Andre,
Take a chill pill! I read your last post twice (which is more than it deserved) and I can't make any sense out of it whatsoever.
I am going take a lesson from pharm's book and cease my "discussion" with you. Your debating skills clearly outclass mine.

Can someone please tell me what "parse straws" means?!

Andre, I can name one illiterate that went to Yale . . . George Dubbya! (I notice you didn't comment about the SAT scores.)

Fact of the matter is, Obama never said he would eliminate earmarks, except in the matter of the stimulus package. I spent some time searching for any evidence that he said he would eliminate earmarks from all legislation . . . WITH NO SUCCESS! As you've already been challenged to share such evidence with us, I believe the onus is on you to prove it. Reform, yes. Eliminate, no.

The reason I couldn't find any other "balanced sites," as you call them, is because the right doesn't want to admit he never said he'd eliminate earmarks!

By the way, if you're already saying his policies are failing, you're certainly not "giving him his four years."

Poll numbers falling . . . very probably the result of the continuing fallout of the economy that Bushie drove into the ground. It's hard to raise a Titanic once it's sunk. But it will turn around, and once it does, those poll numbers will go right back up!

A gleeful friend of mine over in Great Britain sent me this clip yesterday. Soon later it was all over many US news outlets. Britain is one step ahead of us in the march to the labor/socialist agenda (Labor party; which is equivalent to the far left, Democratic party we have running the show here, has had control over there for a few years now). The comments made in the clip you can pretty much sub in Obama, Palosi, and Reed; as the SAME thing is in the process of happening to this country, as the current government leaders bankrupts us.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94lW6Y4tB...
.
This pretty much goes down as one of the greatest speeches ever given in my mind. Really took some stones to give it with Gordon Brown right there in front of him. None of the clowns we have in this country would have the stones to deliver brilliance like this!

can anyone tell me what the meaning of "is" is??? here we go again another Dem. not wanting to give a stright answer!!!

In regards to the article, I thought it was well written. I don't care who are President is, they need to lead, not be popular. As wrong as it was, the AIG bonus money is not going to make or break the country. The 100's of billions doled out will.

Like the quote from the movie Ray,
"You think pennies, Mr. Charles, you get pennies. You think dollars, you get dollars."

A coworker once told me I was a nickel holding up a dime, I think that statement bears true during this situation as well. We can study the magician, or we can be distracted by the lights and smoke.

RetiredAirForce, in the Wikipedia definition of earmarks; "With an earmark, Congress has given itself the ability to direct a specified amount of money from an agency`s budget to be spent on a particular project.." The money is already passed, and with an earmark, it is directed to a specific place.

RetiredAirForce, there are two kinds of earmarks, those that add money to a bill, and have to be passed by the members, and those called "carve outs." "Carve outs" take money from already approved funds and "earmark" them for a specific project. They don`t add to the cost of the bill, just the first type, that have to be voted on, do.

pharm--Earmarks are there because the house and senate pad bills. If there was no earmark program there would be no padding and the bills would be lower.

"Bankruptcy is a social safety net."
-
How is chapter 7 a "safety net" (court ordered liquidation). Perhaps you should spend some time reading the bankruptcy laws if you think this is a social safety net. Far cry from a bailout!

Andre, I know how to use a computer and did my own research . . .

http://mediamatters.org/items/2009031200...

http://open.salon.com/blog/stellaa/2009/...

Good grief, why don't you at least give the man 6 months before saying he did nothing about nothing.

By the way, anyone who's mama or papa has lots 'o money can go to Harvard or Yale.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/2...

See those SAT scores?! They should be in the 800s to get accepted to any college, let alone Harvard or Yale.

"The omnibus spending bill includes more than 8,000 congressional "earmarks," which total almost $8 billion." http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/10/s...
-
Includes! If the earmarks were not there it would have been almost 8 billion less. You asked what the bill would have been without the earmarks and now you quote some journalist stating it is what lawmakers intended to spend? If indeed it was intended by all lawmakers it would not have been slipped in 9000 separate times.

RetiredAirForce, CNNMoney.com, 3/11/09, article by Jeanne Sahadi, "The Truth About Earmarks." Quote, "earmarks are not additional spending-they`re a portion of the total amount lawmakers have agreed to spend for a given year."

RetiredAirForce, sorry but you are wrong. The $410 billion was authorized, then they earmarked what the money was to go for. That is why they are called earmarks, they cannot add money to the bill, only direct where it goes.

Bankruptcy is a social safety net. I was very disturbed by the changes the Republicans made to the bankruptcy laws while Georgy Boy was in office. We should have more safety nets. I think we should have a small business bailout plan. Contact your representative, I already have. Also, you should be an LLC and not a sole proprietorship.

Pharm---"And, that $410 billion bill without the earmarks would have been, SURPRISE, $410 billion! Earmarks only direct money that is already allocated."
-
You are incorrect. The over 9000 earmarks added almost 8 billion dollars to the Omnibus spending bill (needed to fully fund day-to-day federal operations); the same bill that was held up in congress until after the elections were over.

"Providing...financial safety nets provides incentive for people to take risks in the first place"
-
Where is the financial safety net for a sole proprietorship? Where is the safety net for a person leveraging their home to open a small business? Before you begin with assumptions that all are protected with safety nets you might want to research what risk the average small business person does take to fuel this economy---hint; it has nothing to do with bailouts or safety nets!

andre, the Democrats are not going to give Obama everything he asks for, some of the ones that have been yelling for years about deficits, Kent Conrad in particular, will want them chopped sooner. The Republicans are going to say no to everything, it`s all they have in their arsenal. I just hope that if they, the Repubs, manage to come up with a viable alternative to any program that somebody is listening. I have a feeling with the ones that are in charge, that no serious alternative will be forthcoming. Bedtime for this little "girl!"

andre, it might not be what you want to see, but is it better than watching them fail like dominoes and being dragged into a depression? That seems to be the scenario we are being led to believe will happen otherwise. I`m not any kind of economist so I can`t say if it is true, and obviously the real economists are divided on it. I guess we have to agree to disagree. That $5 billion figure came from CNN last week.

andre, Republicans and Democrats received $5 billion in contributions from Wall Street firms, banks, etc., since 1998, that is why we are in this mess!

andre, Obama introduced the Transparency And Integrity Reform bill in February of 2006. If the Republicans in charge then, or the Democrats in charge after January 2007 had wanted to do something about earmarks they could have. They didn`t and only will if the people prod them enough. But, as I stated it won`t save a nickel, the money is allocated, then the earmarks direct it. Obama could only get one co-sponsor.

annie, your President, Mr. Bush made the same promise in his 2007 State Of The Union address, what did he do to follow up? Still, it`s a silly argument, the bill would have cost the same with no earmarks! It`s just an excuse to rag on someones` pet project, but it should be reformed. If RetiredAirForce is correct, the reform is in the works.

andre, little lady, Bush signed a bill with $18 billion in earmarks the largest in history. Obama did not say that bill didn`t have any earmarks, again with the blatant lies. They could have dropped every earmark and the cost would remain the same. RetiredAirForce says a bill has been submitted to do exactly what Obama said he would do, reform earmarks, not ban them. In the first place he doesn`t control everyone in his party, neither would Mr. McCain if he had won. In the second place help a liberal out here pally, maybe if you can show me I`m wrong I`ll become a consevative, and only approve of the 40% of earmarks( 6 out of the top 10 earmarkers were Republicans!) from Republicans.

annie, er, andre, you can`t come up with it because it doesn`t exist! And, that $410 billion bill without the earmarks would have been, SURPRISE, $410 billion! Earmarks only direct money that is already allocated.

Our President has been in office two months and already the neoneocons are stabbing him in the back. Clearly many have a poor understanding of how the economic system works. Not everything is a McDonald's. Markets don't always have low barriers to entry. Making an automobile from scratch isn't the same as making hamburgers. Imagine if the health care system suddenly collapsed because it had over expanded due to a large demographic group disappearing because they died (baby boomers). Suddenly, the nearest hospital is 100 miles away. However, according to the myopic economic philosophy of the day we should just let everything fail. Providing social and financial safety nets provides incentive for people to take risks in the first place. Taking risk is important to the expansion of our economy. However, if you let everything fail then everything will fail. A small minority of me me me poor me whiners thinks this is a good idea. We eventually came out of the Great Depression because we spent our way out. It is a FACT!!!! And it wasn't immoral to do so, it would have been immoral not to do it.

little buddy andre, you can`t give me an example because it doesn`t exist. Nobody but you is pushing this idea that Obama campaigned on banning earmarks. C`mon, you said I don`t know beans about this computer and internet business, help a friend out! Give me a site to go to besides a video of Obama talking about the stimulus package in a 'Funny' video. He must have said it during a debate, or press conference, or a campaign rally. Take a little pity on an internet neophyte and show it to me! Geez little fella, you almost got me begging! Oh, by the way that $410 billion bill with the earmarks in it, how much would it have been without the earmarks? Help me out here buddy!

what's in your wallet?????

andre, Wow! Imagine my surprise when I saw you are talking to me again! Listen, little buddy, until you can give a link of Obama, at a debate, on the Senate floor, at a press conference, in a letter or a tattoo on his chest saying he would ban earmarks, except for the stimulus bill, you are a liar if you say he campaigned on banning earmarks! Dig into your massive vault of links, that you tout and beat your chest about, and dig up something besides a parody on Youtube of Obama promising to ban earmarks. I`ll wait.

As you probably always did with President Bush!! Pardon me!

whoanellie- It is President Obama or Mr. President. Not Mr. Obama. Please show the proper respect for the leader of our country.

I agree with futureteacher. On top of all that he should stay of the talk show circuit, the campaign is over, stop trying to be a rock star or celebrity and do your job Mr. Obama! Since he says he is the president, (like he didn't know it before he actually spoke it), Do the presidential thing and work on our economy! Stop letting others do your job like Nancy Pelosi. They are screwing it up!! All I can think is he must owe alot of people.

it is kind of funny the way the whole obama thing is turning around. He was almost given God-like fanfare as he was elected. That surely seems to be changing quickly. The problem was/is this. It didnt matter who was elected. It didnt matter who was the LAST president. The problem is our government and its structure. It is a two party exclusive governement that has gone bad. It is time to make huge changes in our political structure. The Governement is no longer "by the people for the people" but rather "by the party for the party." too much governement, term limits and salary caps for public servants....caps on campaign funds... abolishment of the two major political parties as they have become monopolies and let lose the lobbyists. Let the busines' that go under, go. The bailouts are a farce. If my business has problems no one is here to help me why should they get special attention. The problems with our country is based on the swindling of the american people by our own governement. Time to wake up and find real solutions!

Where were all you naysayers when Bush was in office? If you voted for Bush and the war how come YOUR not paying for it? Way to stand behind YOUR decisions. Obama has been in office for two months. Here is what you people know. A crippled liberal(FDR) beat the fascists in WWII with huge amounts of public debt. Where were you people when Cheney said "Deficits don't matter."?

The article is making the point that Obama is not 'presidential' is one of the main problems he is having. He is so busy trying to be popular and 'one of us' that his judgment seems way out of whack....from cabinet picks, to overlooking the earmarks when promised he wouldn't, to having 'parties' in White House with pop stars every Wed night (really looks bad ObamaRama), to his appearing on Leno...again don't leave home without your teleprompter. He needs to be 'Presidential' and he needs to do it yesterday! We need a leader not the lost puppy he is starting to come across as. Please. And And And And stop stuttering And And And.

What's funny, yet sad; is that people don't even realize that the debt is being financed almost exclusively by the Chinese. They must literally be laughing their a$$es off at this scam. As they buy the treasury notes to finance our mass debt spending, it props up the US dollar so they can continue to demolish us with their trade policy.
.
It will only be a matter of years before China is the COLOSSAL world super power; as the US economy (and world super power status) falls of the face of the Earth. This mass leveraging we our doing via debt spending is no different then the debt leveraging scams that the banks were doing. It's just a matter of time before the whole house of cards collapses when your so heavily leveraged with debt.

"I have not seen one idea from the naysayers that would solve the economic crisis we are in without adding more debt."
-
It is called getting government out of the way. If a company fails the stock holders are the losers’ not the public. After the company fails another one will by up the assets and fill in the voids needed (production or product); as long as there is a market for it. By involving tax dollars we are supporting failed companies that should be insolvent. The only place government needs to stick their head is to ensure monetary supply and lending rates. The largest reason we are in the predicament we have now is federal policies in regards to lending. A perfect example is a community bank named East Bridgewater Savings Bank. The bank has no delinquent loans and managed to made a profit last year --- They did not take TARP money!!! During a recent FDIC evaluation the bank received a “needs to improve” rating; the second worst rating under CRA (Community Reinvestment Act). They don’t cost taxpayers any money and they make a profit yet the FDIC and CRA evaluation says they need to lend more???

"We will have to wait and see when the next bill that contains earmarks comes up for a vote to see if he follows through on that one."
-
Yes, because he has already done it once means he won't do it again; after running a campaign saying the opposite and also saying that these same bills would have "sunlight before signing"...still waiting for that also.

"has such an act even been submitted yet?"
-
Yes it has.

All spending is an earmark. Paying soldiers is an earmark for the Pentagon. Taking care of soldiers is an earmark. The ranting whiners just want everyone to feel sorry for them. Its not debt until the loans are defaulted on and the value of the dollar has been going up even with our debt. So what. How do you think we won WWII? With debt.

andre, tough noogies little fellow! You gave me nothing because you stated a lie! If you don`t care to talk, fine by me, but if you post another stupid thing I will call you on it again, whether you reply or not. By the way, that "kool aid' thing is being overused, and it just makes you a follower, be more original!

billnewbie, much too early to tell. Lots on the agenda, give him some time. If he proves not worthy he`ll be gone in the next election.

It gets real difficult for the President to reform the process when the Predident surrenders the fight and joins the other side.

billnewbie, it looks to me like you just confirmed what I have been saying all along, not banning earmarks, but reforming them. Seems like he is still saying now what he voted for then, and the vote shows how difficult the process will be.

Retired Air Force, has such an act even been submitted yet? You can`t use it if it isn`t there, can you. We will have to wait and see when the next bill that contains earmarks comes up for a vote to see if he follows through on that one. I believe the guy is a little busy right now cleaning up our economic troubles, I`m sure he`ll get around to the earmark thing when he has a chance. If Mr. McCain was president do you think he would have vetoed the bill and take a chance the government would be shut down? I don`t think so, even his own party wouldn`t back him. They were sure in no hurry to cancel their earmarks, and now are in the process of touting how much bacon they have brought to their states and districts. The Democrats and Republicans both make their reputations bringing home the "pork", and it will be hard to stop. By getting the transparency and accountability act into law, at least we will see what they are asking for instead of hearing lies about"salt marsh mice", and "$8 billion trains from Vegas!"

About a year ago Senator Obama interrupted his campaign for president to vote in favor of an amendment that would have placed a one year moratorium on earmarks. That amendment failed 71 to 29. Candidate Obama said at the time, “we can no longer accept a process that doles out earmarks based on a member of Congress’ seniority, rather than the merit of the project. We can no longer accept an earmarks process that has become so complicated to navigate that a municipality or non-profit group has to hire high-priced D.C. lobbyists to do it. And we can no longer accept an earmarks process in which many of the projects being funded fail to address the real needs of our country." His newfound enthusiasm and respect for earmarks makes him look rather weak and under the thumb of Congress.

Obama also declared this about earmarks --- "Obama's Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act will shed light on all earmarks by disclosing the name of the legislator who asked for each earmark, along with a written justification, 72 hours before they can be approved by the full Senate."
-
Yet this has also not happened.

andre, the quote about banning earmarks was in a meeting about the stimulus package. That is the only time he said he would stop earmarks. You made a blanket statement of untruth, that is not parsing, as you put it. You are the joke, with all your supposed "links", and great intelligence, and all you can do is rail against a man who is trying to bring this country back from the brink of economic disaster caused by years of bad legislation, and government, and corporate greed. You must be a proud American , you always have something good to say about the people who are working to better our lives. Kind of like Rush saying he wants the stimulus to fail and prolong the recession, probably so he can gloat.

andre, you cannot back up your claim so you tell me to do my research. Obama never said he would eliminate earmarks, and you can`t prove he did because it never happened. You come on here and make a ridiculous statement and claim to have the knowledge, but like a balloon you are full of air. Don`t make stupid comments if you don`t want to be called on them!

In my opinion you’re all missing the point. A large portion of the money that has been pushed through congress has been and will be wasted. Period A detailed plan of this size cannot be pushed in such a short period of time by any group without a lot of big mistakes The US has NEVER spent this much money before.. Ever.. on anything.. ever.. Including inflation figured in. in our whole history!
My solution to these problems is much simpler. Give the money to the American taxpayer. You want to stimulate growth? Give a fraction of this 11 trillion to the people, and then they could afford new cars and homes and electronics, and maybe pay off those high interest credit cards and loans. Then and there would be no one getting laid off, business would be booming!!! Think about it before you knock it. The banks, and business and the government cannot succeed if the people are jobless and poor. Even if they were honest folks with good intentions. Maybe if the people could pay their loans they wouldn't have to be written off as a loss and sold for pennies to China.
Figure the numbers, how much could you give each man woman and child in the USA with this money????? 11 trillion divided by 350 million ... Think about the possibilities

My how that NVgrf is getting testy now that his beloved party is having so much trouble governing after we were all assured that salvation was only a few days away after Obama's inauguration. Weren't those avid democrats such as NVgrf the same ones who claimed that vigorous and vocal dissent is patriotic and that hoping that Bush’s policies failed was good for the country? Now that they have all the power and all the credit or blame it seems that vigorous and vocal dissent is now treason. Moral relativism is so convenient to liberal political philosophy!

kinsohn, did you call your representatives when Mr. Reagan raised the debt 150%, or when Mr. Bush Sr./Mr. Bush Jr. raised it 134% ? Granted, no one wants to see it go out of sight, but I have not seen one idea from the naysayers that would solve the economic crisis we are in without adding more debt. You can be sure Obama will not get everything he is asking for, no president does. Mr. Reagan asked for more money in the budget every year than he got, that is why the debt only went up 150% during his terms!

andre_linoge, your list of random articles doesn't necessarily support your position. Did you actually read them, or just scan headlines? And you certainly can't use Fox News to support your cause . . . talk about biased media!!

And I find it amazing all the criticism of the gaffes made by Obama when we just finished 8 years with an illiterate president! Just amazing!

And, pharm, right on! How can you get rid of an earmark process that's been firmly entrenched in US politics for as long as any of us can remember?

andre, could you pull out the link where Obama said NO earmarks, I`d like to see it. The only time he said NO earmarks was on the stimulus bill. He said repeatedly that he would reform the earmark process, not get rid of it, as if he could!

actually, the debt ceiling is 11.3 trillion. And lets see what is comes out to as a % of GDP.

Barack is planning to saddle my children and grandchildren with $9 TRILLION in debt, in ADDITION to what they're already saddled with. Even by a liberal's low sense of morality, this can be seen as nothing less than immoral. I have called my representatives to see if there's a limit to the amount of debt they're willing to vote for. At least Herb Kohl's office was honest in saying there was no limit. Others haven't answered yet.

I think we all know that Nancy Pelosi is running the country. (God help us all!) Obama is nothing more than a front man appearing on talk shows in an attempt to distract us from how bad things really are and already campaigning for 2012. How stupid does he think the American people really are? Hold on to whatever you have left right now because if he is successful in his march toward Socialism, you won't even have that left. Those who sit back and complain, don't work and don't get educated, will have redistributed to them some of what you have ... definitely NOT what the founding fathers had in mind!

If Obama did nothing, as some of you are suggesting, if he just sat on his hands and let all these Businesses fail, as is the true free market protocol, then he would be accused by you of doing nothing. "How can he just sit there as AMERICAN banks fail. I thought we voted for change" you would say. Nobody, certainly nobody that posts on this site, can say for sure if what he is doing will work or not. Me, personally, I think he should've let them fail, after he was elected he should've just held up his middle finger to all the corporate ceo's standing in line with their hands out, and said F all of you. It was your oversight that created this mess. You wanted deregulation, you got it, and you blew it. Sorry, but I'm here to help responsible business owners.

I certainly am not going to criticize that he chose to do the other. When your house is on fire, and you know there is nothing you can do to stop if from burning to the ground, it doesn't mean you're necessarily going to turn off the hose. He was faced with two choices. Sit back and let the "free" market work itself out, or try to do something. It is a no win situation, and certainly not a decision that would be easy for a new President to make.

andre_linoge

And I was being facetious

quam6535: You said "I see your point though..". Who are you addressing?

Socialism: Any of various political philosophies that support social and economic equality, collective decision-making, and public control of productive capital and natural resources

vs.

Fascism: A social and political ideology with the primary guiding principle that the state or nation is the highest priority, rather than personal or individual freedoms

It's easy to repeat buzz words and forget what their definitions are isn't it. At this point I'll take a little dose of socialism, to counteract the 8 years of Fascism that got us in this mess. I see your point though, let's forget the first six years when Bush had both House and Senate, and focus on the last two years and pin the mess on that. I'm sure it was the tax and spend democrats that bankrupted the country and not the deficit spending republicans the six years prior.

SuperDave - Please don't think I was giving him a pass for his gaffe on the Leno show. Far from it. I believe his arrogance gets in his way of being able to fully understand that it would be wrong to crack jokes that make light of children with disabilities. It is simple as that. I really do not think it was intentional as to distract us from other issues.
-
The truely sad part of this will be when President Obama invites Special Olympians to the White House in an attempt to show his support for such causes. It will be truely disgusting to see a man who had never seen the harm of cracking insensitive jokes about children with disablities and then using these same children for a political photo shoot.

pharm: Thanks.
NVgrf: Put your gun away, let's be reasonable here.
beenthere1968: Please give him a little more time. Finding a cure for cancer is not that simple.
andre_linoge: Thanks for all the links! You clearly are keeping track of this man.
just_hype: The point re: the "Special Olympics" gaffe is that Obama gets a pass from you and most people. I don't think that this was a mistake, I think it was meant to distract us from the HUGE spending bills coming out of Washington - eight thousand and five hundred earmarks from a president who promised ZERO earmarks; bailouts for the bankers who screwed up; totally ignoring the role of Congress in causing the current economic chaos (which the administration and mainstream media has encouraged).
Here, watch my left hand with the playing card while my right hand steals your watch, wallet, job, retirement.... Give me a break!!!

NVgrf - I thought you were a member of the ACLU?

His Special Olympics joke brings up a character flaw. Unfortunately it is a character flaw so many of us have. How often have you heard someone describe something as being "retarded"? And they say it not having any idea that it could be offensive. President Obama probably had no clue what he said was offensive until David Axelrod or his teleprompter told him it was.
-
How could somebody so intelligent slip up by cracking a joke on national television making fun of people with developmental and mental disabilities? This was not intentional but at the same time it is now clear that issues facing many Americans that have children with special needs is not something that the President has ever concerned himself with.

More venom from Republicans who WANT to see our President, and thus our nation, fail. This total lack of patriotism is beyond disgusting. Kathleen Parker, Rush Limbaugh, crybaby Glen Beck and all the rest these anti-American losers should leave the country or face the standard penalty for treason. BANG!

andre, the Democrats tried to re-regulat Fannie and Freddie in 2005 and Bush threatened a veto and the Senate never brought up the bill that passed the House. And then the Republicans try to say Mr. Frank and Mr. Dodd stopped THEM from re-regulating! How did they do that when they didn`t have the power to pass anything on their own? If the Republicans wanted to do something they had the votes, but not the will!

Wow, Obama's in office less than two months and everything including not finding a cure for cancer is his fault.

I love how, for 8 years, ANY harsh word against the president and you were labeled un-American. Now, with a President who inherited all these problems from the greatest American hero that ever held the highest office, the opinions can flow freely. We spent trillions on defense of this country while we rotted from the inside out. Now the trash must be taken out, except the mess is so large it appears nothing is being done.

When your house has been destroyed, sweeping the sidewalk doesn't appear to do much, but in the long run, it needs to be done.

Give the man a break. He is dealing with things on a much larger scale than any previous President has ever had to deal with, save for washington, lincoln, and FDR. He did not create these problems, he just has to clean them up. Perhaps he should talk with George H. W. Bush, for some advice on cleaning up Jr.'s mess.

SuperDave, the bonuses were in the Tarp bill passed last year, what was inserted in the stimulus bill was a change in future bonus payments. They, Democrats, Republicans, Bush, Obama ,all screwed the pooch on this one.

Of COURSE the administration knew (or should have known) about the AIG bonuses. It was in the bill, Obama signed it. And imagine what would have happened if Bush (or pretty much any Republican) made the "Special Olympics" comment. But Obama is just given a pass. I think Pelosi is actually in charge though.