Archive for June 17th, 2010
GREAT MERCIFUL ZEUS the Race Industry has hit a new low point of ridiculousness — upset that Angelina Jolie is playing Cleopatra (a Greek woman)
The last pharaoh of Egypt, Cleopatra, was not a black woman -- no matter how loudly the Race Industry wants to shout otherwise.
This is really hilarious to us, as guys who’ve always loved Egyptian history: the Race Industry and various black message boards are foaming at the mouth, shouting RAAACISM! again, because they are upset a black woman is not playing Cleopatra, and instead the role went to Angelina Jolie.
Honestly, this is like being upset Morgan Freeman is not playing George Washington in a new movie…because Cleopatra was white.
Idiots.
She was Greek, in fact…a descendent of Ptolemy, whom Alexander the Great…a Greek…installed as Pharaoh of Egypt after Alexander conquered it.
Egyptians, too, for the record, weren’t black either.
Have any of these people ever been to a museum? Most of them, even in the smallest of towns, have an Egyptian exhibit of some kind. The tomb carvings were elegantly painted using realistic colors…and the Egyptians did not paint themselves black, though they had plenty of black paint. When depicting Nubians and other African peoples, they used the black paint. For themselves, they used a reddish, coppery sort of color.
Which wasn’t black.
No matter how much the Race Industry wants to wail and scream about it.
You can’t rewrite history, race-baiters.
And you can’t make Cleopatra black when she wasn’t.
For the record, Amelia Earhart wasn’t black either. Neither was Joan of Arc. Madame Curie? Not black. Catherine the Great? Not the least bit black. Marie Antoinette? Not black, but we sure know a black woman who would be excellent at playing her on film, since she’s getting so much practice in real life living as extravagantly as possible with absolutely zero concern for the suffering of the average people in her country.
Wonder who that talented fashion icon would be.
Thoughts?
PROJECT: How many times in a week are you asked to present an ID of any kind?
We told you the story of our friend Jess who witnessed a crime being committed here in Boystown a few weeks back.
As the police were interviewing her — as an innocent witness, uninvolved in the crime, who just happened to be in the store while a shoplifter was apprehended — the cops asked for her ID.
She didn’t hesitate, and immediately produced her US passport, which she carries at all times in addition to her Illinois driver’s license (which has a hideous picture of her on it, while the passport photos could have been taken by Herb Ritts…AND the new US passports are GORGEOUS, with a bald eagle and Old Glory on the first page, and all sorts of patriotic American images on all pages thereafter. Honestly, it’s GORGEOUS, and makes us all jealous we don’t have our new ones yet).
Today, when we were talking to her, she actually brought up the fact that the police asked her for her ID — and then wondered what on Earth the Left is screaming about in regards to illegal aliens in America, and how it’s such a burden for them to produce their papers.
Jess is an American citizen who committed no crime, and was just standing in a store shopping, and she was told to show her ID.
Should she contact the ACLU and sue the City of Chicago, Chicago Police Department, the store she was standing in, and the federal government over the fact she was asked to produce her papers that identified just who in the Hell she was?
Should Jess have refused to produce her ID?
What would the police have done then?
Could they have arrested her for refusing to comply with this request?
We’d love some answers to these questions, especially from any lawyers out there who are reading this.
We’d also like you to join us in a little project we want to start for next week…and keep track of how many times in a seven day period you are asked to produce an ID for anything.
We need to show our IDs to get into any of the bars in Boystown…even the ones where at least one of us has dated every bartender and bouncer in the joint. We know these people intimately, in every sense of those words, and yet, in Chicago, they still need to see our IDs. No one — NO ONE — is allowed in without showing an ID.
Back in Cleveland in the 90s, when one of us worked for a fancy hotel there, Tina Turner was in the hotel bar and the staff could not serve her because she did not have her ID. The woman was TINA TURNER. In full Tina Turner wig. She even had her latest CD in her purse, with her picture on it. And she could not be served without her ID. And she was TINA TURNER.
90% of the stores we shop in here in Chicago require an ID to use a credit card.
The bank requires an ID for most transactions at the teller’s window.
The Post Office requires an ID for certain transactions as well.
What other times during the day do you need to show an ID?
At each of these junctures in time, could we raise a big stink about showing an ID, and claim we are being discriminated against in some way, because it’s the Left’s opinion that ID-checking is wrong for some reason?
We believe this is an incredibly foolish position for Democrats to take, because if the Tea Party and grassroots groups got ahold of this issue and asked Americans at large how often they have to show an ID in a week — and perhaps a commercial was made to this effect — then America at large will ask what the big deal is about asking illegals to show their identification.
If we have to show our IDs to get a drink at Sidetracks, and we’ve seen the people checking those IDs naked, and they’ve made breakfast for us, and we STILL have to show the ID, then we’re sorry Pablo and Esmerelda, it just doesn’t cut it that you don’t have to show yours ever.
MISSION: Find a way to get regular Americans to understand the economic ruin Cap & Tax would be and expose the Cult of Anthropogenic Global Warming once and for all.
Consider this thread a brainstorming session.
We see a real and pressing need to get regular Americans — the kind who don’t follow the news and politics but who do vote — to understand the full scope of ruin Cap & Tax will do to the country.
We also need them to finally understand Climategate, and the absurdity of Al Gore’s Cult of Anthropogenic Global Warming.
We can’t count on Republicans to do this for us…this has to be something regular people out there get behind, because the GOP is truly the Party of Stupid when it comes to things like this.
The Tea Party needs to take this up as a cause, because Cap & Tax is going to kill hundreds of thousands of jobs, raise taxes, make utility bills ridiculously high for most people, and make gasoline European-priced…if Democrats have their way.
How can regular people be tuned into this?
Once tuned in, what do people need to do about Cap & Tax?
How can we prevent a lame duck Democrat majority from ramming Cap & Tax through between the aftermath of the November elections and when the new Congress is installed in January 2011?
Start thinking…because we all need to start working an Action Plan on this next week if we want to thwart the White House’s latest attempt to ruin the economy.
Insight into why crime statistics in Boystown do not reflect the real amount of crime in Chicago: it's a pain in the neck to follow through on the process
Here’s a little anecdote for you from our week here in Boystown that gave us a bit more insight into the numbers shell game the media plays with crime statistics.
Two weeks ago, our friend Jess witnessed a shoplifting incident at a clothing store near Boystown, in which she actually pointed out to the clerk that a man in very bad drag was shoving packs of underwear up “his” dress. The clerk called the cops, who arrived, arrested the man, and then took Jess’ information as a witness to what happened, telling her that she’d get a letter in the mail informing her when she’d have to testify against this individual. After the police ran his name in their computers, they saw he had a long history of this sort of thing, and emphasized the importance of Jess appearing in court to testify as to what she witnessed.
Well, here’s where things get interesting, because now a lot of the crime in Chicago makes more sense.
Jess didn’t get a letter about the case until the day before she had to appear and testify. It’s a good thing she’s unemployed right now and has no kids or other responsibilities, because otherwise she would not have been able to drop everything and make it to court the way she did.
The court ended up being on the opposite side of town from which the police told her it would be, so she had to scramble to figure out how she was going to get there. And, of course, it was in a rough neighborhood she was afraid to go to alone, so one of us went with her. Who else out there has a group of guys who can just take the whole morning to accompany you somewhere scary when you need them?
Getting to court, everything was completely disorganized. It took a good 25 minutes to figure out where Jess had to go, despite Jess having a letter from the state’s attorney with a bunch of case numbers etc. on it. No one who worked in the building was able to tell her where she needed to be, and all stared at the paper she was sent as if they had never seen anything like it before. One woman was nice enough to try to look the case up in her computer, but her computer wasn’t working properly and what came up on the screen was all garbled numbers and Klingon love poems.
She whacked it on its side really hard, and it came back into English, like in a cartoon.
Finally, this woman told Jess what room she had to go to and was nice enough to walk us there.
It was a large brick room with church pews in it, with a tiny liberal judge sitting on the bench. As we waited for Jess’ case to be called, we saw a stream of defendants emerge in khaki jumpers, each one of them there for some drug-related charge. After calling their names and listening to the state’s attorney talk about what they did, and hearing the police tell the judge what they saw them do, the judge issued various preliminary decrees and then admonished each of these men for, essentially, being “bad boys”.
This was hilarious to us, because he really did do this: he told each of these guys he was very disappointed in them and that this was no way for them to be living their lives, and that he didn’t want to ever see any of them in his court room again because he wanted them to be good, not bad. Each of the men said, as if scripted, “Sorry judge, I’ll be good from now on”.
Bizarre.
There were a few other shoplifting cases that came up before the one Jess was there for, and it looks like all of those were just dismissed because no one from the stores and no witnesses appeared in court to testify. That seems to be why the police were so adamant that Jess appear that day and tell the judge about the underpants she saw the drag queen steal.
So, at last, after about 2 hours of sitting in the courtroom, and a total of three hours since we left Jess’ house on his adventure, it was time for Jess to testify and she was asked to identify the man who stole the items in the store. It adds a whole new level to something like this when the criminal was in drag when committing the crime, like a Batman villain, and Jess had to look hard at the man’s face to determine whether or not he was the Riddler or whatever, but she was sure it was him and the state’s attorney then had her tell the judge what she saw him do. Then, the defense attorney for the shoplifter asked Jess a few questions about whether or not she really saw the police pull all of the merchandise from under this man’s dress — which seemed like the attorney was implying the police staged some elaborate trap to discriminate against this man, and David Copperfield-like conjured these items from his dress magically to frame him.
We were pretty much, yet again, disgusted with liberalism by the time we finally got out of this court building with Jess about a half hour later.
First, there’s the fact the liberal mindset treats all of these guys like scamps and wayward children, who just need to be reminded to “be good” and that will solve all the problems. No one who came before the judge that day took any of what was going on seriously, since they all gave us the impression they knew they would be on the street again in no time, doing whatever they pleased.
Then, there’s the realization that in a liberal controlled city like Chicago, very few people seem to follow through with anything. The police showed up to testify in their cases because they are paid double and triple time to do so…and those were all the drug possession cases. However, for the shoplifting cases, Jess was the only witness to show up that we observed…and she wasn’t even the victim in that case. We asked the state’s attorney if that was normal, and he said it’s very rare for witnesses to ever show up, so he’s glad that Jess did this because the man they caught had a long history of crimes and this was a violation of his parole. The store he stole from did not send an agent to testify, and we saw three or four other shoplifting cases get seemingly dismissed because Macy’s and Loehmann’s did not send anyone from their stores to stand up and talk about the crimes committed against them. Apparently, this needs to happen for the criminals to be taken off the street.
This made us think, yet again, about the crime that happens in our neighborhood in Boystown.
We’ve seen people literally lying in the street with no one stopping to help them, because guys didn’t want to get involved. We’ve seen thugs snatch purses and push people down trying to grab their wallets or cell phones, and bystanders stop and gawk, but don’t even think to call the police.
So, if there’s that much reluctance to get involved when something is actually happening right in front of them, in the moment, we can just imagine the miniscule percentage of Boystown residents who ever follow through and appear in court for something like Jess had to do.
The fact no one in the court building had any clue how to read the letter that Jess was sent seems to indicate it’s a rare occurrence for anyone to show up with one of those witness summons. Everyone had the surprised reaction of, “You got a letter and you showed up? To testify? We sent you a letter and you came? That’s never happened before”.
Now, what happens to all these criminals who are caught doing something bad, but then no one ever shows up in court to follow through on it? Are they just released, and the case is dismissed and goes away?
If so, then the crime statistics for Chicago must be off by an awful lot.
And the REAL problems we face in places like Boystown are even harder to nail down because you also need to factor in all the things that happen that go unreported because either people don’t want to get involved, are too lazy, don’t know how to report it, or are scared of having to go to places like this court in a bad part of town to follow through on the bureaucracy of all this.
We have no idea how to resolve any of the above, but just mention it because it’s new insight we didn’t have before in terms of what’s going on behind the scenes with all of this.
Any crime statistics used need to be able to accurately reflect everything that’s happening in a neighborhood…not just the few instances where someone is caught, properly processed in the system, and actually gets prosecuted for being “a bad boy”.
QUESTION: What do you think it means for Obama now that the Leftist Media has apparently turned against him?
We still don’t know what to think about the way Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Maureen Dowd, and others in the Leftist Media have behaved since “president” Obama’s speech from the Oval Office on Tuesday.
They’ve excoriated him as “unpresidential”, have invoked Jimmy Carter comparisons, and have repeatedly called him on the carpet for his lies and vagueries the way a respectable and professional press should have vetted and scrutinized Obama as a 2008 candidate.
The Kool-Aid seems to have worn off in the sense that, at last, a Media that’s carried more water for this man than Gunga Din has put down its buckets and had a potentially fleeting moment of clarity.
What does this mean?
Have the fools at MSNBC woken up and realized “the first historic and unprecedented black president” is a complete and utter failure?
Will they ever admit this?
If so, what are the ramifications of that for the Democrat Party and the Left?
Since the Media loves to make everything about race, what does it mean that the Media pushed his particular unqualified and inexperienced black man into a position that was several dozen pay grades above his head?
What does it mean that the Media’s particular brand of affirmative action foisted upon this nation a president who spends as much time as possible goofing off, playing golf, dancing to music at lavish parties at the White House, and generally acting like P-Diddy instead of the P-OTUS…while disasters unfold all around his oblivious and deliberately vague incompetence?
Is the Media turning on this “president” before the public at large puts two and two together and realizes, “Hey, wait a minute, this guy’s president because MSNBC and the New York Times told me Hope and Change were good and that this guy could do anything, so that I should just trust him. So, I did trust him, and now I’m living in a cardboard box, that oil’s spilling everywhere, and taxes are through the roof. The Media tricked me!”?
What’s their angle and game plan here?
Because we find it so very strange that ALL the usual suspects in the Leftist Media — Obama’s most fervent, unapologetic, and most cultist cheerleaders — are ALL changing their tune on this man at the very same time.
What gives?
What Rob Long at Ricochet is missing about a Hillary Clinton 2012 challenge to Obama: she won't do it because of the black vote nuclear option
Read this missive by Rob Long over at Ricochet, regarding a theoretic Hillary Clinton 2012 challenge to Obama, based on the fact that Obama’s polling is tanking and should be in the 30s by 2012.
Hillary Clinton will run for president again, but it will be in 2016.
We don’t see a scenario possible where Clinton challenges Dr. Utopia for the nomination because of the nuclear option of the black vote that the Obamas held over Clinton’s head in 2008, which they will employ as a scorched earth threat in 2012 too.
We talked about this last month on the Tammy Bruce Show, and we’re surprised it’s something that a lot of you out there didn’t think about in 2008, when so many of you wondered why Clinton didn’t take her nomination fight all the way to the convention where she could have hardscrabbled a victory with a floor fight.
Put simply, the Obamas threatened Clinton in the general election should she have succeeded in winning the nomination in a Denver floor fight.
Clues to this were dropped in remarks Michelle Obama made during the primary campaign, where she said she’d “have to think about” whether or not the Obamas would support Clinton and campaign for her if she was the Democrats’ nominee. It was one of the nastiest, most unprofessional, and most unbecoming things we’ve ever heard a Democrat candidate’s surrogate ever say — though it was quite characteristic of who Michelle is as a person. AND it was revealing in terms of what the Obamas intended to do to Clinton if she won the nomination and not Dr. Utopia.
They would have directly or indirectly sent signals to the black community to sit their butts home on election day — in much the same way the Media keeps tricking conservatives to sit home and not vote “to teach the GOP a lesson”. In this case, the Obamas would have played the nuclear race card against Clinton, most likely through proxies as that’s Dr. Utopia’s style.
Just picture it: Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, John Lewis, Henry Gates, James Clyburne, and other notorious race-baiters would have been wailing on the TV nonstop, like fat buzzing flies, fueled by a Media 100% in the tank for this plan, going on relentlessly about how Clinton “done stole this from the black man”. Clinton’s general election prospects would have turned ugly, and we can easily imagine her campaign rallies being interrupted by Black Panthers, ACORN, and other groups who would seize the opportunity to take a stab at the Democratic Leadership Council and other moderates in the Clintonverse by sinking Clinton’s challenge to McCain in order to take over the party completely and return to the fight again in 2012 with Obama as the nominee.
In a very weird way, it’s similar to what happened in 2008 with John McCain’s campaign in terms of conservatives withholding their support so McCain would lose and they could “return with a new Reagan” in 2012. Taking only one example we personally know of, the Log Cabin Republicans here in Chicago told us specifically this is what they wanted to happen. Though they did not campaign against McCain, they sat on their sorry butts and did nothing to help him because they wanted Obama to become the new Carter, and be such a dismal failure that the party would have to learn that a moderate, Democrat-Lite like McCain can’t be run in 2012, so “a true conservative” would need to take the party back in the Obama rematch.
This is indeed what seems to be happening…though the Log Cabins were dead wrong in terms of just how much damage Obama would do to the country in four years. The Log Cabins said, “he can’t mess things up so bad we can’t fix them with the new Reagan”…but the Gulf Obamaspill Disaster is sure proving them wrong.
In terms of Clinton 2008, the Obamas would have orchestrated a black voter boycott of the general election, which the Media would have gleefully orchestrated, and Clinton’s campaign would have probably gone down in flames, landing McCain in the White House for a single term.
THEN, the very next day after the election, Obama would have begun his 2012 campaign, and from the Senate would have served as the Media’s Shadow President, effectively taking over the Democrat Party and setting himself up for the McCain challenge as the presumptive and de facto next Democrat nominee. ”They done stole it from him last time!,” would be the deafening shout from the Left for four long years. ”He should have been president now!,” would have been all we’d hear.
In a very, very strange way, we’re actually all lucky things worked out the way they did. As things stand now, Obama will be a one-term president. Despite the immense damage he’s done to the country, Democrats revealed their true nature in his campaign and in the way they’ve governed since the Golden Age of Hope and Change began. The Left has been exposed, and there is now a whole new generation of American voters who sees just how dangerous it is to have Leftists in power. Though they’re going to try to get away with as much lunacy as possible while they can, their days in office are now numbered. We hope it takes them decades to worm their way under the radar again. Obama’s candidacy and presidency have done the Left far more damage than Obama’s doing to the country…but they, and the Media, have just not realized it yet.
In terms of a Clinton 2012 run, we just don’t see how it’s possible if it involves a challenge to Obama…because of that black vote, which Clinton will need in lockstep to ensure a victory. She won’t run unless she thinks she has that particular quacking duck in a row…and we can’t imagine the rogue’s gallery of black “leaders” like Jackson, Sharpton, Gates, etc. supporting Clinton in a general election where they accuse her of “stealing” anything from Obama. Can’t you just hear these degenerates now? “He’s the president, and he’s a BLACK MAN, and this white woman done stole that nomination right from under him! You know what that is, that’s racism right there! Well, she might have stolen this, but she ain’t going to be no president, I’ll tell you that right now, because we’re just going to STAY HOME that election day. Uh huh, that’s right, you just wait and see”.
That could very easily be a direct quote from any of those race-baiting clowns should Clinton, or anyone in the Democrat party who is not black, successfully challenge Obama in 2012.
The only hope for Clinton in 2012, actually, is if Obama would see the writing on the wall and decide to pull an LBJ and decline a second run “because of health reasons”. We’re convinced this man is in early stages Parkinsons’ already, so “health reasons” would be accurate and legitimate for him. The real reason he wouldn’t run again would be that he knows he’s so poisoned this country with his incompetence and mismanagement while in office that the environment has become too toxic for any Democrat to win. If he knows there’s less than a 60% change he’ll succeed, just like everything else in his life, he’ll walk away. This is a man who’s never fought a fair fight in his life. If he doesn’t have the Media cheerleading for him, if he doesn’t have his cult in strong enough zombie numbers, if ACORN and the SEIU thugs aren’t properly positioned, he’s not going to run again.
And, we think, even if he doesn’t run, and even if he cedes the nomination to Clinton, we think Obama will do everything he can while in office to see that she fails in her election.
We think Michelle will help with that effort, because she more than strikes us as the sort who would say, “Well, if we can’t live in the White House anymore, then you won’t be living there either,” ending that sentence with one of her choice expletives, no doubt.
If Obama’s not the nominee in 2012, we believe the Obamas will sabotage the campaign of whoever does run on the Democrat ticket instead. While they remain in power, these people will never do anything that’s not for their own personal good…and we just can’t picture either of them being magnanimous in their defeat.
Clinton’s only hope is really 2016, because once Obama is defeated in 2012, his influence on the party will be removed. He and his lovely fashion icon wife will be exiled to Hawaii, where he’ll no doubt continue being a darling of the far left, and where he’ll set up a radical, crazy think tank organization of his own that will be decidedly anti-American and pro-Islam for the remainder of his life. If there really is a God, and if He really loves America as much as we believe He does, the Parkinsons’ will be the sword of Damocles that finally comes down in the next 5-10 years to limit the scope of Obama’s post-presidency and spare the country from a Worse-than-Carter 20-30 years of this garbage. For some reason, in our gut that’s what we think will end up happening: Obama leaves the White House, embarks on his “America is Bad” post-presidential agenda, but is then confined to a wheelchair and unable to speak much for the rest of his life. He’s photographed now and again on a veranda near some beach in Hawaii, with men in sunglasses pushing him in his wheelchair, a bevy of rainbow speedo-clad little twinks playing volleyball in the pool for eye candy, giving all manner of insane interviews to whichever dinosaur media outlets are still around, but never able to muster the strength do to any more stadium rallies or other big events where he can trash America the way he’d like. His body will betray him the way he betrayed his oath to this country, and we hope as his speech is further stolen by his Parkinsons’ that he’ll spend the last remaining years of his life screaming inside his own head for want of the ability to continuously curse the nation that gave him everything he dreamed of, despite the fact he continues to hate it so much.
Can the Clintons rebuild the Democrat Party enough to mount a successful 2016 bid to make Hillary Clinton the 46th POTUS?
That’s a very good question, and one that we don’t have an answer to at the moment…it depends on a great deal of things, but chiefly whether or not the Clintons could ever convince America that Democrats are not the radical, insane Leftists the Obama presidency has exposed them as being. Many of you seem to forget this, but before the 2008 campaign all of us here at HillBuzz were 100%, dyed in the wool, blind-voting, party loyalist Democrats. The DNC completely and permanently alienated US. They pushed us so far away that we’ve spent the last two years, roughly, working AGAINST Democrats.
So, for the party to ever rebuild itself, the Clintons would have to bring a lot of people back into the fold…people who have a VERY bad impression of the party now, which we don’t see going away any time soon.
A lot, in fact, depends on what kind of president Governor Palin ends up being come 2012. If she succeeds in the ways we believe she will, President Palin has the opportunity and potential to be the greatest president this country has ever seen. If that comes to pass, then Hillary 2016 might not even happen, as Clinton would see the writing on the wall and wouldn’t make the challenge against her…unless she just wants to finally nab the honor of being the first woman to land the Democrats’ nomination, regardless if she can unseat President Palin or not.
Many “firsts” and honors should have gone to Hillary Clinton in 2008, but as we’ve noted, that black nuclear option is what stole it all from her, and might have quite possibly permanently denied her the presidency as well.
You have no idea how hard it is for us to confront this reality, but it’s there, and we call it like we see it.
Thursday Open Thread: June 17th, 2010
What’s on your minds this Thursday?
What are people talking about in your part of the country?
*******************************************************
Last night in Boystown was very strange.
It was Sidetracks’ 28th Anniversary Party, which is normally the best of all the bar parties every year. For those who don’t know, each bar on Halsted celebrates its anniversary with an invitation-only cocktail reception where they try to one-up each other, with the best decorations, the most people, the hottest guys, etc. Usually, Sidetracks wins this honor in a walk, and has a party that’s just PACKED with people. They also usually have the best caterers, go-go boys, and the most fun.
Last night, they put on a very nice party, but it was sparsely attended. They had a nice spread put out, but nothing was hand-passed, so it looks like the catering budget was much lower this year. The only decorations were a few orchids in the Glass Bar area, instead of the elaborate theatricality of years’ passed (where they had an impressive Roman theme, complete with painted, live, nude male statues and ornate temple columns…or a Chicago themed year, where they had models of various Chicago landmarks that were Broadway production quality).
We’ve heard they’re still spending a good amount on their Pride Parade float (Crayola Crayons is the theme), but if Sidetracks is budgeting their anniversary party and cutting this far back in terms of numbers of invitees and the spectacularness of the event, then that should concern everyone. This is the 800-pound pink gorilla in Boystown, where money is practically printed, so if this bar’s seams are showing, then Obama’s Great Recession could very well be further into Depression territory than anyone realizes.
We keep saying the gay community is the peacock in the coal mine. For the first time in 28 years, we’ve heard Sidetracks is experiencing down sales, and its bartenders report the disappearance of years-long regulars (and, for the first time ever, a decline in tips).
Scary stuff.
