted above since you didn’t pay your fair share you should, as you like to say, STFU. Let those of us who take care of you decide how to spend our money. since you obviously don’t know how to manage your own why do you think you can manage mine?
    Once again, I’ve addresse your questions while you provide only false allegations and can’t address any of your false claims. Try answering something for once instead of accusing others of not giving you enough

  30. “http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/national-debt-burden”
    I see you agree that the government spends to much and is passing on too much debt to future generations.

  31. $$30,000 for every man woman and child going to subsidise rich , powerful corporations is just too much. Why don’t you decide something of value, rather than who has the right to decide who should be taxed and how much.
    Your straw man arguments are boring, childish, tedious,and stupid.
    There, I answered your question again.
    And you’re wrong about everything else.
    Another question answered.

Leave a reply