McCain Loves the Middle Class
 

Okay, so we went from 800 political threads to one. People, the election is less than two weeks away and we are silent!
So I'm here to do my part. Colbert articulates hilariously one serious reason I find the whole Joe the Plumber theme so annoying and ridiculous. It's condescending.

Well if our conservitive friend had not been scared off, then we might have something going on! I am as excited as ever (for the election)!

Me too. So if we've scared him off, I guess that means we've won the war of ideas.

Check out the scarf Palin is wearing. Vote for Democrats! $150,000 on a new wardrobe and she shows up wearing this?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...palinscarf.jpg

I don't think anyone scared him off. Perhaps he actually made a friend and simply has 16 hours less of free time than previously. I am sure he will be back to talk about himself when the room once more becomes empty. They always do.

If I was a hard core rightwinger I'd be laying low long about now..Watching the final nails going into the coffin of the Reagan revolution is something this old liberal has waited a liftetime for ..When I see Barack and the Democratic Senate and Congress sweep into power in 2 and a half weeks it will be difficult to put into words the elation I feel ..I know there is alot of work to be done but I think Barack will prove himself up to the challenge..I feel he could be another FDR for the new millenium.

^^

If polls are to be believed and unless there is some suprise issue not vetted, Obama will win by 99.9% of all polls. Moreover, Obama could win 344 electoral votes. So, Obama likely will have considerable political clout going in to the White House. THis will be greatly enhanced by the likely taking of the Senate by the D's and the seats the D's pick up in the House.

Assuming that to be true, Obama inherits as large a mess as FDR did, perhaps even larger. To these eyes, the only way out the mess is to sponsor huge government projects on the lines of the TVA, the Hoover Dam, etc. These will create a huge amount of jobs and greatly enhance our country, if not free it. For example, let's say the Obama places deveral hundred thoudand windmills throughout the country at the govt.'s expense and uses that power to provide lights on public roads and interstates. This clearly is feasible.

I truly hope the confidence placed in Obama is well placed.

Yes if those things happen on election day and it seems very likely they will Obama will be the most powerful Democratic President in decades.It will be with great hope and expectation that I will look forward to see what he can do to get our once great nation back on track..Just the relief I am beginning to feel about the prospects for the Supreme court is lifting my spirits greatly.

Moreover, I think the following is one of the major reasons why McCain is taking a beating.

Alan Greenspan testified today and said "I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such as that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms."

This speaks volumes about the R theory of free enterprise, unregulated business, etc. It means that those theories have, once again, lost to greed. Greed is the common denominator. The financial institutions thought only of the moment - what new phantom scheme would get them their bonus. Who cares about who is left holding the bag because hopefully, you would have made your millions prior to then AND it is almost assured that the govt. would provide relief no matter hoe extensive the fraud - thus, the trillion dollar + economic stimulus package, loans, etc. -- which have yet to save one house from foreclosure.

Thus, I maintain, it would have been better to give every single American $150,000 or so and mandate that money be used to pay off a mortgage. Anything left over should be mandated to pay credit card debt. Anything left over from those two, could be used as the citizen pleased (spend it or save it). Talk about wiping out the mortgage crisis and jump starting the economy!

But, there is no potential grift for the politicians or banks. So, they instead invest capital in the banks with no assurance that the mortgage crisis will be staved.

I know. Hillary should sooooo be on the Court.

Obama should also nominate Dershowitz - though he is a little long in the tooth.

Given the changes in political tides, I'd say appoint 30 year olds to the Court :laugh:

As for Palin's new wardrobe. I do not think there is anything wrong with her having those clothes. I do think, however, it will not play well with the wives of the Joe Six Packs that she patronizes with her "I'm one of you" speeches. In other words, Palin appears too good to wear a dress from Target, when that level is where she is from. It will smack of hypocrisy. Again, I do not have a problem with the image makeover. In fact, I think it did wonders for her look. It just makes her look like a fake.

Damn straight...

I already voted, so this is just a "hurry up and wait" kind of a thing for me.

I'm hesitant to call a landslide for Obama, but unless there's something majorly screwy with the polls, I don't see how McCain can pull off a win at this point.

Regardless, Bush has made such a mess of things, I'm doubtful that either Obama or McCain would be able to make much headway with it, and I think either of them would be a one-term president. I'd love to be wrong.

I always thought Bill would be more of a contender for a Supreme Court appointment than Hillary would; I wonder if she has designs on another run for president in 2012....

Hillary is saying no to this and every other possibility. "Bloom where you're planted," I believe she's been quoted. (In the Senate, she means). But come on, she deserves a real reward for bucking up and working so hard for the nominee. I wasn't a Hillary supporter in the primaries, but I firmly believe that she could very capably fill any position she is given.

The Gray Lady shows her spine, in spades!

October 24, 2008

Editorial

Barack Obama for President

Hyperbole is the currency of presidential campaigns, but this year the nation’s future truly hangs in the balance.

The United States is battered and drifting after eight years of President Bush’s failed leadership. He is saddling his successor with two wars, a scarred global image and a government systematically stripped of its ability to protect and help its citizens — whether they are fleeing a hurricane’s floodwaters, searching for affordable health care or struggling to hold on to their homes, jobs, savings and pensions in the midst of a financial crisis that was foretold and preventable.

As tough as the times are, the selection of a new president is easy. After nearly two years of a grueling and ugly campaign, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois has proved that he is the right choice to be the 44th president of the United States.

Mr. Obama has met challenge after challenge, growing as a leader and putting real flesh on his early promises of hope and change. He has shown a cool head and sound judgment. We believe he has the will and the ability to forge the broad political consensus that is essential to finding solutions to this nation’s problems.

In the same time, Senator John McCain of Arizona has retreated farther and farther to the fringe of American politics, running a campaign on partisan division, class warfare and even hints of racism. His policies and worldview are mired in the past. His choice of a running mate so evidently unfit for the office was a final act of opportunism and bad judgment that eclipsed the accomplishments of 26 years in Congress.

Given the particularly ugly nature of Mr. McCain’s campaign, the urge to choose on the basis of raw emotion is strong. But there is a greater value in looking closely at the facts of life in America today and at the prescriptions the candidates offer. The differences are profound.

Mr. McCain offers more of the Republican every-man-for-himself ideology, now lying in shards on Wall Street and in Americans’ bank accounts. Mr. Obama has another vision of government’s role and responsibilities.

In his convention speech in Denver, Mr. Obama said, “Government cannot solve all our problems, but what it should do is that which we cannot do for ourselves: protect us from harm and provide every child a decent education; keep our water clean and our toys safe; invest in new schools and new roads and new science and technology.”

Since the financial crisis, he has correctly identified the abject failure of government regulation that has brought the markets to the brink of collapse.

The Economy

The American financial system is the victim of decades of Republican deregulatory and anti-tax policies. Those ideas have been proved wrong at an unfathomable price, but Mr. McCain — a self-proclaimed “foot soldier in the Reagan revolution” — is still a believer.

Mr. Obama sees that far-reaching reforms will be needed to protect Americans and American business.

Mr. McCain talks about reform a lot, but his vision is pinched. His answer to any economic question is to eliminate pork-barrel spending — about $18 billion in a $3 trillion budget — cut taxes and wait for unfettered markets to solve the problem.

Mr. Obama is clear that the nation’s tax structure must be changed to make it fairer. That means the well-off Americans who have benefited disproportionately from Mr. Bush’s tax cuts will have to pay some more. Working Americans, who have seen their standard of living fall and their children’s options narrow, will benefit. Mr. Obama wants to raise the minimum wage and tie it to inflation, restore a climate in which workers are able to organize unions if they wish and expand educational opportunities.

Mr. McCain, who once opposed President Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy as fiscally irresponsible, now wants to make them permanent. And while he talks about keeping taxes low for everyone, his proposed cuts would overwhelmingly benefit the top 1 percent of Americans while digging the country into a deeper fiscal hole.

National Security

The American military — its people and equipment — is dangerously overstretched. Mr. Bush has neglected the necessary war in Afghanistan, which now threatens to spiral into defeat. The unnecessary and staggeringly costly war in Iraq must be ended as quickly and responsibly as possible.

While Iraq’s leaders insist on a swift drawdown of American troops and a deadline for the end of the occupation, Mr. McCain is still taking about some ill-defined “victory.” As a result, he has offered no real plan for extracting American troops and limiting any further damage to Iraq and its neighbors.

Mr. Obama was an early and thoughtful opponent of the war in Iraq, and he has presented a military and diplomatic plan for withdrawing American forces. Mr. Obama also has correctly warned that until the Pentagon starts pulling troops out of Iraq, there will not be enough troops to defeat the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

Mr. McCain, like Mr. Bush, has only belatedly focused on Afghanistan’s dangerous unraveling and the threat that neighboring Pakistan may quickly follow.

Mr. Obama would have a learning curve on foreign affairs, but he has already showed sounder judgment than his opponent on these critical issues. His choice of Senator Joseph Biden — who has deep foreign-policy expertise — as his running mate is another sign of that sound judgment. Mr. McCain’s long interest in foreign policy and the many dangers this country now faces make his choice of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska more irresponsible.

Both presidential candidates talk about strengthening alliances in Europe and Asia, including NATO, and strongly support Israel. Both candidates talk about repairing America’s image in the world. But it seems clear to us that Mr. Obama is far more likely to do that — and not just because the first black president would present a new American face to the world.

Mr. Obama wants to reform the United Nations, while Mr. McCain wants to create a new entity, the League of Democracies — a move that would incite even fiercer anti-American furies around the world.

Unfortunately, Mr. McCain, like Mr. Bush, sees the world as divided into friends (like Georgia) and adversaries (like Russia). He proposed kicking Russia out of the Group of 8 industrialized nations even before the invasion of Georgia. We have no sympathy for Moscow’s bullying, but we also have no desire to replay the cold war. The United States must find a way to constrain the Russians’ worst impulses, while preserving the ability to work with them on arms control and other vital initiatives.

Both candidates talk tough on terrorism, and neither has ruled out military action to end Iran’s nuclear weapons program. But Mr. Obama has called for a serious effort to try to wean Tehran from its nuclear ambitions with more credible diplomatic overtures and tougher sanctions. Mr. McCain’s willingness to joke about bombing Iran was frightening.

The Constitution and the Rule of Law

Under Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the justice system and the separation of powers have come under relentless attack. Mr. Bush chose to exploit the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, the moment in which he looked like the president of a unified nation, to try to place himself above the law.

Mr. Bush has arrogated the power to imprison men without charges and browbeat Congress into granting an unfettered authority to spy on Americans. He has created untold numbers of “black” programs, including secret prisons and outsourced torture. The president has issued hundreds, if not thousands, of secret orders. We fear it will take years of forensic research to discover how many basic rights have been violated.

Both candidates have renounced torture and are committed to closing the prison camp in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

But Mr. Obama has gone beyond that, promising to identify and correct Mr. Bush’s attacks on the democratic system. Mr. McCain has been silent on the subject.

Mr. McCain improved protections for detainees. But then he helped the White House push through the appalling Military Commissions Act of 2006, which denied detainees the right to a hearing in a real court and put Washington in conflict with the Geneva Conventions, greatly increasing the risk to American troops.

The next president will have the chance to appoint one or more justices to a Supreme Court that is on the brink of being dominated by a radical right wing. Mr. Obama may appoint less liberal judges than some of his followers might like, but Mr. McCain is certain to pick rigid ideologues. He has said he would never appoint a judge who believes in women’s reproductive rights.

The Candidates

It will be an enormous challenge just to get the nation back to where it was before Mr. Bush, to begin to mend its image in the world and to restore its self-confidence and its self-respect. Doing all of that, and leading America forward, will require strength of will, character and intellect, sober judgment and a cool, steady hand.

Mr. Obama has those qualities in abundance. Watching him being tested in the campaign has long since erased the reservations that led us to endorse Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primaries. He has drawn in legions of new voters with powerful messages of hope and possibility and calls for shared sacrifice and social responsibility.

Mr. McCain, whom we chose as the best Republican nominee in the primaries, has spent the last coins of his reputation for principle and sound judgment to placate the limitless demands and narrow vision of the far-right wing. His righteous fury at being driven out of the 2000 primaries on a racist tide aimed at his adopted daughter has been replaced by a zealous embrace of those same win-at-all-costs tactics and tacticians.

He surrendered his standing as an independent thinker in his rush to embrace Mr. Bush’s misbegotten tax policies and to abandon his leadership position on climate change and immigration reform.

Mr. McCain could have seized the high ground on energy and the environment. Earlier in his career, he offered the first plausible bill to control America’s emissions of greenhouse gases. Now his positions are a caricature of that record: think Ms. Palin leading chants of “drill, baby, drill.”

Mr. Obama has endorsed some offshore drilling, but as part of a comprehensive strategy including big investments in new, clean technologies.

Mr. Obama has withstood some of the toughest campaign attacks ever mounted against a candidate. He’s been called un-American and accused of hiding a secret Islamic faith. The Republicans have linked him to domestic terrorists and questioned his wife’s love of her country. Ms. Palin has also questioned millions of Americans’ patriotism, calling Republican-leaning states “pro-America.”

This politics of fear, division and character assassination helped Mr. Bush drive Mr. McCain from the 2000 Republican primaries and defeat Senator John Kerry in 2004. It has been the dominant theme of his failed presidency.

The nation’s problems are simply too grave to be reduced to slashing “robo-calls” and negative ads. This country needs sensible leadership, compassionate leadership, honest leadership and strong leadership. Barack Obama has shown that he has all of those qualities.

www.nytimes.com

Who wouldn't want to spend $175,000 at Neiman's and Saks? When I heard about the shopping trip I finally realized Sarah and I have something in comon besides the obvious. :laugh:
Seriously though, this will not play well with middle America, especially in these economic times.
Michelle Obama has managed to look stylish with pieces from H&M and White House Black Market. Sarah would be wise to follow suit.

I'm just as into this race and politics as I've ever been!!! To tell you the truth though, I am just ready for this election to be over, so that way everyone knows that we will start to see some change, via Obama!!

Lord Child - you ain't sayin' no lies!

I know -- what were they thinking. I am no political operative, but I know what has happened in the past a la Clinton's $200 haircuts and Edwards' $400 haircuts. And, I readily admit there is a double standard in that the First Lady is expected to be glam - at least as of Nancy R. Moreover, Cindy McCain wore a fab. red Valentino during the R convention. But, unlike CM, Palin's dressing up seems hypocritical when she talks about being one of the masses while wearing a $5,00o esemble - $5,000 is more than most make in a month PRIOR to taxes. So, she looks foolish to those she panders to.

Also - McCain has spoken out against campaign funds not being used for items such as clothing, though it is unclear if that included Committe money as opposed to personal campaign money, which are judged by different standards.

Well you have been wrong before..last year you described Obama as 'unelectable":thumbsup:

Sure, and so did a lot of other people. An awful lot can (and does, obviously) change in a year. Honestly, I don't know if he'd be this far ahead in the polls if it weren't for the economic meltdown and the circus sideshow that is Sarah Palin - although he handled himself beautifully in the debates - that was like watching an angel debate Grandpa Simpson. No one wanted a Democrat in the White House more than I did (and I really didn't care whether it was Obama or HRC - though as things turned out, I'm glad I voted for Obama in the primary and not just because he's winning now - we really need something different from either the Bush or Clinton administrations, and Obama stands the best chance of providing that), and I'm thrilled that Obama is doing this well.

I'd love to be wrong about this, too, for Obama to turn out to be a wonderful president who whips everything back into shape - I'm just not that much of an optimist. But who knows? :shrug:

I agree. And, with all due respect to Mr. Obama, whose smoothness (which is a great attribute) is what is getting him elected, he is also greatly benefiting from a horrible economy and the end of the dspised Bush II era, which any D would have benefitted from.

As I have said before, Hillary was way more qualified and her reocrd has demonstrated she would have been better for the nation. However, she did not win the nomination (due mostly to the odd nature of the caususes) -- so that is that. And, although I am not a fan of Obama and see him as far less of an saving angel than most (based on facts) -- I'd piss on a spark plug to keep McCain and Palin out of the WH.

Yes, the makeover has been a gigantic improvement--Lord knows she needed one. But you're absolutely right that it could have been done for far less, if anyone was concerned about authenticity.
Certainly the shopping spree won't change anything for people who already supported McCain/Palin. But it should make the undecideds think twice about the genuineness of the campaign's appeals to the middle class.

Hopefully that won't be necessary.

I KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I mean I am rather found of my weenie - though in the right setting, the act could prove fun :D:D:D

I know. I mean they all wear expensive clothing and I have nothing against that. I think when you get to that level, the press will excoriate you, especially if you are a woman, and do not look great.

I also think the RNC was smart in that although they clearly knew they would take a hit when the makeover cost was released, they also knew that many a straight male is titillated by the prospect of how hot Palin is, which is only enhanced by a striking outfit. It sort of is a twisted Stepford Wife kind of thing with them. And, the R party knews this and is playing to it.

In any event, I think the only issue about the clothing is appearance of hypocrisy of playing to the lower classes while in a $5,000 or so ensemble. Palin likely would have had better luck by noting that she was not in a $5,000 ensemble and that her outfit was from Target.

It's interesting that you say this. I read the following opinion piece in the Washington Post this morning. As much as I dislike Palin and agree that her appearance most certainly plays a part in her popularity, I wonder how much of this type of discussion is fair? I mean, Barack is pretty hot too. His looks play a part in his charisma too, and that charisma is largely responsible for getting him where he is today.

Something About Sarah
By Kathleen Parker
Friday, October 24, 2008; Page A19

My husband called it first. Then, a brilliant 75-year-old scholar and raconteur confessed to me over wine: "I'm sexually attracted to her. I don't care that she knows nothing."

Finally, writer Robert Draper closed the file on the Sarah Palin mystery with a devastating article in this Sunday's New York Times Magazine: "The Making (and Remaking) of McCain."

McCain didn't know her. He didn't vet her. His campaign team had barely an impression. In a bar one night, Draper asked one of McCain's senior advisers: "Leaving aside her actual experience, do you know how informed Governor Palin is about the issues of the day?"

The adviser thought a moment and replied: "No, I don't know."

Blame the sycamore tree.
McCain had met Palin only once -- in February, at the governors' convention in Washington -- before the day he selected her as his running mate. The second time was at his Sedona, Ariz., ranch on Aug. 28, just four days before the GOP convention.

As Draper tells it, McCain took Palin to his favorite coffee-drinking spot down by a creek and a sycamore tree. They talked for more than an hour, and, as Napoleon whispered to Josephine, "Voilà."

One does not have to be a psychoanalyst to reckon that McCain was smitten. By no means am I suggesting anything untoward between McCain and his running mate. Palin is a governor, after all. She does have an executive résumé, if a thin one. And she's a natural politician who connects with people.

But there can be no denying that McCain's selection of her over others far more qualified -- and his mind-boggling lack of attention to details that matter -- suggests other factors at work. His judgment may have been clouded by . . . what?

Science provides clues. A study in Canada, published by a British journal in 2003, found that pretty women foil men's ability to assess the future. "Discounting the future," as the condition is called, means preferring immediate, lesser rewards to greater rewards in the future.

Drug dealers, car salesmen and politicians rely on this affliction and pray feverishly for its persistence.

The Canadian psychologists showed pictures of attractive and not-so-attractive men and women to students of the opposite sex. The students were offered a prize -- either a small check for the next day or a larger check at some later date.

The men made perfectly rational decisions, opting for the delayed, larger amount after viewing the average-looking women. You know where this is going. (Women, by the way, were rational no matter what.)

That men are at a disadvantage when attractive women are present is a fact upon which women have banked for centuries. Ignoring it now profits only fools. McCain spokesmen have said that he was attracted to Palin's maverickness, that she reminded him of himself.

Recognizing oneself in a member of the opposite sex (or the same sex, as the case may be) is a powerful invitation to bonding. Narcissus fell in love with his own image reflected in the river, imagining it to be his deceased and beloved sister's. In McCain's case, it doesn't hurt that his reflection is spiked with feminine approval.

As my husband observed early on, McCain the mortal couldn't mind having an attractive woman all but singing arias to his greatness. Cameras frequently capture McCain beaming like a gold-starred schoolboy while Palin tells crowds that he is "exactly the kind of man I want as commander in chief." This, notes Draper, "seemed to confer not only valor but virility on a 72-year-old politician who only weeks ago barely registered with the party faithful."

It is entirely possible that no one could have beaten the political force known as Barack Obama -- under any circumstances. And though it isn't over yet, it seems clear that McCain made a tragic, if familiar, error under that sycamore tree. Will he join the pantheon of men who, intoxicated by a woman's power, made the wrong call?

Had Antony not fallen for Cleopatra, Octavian might not have captured the Roman Empire. Had Bill resisted Monica, Al Gore may have become president, and Hillary might be today's Democratic nominee.

If McCain, rightful heir to the presidency, loses to Obama, history undoubtedly will note that he was defeated at least in part by his own besotted impulse to discount the future. If he wins, he must be credited with having correctly calculated nature's power to befuddle.

^^^^

Regardless of the fairness of it - image, which is based mostly on looks, plays a significant if not the most significant part in politics. Look at Obama in the last debate. Both candiates said the usual schpeel, but McCain appeared old, angry, and desparate. Obama appeard calm, cool, and collected, which made him look better, regardless of the lies he said (they both lied during the debates).

I think for women, there is a doble standard. I do not adress the fairness of it. But, I do think the campaigns must play to it, as the R's have with Plain and Cindy McCain. To a certain degree, the D's do with Michelle Obama in that she never looks less than perfect.

As for the Stepford Wive thing, I was a t a party the other day and a bunch of guys were all talking about how they wanted to bang Palin, what a hottie she is, etc. Plain is a beautiful woman. She uses that to entice. It is not all she uses. But, it certainly helps her, at least initially :shrug: Plain's problem was and is that she was totally unprepared for the interviews she gave to mostly softball, non Fox interviewers (again, the Hannity interview was an infomercial). So, despite her looks and charisma, which are significant, she showed no substance and it hurt her. In her current interviews, she is much better, but it likely is too late.

I remember the early female supporters of Obama being ridiculed for finding him attractive. So I suppose it's fair game to make fun of all the old geezers and young bucks who are entranced by Palin now. Lord, I hope the men of America will not be voting with their d***s in this election.

On Diane Rehm's show this morning, this topic came up briefly. Diane, and I think Susan Page, immediately shut down the male panelist when he said he thinks a lot of men have crushes on her. As if the notion was so preposterous or offensive that they couldn't believe he'd say such a thing.

I think many women really want to keep the discussion about her politics and unpreparedness and shallowness---but she brings up these gender issues that a lot of us thought, or wanted to belive, were not issues anymore. I guess the best thing to do is to be real and keep on talking.

^^^

I think the gender issue is there and has always been there. The first SNL skit illustrated that quite cleverly in that Palin was depicted as a hottie and Hillary as a "boner kliller." Though they speak to different looks, they both speak to looks and the importance of them. In other words, that Hillary was not hot was a detriment.

Did I already say this somewhere else? I don't remember. I think that it would be hilarious if the elections suddenly comes down to Florida and Obama wins after a huge mess, but McCain gets the popular vote. Then, just to spite the R's, puts Bill & Hilary on the Supreme Court. But that'll never happen. I love the CNN map that you can mess with. Right now, after looking at recent polls and stuff, it looks to me like 378-160 for Obama.


I really don't care if the McCain campaign would rather spend 150,000 dollars on Sarah Palin's cloths than on something meaningful, I think that is their choice to make. Same with Edwards, if he wants $300 haircuts, that's on him.

I agree 100%. I just wonder if the working class people (for want of a better term) that Palin relates to will care? Moreover, that fact that Palin's traveling stylist was paid $22,800 for two weeks worth of work compared with $12,500 paid to McCain's foreign policy adviser will also likely not sit well though I think that is perfectly okay because image is everything in an election - just ask "WE'RE GOIN TO TEXAS" Howard Dean :eek:

In the end, the clothes essentially are a loaner in that she has to give them back or pay the income tax on them (or the RNC pays a gift tax)

So, the clothes are not her clothes, though she wears them.

Exacally. Palin is looking hypocritical. EVERYONE KNOWS that Cindy McCain is FILTHY STINKING RICH. :laugh: And if you didnt, take it from someone in Arizona, they SHOULDNT even pretend to know what its like for the rest of us.