The American Spectator

Bob| 3.28.09 @ 10:30AM

During this last election, you and others took much of Obama out of context and it only helped him win. Many of us agree with Brooks and Frum, and we consider ourselves strong fiscal conservatives. You are angry at these guys because there are lots of us who agree with them. Calling us "RINO's" or saying that we are not conservative is the action that causes this problem. It is your intolerance and unwillingness to keep open minds that stands in the way. Most of us strive for the truth -- and you ideologues do not. There can be no harmony when you are trying to communicate with closed minds.

I believe the problem with you ultra-rightwingers is that you won't, or can't, engage in intelligent discourse. You'd rather use words like "crapweasel", "alinskyite", "marxist", "fascist", "RINO", "baby killer", etc., than engage in dialog to discuss issues. You'd rather rely on rhetoric than data to make your points -- especially on economics.

Do you really want Republicans to win when they represent less than 30% of voters? Then look for places where you agree rather than places where you disagree.

The fact is that people who post here do not want Republicans to win. They want to throw bombs so they can get more hits on their blogs. Any rational analysis of voting data says that Republicans must have a bigger tent. Those of you who propose that the problem is that the party is not "conservative" enough, are simply unable to analyze data effectively. It's like the three monkeys: hear no evil, see no evil, and only speak evil. (Slightly modified for the author).

Most of us you call "RINO's" (and I am a proud RINO), think that Obama's budget is a disaster for our children and grandchildren. Most of us disagree with interventionist policies and nation building. Most of us believe government should be smaller. By the way, Brooks and Frum also believe these things. But I am proudly libertarian when it comes to social issues and am certainly pro-choice. I'm not squishy about this at all. I fundamentally believe that government should stay out of our lives as much as possible when it comes to taxes/spending as well as abortion and gay marriage. I know you won't agree on the social issues, but can't we all just get along on the rest?

Interested Conservative| 3.28.09 @ 10:51AM

But Bob, seriously, why did you vote for Obama? For all the disagreement and call for ideas and policies, what are the reasons to vote for Obama beyond hope and change?

Not all of us even use the comparatively mild term "RINO", but most folks are barely VINOs if you challenge them for their rationale.

So, why did you vote for Obama?

whiterb| 3.28.09 @ 11:00AM

They can't handle the truth Bob. They actually think they can win with their out of touch agenda. The alleged red state of Kansas just found Tiller not guilty. But, none of this penetrates their thick skulls, and they insist overturning Roe is a winner at the polls. The only hope to avoid total leftist idiocy is a third party.

Bob| 3.28.09 @ 11:20AM

Interested -- I've said this before. I was a strong Romney supporter. I will no longer vote for any candidate that is not intellectually superior. If it were Romney versus Obama, I would have voted for Romney. McCain graduated 5th from the bottom of his class and didn't know anything about economics. Palin was the last straw as her significant lack of knowledge regarding economics, history, the Constitution, and the Supreme Court made her totally unacceptable. Besides, since I am not a social conservative, her social positions were more of a negative to me than a positive.

I knew Obama would be limited on spending because of the state of the economy. You'll find that he will be forced to compromise on things like cap in trade. Besides, as you probably know by now, tax cuts have been a disaster for this country by raising the debt too much. No one is going to cut the budget unless they address entitlements. We also need to address healthcare as that represents 16% of GDP and our competitors only spend half of that. My bet is that when actual legislation gets to be signed, it will be more reasonable than his budget. We'll see if I'm right.

Bobbi| 3.28.09 @ 11:37AM

Bob-Since Obama has yet to release his academic transcripts, how do you know that you voted for the intellectually superior candidate? Looking at Obama's budget, I would say he knows nothing about economics either.

Angel| 3.28.09 @ 12:42PM

I see. Now that 'Dr. Tiller the Baby Killer', who aborts babies up until their due date for $5000.00 a pop, has been found not guilty by a Kansas jury, I'm supposed to become pro partial birth abortion/pro infanticide. No thanks, whiterb: If infanticide becomes widely accepted by the American people, I won't give a damn what happens to this country. It won't be worth saving.

Bob| 3.28.09 @ 1:31PM

Bobbi -- have you seen McCain's or Palin's transcripts? We don't know much about Obama's grades at Columbia, but we do know he graduated magna cum laude at Harvard Law and was elected president of the law review. In order to graduate magna cum laude you must have an "A" average. It is totally based on grades. You didn't hear that from the biased talking heads, did you.

Regarding economic theory, what specifically in Obama's budget leads you to believe he knows nothing about economics? Do you want to argue the rate of growth of GDP in the out years between the CBO estimate and the one in Obama's budget? How about comparing that with the Republican alternative? That's right, there are no numbers in the Republican alternative.

I have graduate training in economics and 35 years of business experience. How much training do you have to judge the budget?

I believe the debt created is too high, but that has nothing to do with knowledge of economics. It has more to do with the debt on my grandchildren. That's what makes me a fiscal conservative. But that is a matter of philosophy, not economics.

Spicy Joker| 3.28.09 @ 1:52PM

Frum has been ostracized from the D.C. cocktail circuit ever since he wrote the idiotic "Axis of Evil" speech (and boasted about it until Bush canned him). Now Frum is trying to rehabilitate himself with the Left by taking cheap shots at the Left's bete noire, Rush Limbaugh, and letting Newsweek and other liberal publications use him to keep Republicans divided. This guy is loathsome.

Obama Drules| 3.28.09 @ 1:53PM

Bob is president of the Crapweasel coalition.

adagioforstrings| 3.28.09 @ 3:45PM

re: Bob:

Do you want to argue the rate of growth of GDP in the out years between the CBO estimate and the one in Obama's budget? How about comparing that with the Republican alternative? That's right, there are no numbers in the Republican alternative.

Did Democrats typically develop alternative budget swhen they were not in power or did they spend most of their time just comparing Bush to Hitler?

Bugg| 3.28.09 @ 4:32PM

Bob-

Readliy concede Mccain, personal courage notwithstanding, knows nothing of economics. But everyone else here KNEW what ever Obama thought he knew from the knee of his Hawaiian mentor Davis through the Ivy League on on through Chicago was less than that. And what he did know was Marxist class warfare gibberish. But you guys were too frightened of being called racist to say that. You didn't want that fight, you w anted to seem accomodating and worldly , and you wanted to get scraps form the MSM table.

We would have bumbled along making a lesser mess with Mccain. But heaven forfend anyone call you a racist for calling a communist a communist.

We have lost control because people like Brooks and Frum readily concede the field of verbal battle to the left. They accept the speech codes and the PC nonsense. We cannot do that any more. If the Limbaughs and Hannitys make you mad, you should know your timidtiy, your pathos, your very cowardice allowed them to grow strong. At least they aren't scared to tell the truth about the left.

If you though that strongly why didn't you get behind Ron Paul? Why was he savaged?

Bob| 3.28.09 @ 5:35PM

adagio -- I'm not concerned with the Dems. They did not have to create an alternative. The Republicans, on the other hand, after being in control of the White House AND Congress, have something more to prove. I've done thousands of corporate presentations with lots of budgets. If you call yourself a fiscal conservative, then you should be able to prove it. The way you do that is through communicating the bottom line and showing what it means for our progeny. So yes, this time Republicans need to provide a real alternative. Remember, the purpose of a budget is to show the strategic direction of the country. It is not an executional document, but a strategic guidepost. It starts out with strategic goals, provides a way to achieve them, and then reduced that to the bottom line. The problem with our party right now is that there are no strategic goals. What do we want America to look like 20 years from now? How important is health care and education? I think the real reason you didn't see the numbers is that they aren't that different from Obama's bottom line -- especially after they are scored by CBO. The problem really isn't the budget, it is the lack of strategy.

Bugg -- the real difference between McCain and Obama is the approach. McCain was jump first and ask question later. Perhaps that's why he had so many plane crashes. Obama's method is Socratic. Calling Obama a Marxist or a communist is just plain dumb and does more harm than good. It further show a lack of knowledge of those systems. It is just as bad as calling you a racist.

We RINO's have not conceded the field of verbal battle to the left. The problem is that the Republican party has become more ideological and less intellectual. Thus it is the hard right ideologues who have refused to engage in meaningful dialogue. You don't get someone to listen if you cannot show you respond to reason. Very few people on this board respond to reason. You respond only to belief. It is much like trying to reason with Islamic militants.

I don't agree 100% with Brooks/Frum, but they are far more conservative than those on the left. Furthermore, they use facts and reason. This doesn't work with the social conservative base because you guys are not open to reason and logic -- only name calling and demonization.

I didn't get behind Ron Paul because of his radical views on monetary policy. But he was certainly more appealing than McCain or Palin.

Bobbi| 3.28.09 @ 6:29PM

Bob-I readily admit I am a layperson when it comes to economics. However, I don't think it takes an "expert" to realize that you cannot spend money you don't have to infinity. That is Obama's budget. Spending based on the "hope" (where have I heard that before?) that the economy will grow at a stronger pace than reality allows. I live within my means, is it too much to ask that government do the same? Especially sense I am an actual taxpayer. I think that is enough "training" to "judge the budget," you pompous ass. I am forced to send my hard earned money to DC to watch them piss it all away.
As far as Obama and his "intelligence," I have yet to see any example of said superior intellect. Talk about a talking head! We have one in the White House. The man has no common sense whatsoever. He talks, and talks, and talks, yet says nothing. I personally cannot take anymore of him.

Matthew Vadum| 3.28.09 @ 6:38PM

Stacy:

Define "crapweasel." Posting a photograph of David Brooks will not suffice.

Derek| 3.28.09 @ 7:59PM

Bob- Socratic? Have you read any Plato, or did you just hear something about him from Keith Olberman? The only way in which Obama resembles Socrates is in his penchant for projecting false motives and beliefs on his opponents and his blatant tendency to create false dichotomies. Of course, Socrates and Obama are kindred souls in their inability to provide any constructive suggestions and like all of Socrates's early dialogues Obama's press conferences and speeches are increasingly leaving the American people with a sense of aporia or helplessness. At heart Obama is a Platonist albeit a Platonist who believes the form of good and the form socialism are the same thing. 4 percent annual growth in the GDP is looking more and more like one of Plato's noble myths and perhaps Obama is a secret Straussian.

Interested Conservative| 3.29.09 @ 12:08AM

Bob - interesting replies, most of which seem to boil down to a preference for Obama's intelligence. There doesn't seem to be much else there, and my great worry is that he's not even particularly wise.

Clever, sharp, a polished and practiced speaker - absolutely. Same could be said of Churchill, who of course went right beyond him with experience, intellect and wisdom galore - all without noteworthy credentials.

You realize, of course, the unexamined nature of Obama's college record, aside from how hilarious it is that we're even discussing it. First off, the years he took between undergrad and Harvard law - there's something to be said for simple age as an advantage over fresh 22 year old 1ls. I only mention the old joke that Harvard law graduates more criminals than criminal attorneys, but it does highlight the specialized nature of our "higher" law schools.

Finally, as every day passes, it's a little more difficult to overlook that the bulk of his "experience" really has nothing to do with business, capitalism, meeting a budget, managing an office, making a profit, or even dealing with a wide range of customers.

Regardless of how harsh or insulting the description is - marxist, alinskyite or the mundane "community organizer", it may be valuable in many settings, but it's probably not going to be useful for the tasks at hand.

He's a player, that's about all.

Interested Conservative| 3.29.09 @ 12:08AM

Bob - interesting replies, most of which seem to boil down to a preference for Obama's intelligence. There doesn't seem to be much else there, and my great worry is that he's not even particularly wise.

Clever, sharp, a polished and practiced speaker - absolutely. Same could be said of Churchill, who of course went right beyond him with experience, intellect and wisdom galore - all without noteworthy credentials.

You realize, of course, the unexamined nature of Obama's college record, aside from how hilarious it is that we're even discussing it. First off, the years he took between undergrad and Harvard law - there's something to be said for simple age as an advantage over fresh 22 year old 1ls. I only mention the old joke that Harvard law graduates more criminals than criminal attorneys, but it does highlight the specialized nature of our "higher" law schools.

Finally, as every day passes, it's a little more difficult to overlook that the bulk of his "experience" really has nothing to do with business, capitalism, meeting a budget, managing an office, making a profit, or even dealing with a wide range of customers.

Regardless of how harsh or insulting the description is - marxist, alinskyite or the mundane "community organizer", it may be valuable in many settings, but it's probably not going to be useful for the tasks at hand.

He's a player, that's about all.

Interloper| 3.29.09 @ 12:53AM

Obummer is nothing without his trusty 'PROMPTER'.

Pam| 3.29.09 @ 1:02AM

Obama is our CrapWeasel in Chief.

Terry| 3.29.09 @ 7:43AM

Bob says, ". . . but we do know he graduated magna cum laude at Harvard Law and was elected president of the law review. In order to graduate magna cum laude you must have an "A" average. It is totally based on grades. You didn't hear that from the biased talking heads, did you."
Since you regard your statement as an indisputable fact in your support for Obam as intellectually superior (beyond McCain et. al.), please explain why, if he actually earned those grades, he is not forthcoming with the actual grades. We are aware that McCain (used only as an example, I would've preferred a stronger candidate) graduated near the bottom of his Annapolis class. We know this because it is a public record. Conservative/libertarian (Bob, you're not a libertarian) issues with Obam's academic record revolve around the secrecy that surrounds it. Obam is a poseur and you are a fool for being taken in by him.

Bob| 3.29.09 @ 10:21AM

Bobbi -- I believe it is the height of idiocy to think that "common sense" is more important than training and experience. Certainly, once you have training and experience, you can judge what is relevant and what is not. It never ceases to amaze me how many "economic" experts we have that think that managing a global economy is as simple as managing your personal budget. If you really felt that way, you would have also hated Reagan who increased the debt more than all the other presidents combined. If you did not feel that way, it is not common sense that you are using, it is emotional rationalization. Perhaps, Bobbi, you can tell me about the superior intellect of Palin who didn't know any Supreme Court decisions other than Roe.

Interested -- you are certainly not making a rational comment. Obama has been in office for almost two months. After he has been there for at least a year, you will be able to begin to judge him. No one can be judged this quickly -- and you know it.

By the way, I fully agree that Obama lacks management and business experience. But that was also true of McCain and he was not anywhere near as smart. Like I said, if it was Romney versus Obama, I would have voted for Romney.

Terry, let me tell you why most of us wouldn't want our transcripts released. I graduated with honors from college. However, I did extremely well in most subjects and poorly in a couple of them. If I ran for public office, I'm sure that information would have been taken out of context and used against me. Churchill, for example, was an extremely poor student in mathematics even though he graduated high in his class. In today's world, you would have said that he couldn't add and therefore couldn't handle a budget. Annapolis publishes class placement so we know McCain graduated 5th from the bottom of his class. Obama did not achieve honors at Columbia which tells us he didn't have an "A" average. Obama did graduate Harvard Law magna cum laude which tells us that he had a strong "A" average and probably in the top 5% of his class. Unless you received straight "A"'s in college (and I don't know anyone from a major university who has done that), you would not want your transcripts released.

And Terry, I never claimed to be a libertarian except socially. Are YOU going to publish your college transcript?

Bugg| 3.29.09 @ 11:12AM

Bob-

I'm unimpressed by Obama, and frankly many who graduate fron the Ivy League. Argiung continually abotu what someone got in freshman psych is beyond pointless. That you think it much matters one way or the other is somewhat disturbing.

I care that we elected a man to run the counrty who has barely managed anything as significant as a paper route.

And in his one academic job he touts-editor of Harvard Law Review-Lazy Barry didn't write any great treatise on the issues of the day. I went to what most would consider a middling law school and didn't make review there. But had I done so, or any law student done so, theyw anted that credential of a scholarly article or 2. Yet even here Obama didn't do the work.

Simply Obama did very little after he left Cambridge other than run for office. And as I explain, in his one supposed big job, he did nothing. And you see that as accomplishment. That's wrong.

Basil Plumley| 3.29.09 @ 11:21AM

Bob ... Bob ... Bob ....

You really need to lie down on the couch and get some therapy.
Where does one begin with you?
You said-Many of us agree with Brooks and Frum, and we consider ourselves strong fiscal conservatives.

Really? You must have missed the part where Frum worked for a President who proposed a lot of fiscally irresponsible programs. (Prescription drugs anyone?) Not one peep of protest from Frum.
Yet, you claim to be a "fiscal conservative". All your brand of "fiscal conservative" means is spend, tax-to pay for the programs, and leave no deficit. How quaint.

As for Obama, his election to President of HLR was more politics than grades/qualifications. Don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant. I don't think his grades were that good. There is a reason he won't release his grades and it isn't because he got a D in economics. You do realize the requirements necessary to graduate "Magna Cum Laude", don't you?

What is fascinating about you Bob is that you don't want to work with Social Conservatives to make a majority. You do realize that many Social Conservatives tend to be Fiscal Conservatives. Yet, as a result of a couple of issues, you are willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Compromise is a two-way street, except for you. It's your way or no way.
You must have been a hit at the company Christmas party. You do celebrate Christmas don't you Bob. After all, to believe all what you post, one would have to believe in Santa Claus.

You desire to rely all of your premises solely on data but Bob, when you use data, make sure it isn't flawed. You damn common sense as rhetoric yet, you are the one who should be on the street corner wearing a sandwich board proclaiming The End Is Near.

Basil Plumley| 3.29.09 @ 11:36AM

Bob

You said-you would have also hated Reagan who increased the debt more than all the other presidents combined.

I noticed you were very quiet when it was posted on AmSpec the data showing Obama's spending plan would increase the debt more than all the other presidents combined.
You have a lot of nerve to damn Reagan. I do expect that from pointy-headed nitwit who graduated from an "elite" school.

Bob, I'll say it again; you are a phony, a liar, and a fraud.
If you were sincerely intellectually honest you would attack the present real-time problems instead of attacking your perceptions of the past.

Bob| 3.29.09 @ 12:33PM

Basil -- I see your comprehension problems continue. I have consistently said that debt is the major problem and that the Obama budget is irresponsible for that reason. But you, as a non-listening social conservative, don't want a real discussion on the issues. If you want to talk about compromise -- I have also consistently stated that I would certainly vote for a social conservative if he/she were knowledgeable and competent. I have consistently supported Romney and said I'd vote for Jindal. No, Basil, it is you that is unwilling to compromise, for you would not support a fiscal conservative who is pro-choice, would you?

Furthermore, I only rail against Reagan regarding the debt he created. I believe that was immoral. I've also consistently said that I voted for Reagan and thought he was a good President because of his strategy against the Soviet Union. It is you that is the phony. Please go to the doctor and get that wax removed from your ears. You are the true phony, Basil.

Bugg -- your post sure sounds like envy to me. I can understand why you didn't make review there and probably could not get accepted at Harvard. Believe me, it wasn't that difficult if you had graduated college with honors and received great recommendations as well. Of course, the other path is being a legacy admit like Bush, but my father was a poor machinist.

Laura| 3.29.09 @ 12:58PM

What is a crapweasel? I assume it has something to do with the whole Brooks being Obama friendly thing, but I honestly do not know what the term means.

Ran| 3.29.09 @ 3:45PM

"[Obama a clever], sharp, a polished and practiced speaker - absolutely."

Oh, come on IC! When his ear-piece [as during the debates] or his teleprompter [ever since] are out of range, the guy is a bumbling nitwit. He is only articulate and comfortable when he's quoting neomarxist doctrine, as in his Joe the Plumber moment. Beyond that he's constantly mangling concepts [and basic grammar, too.] Not a bit sharper in those regards than his predecessor. Thing is, should we look to genius, or to solid principles? It is the principles issue which is Barry's Achilles heel.

Basil... you're a sadist, man. You're like the kid haranguing the idiot dog behind the fence. Thus, I proclaim you a true exemplar of RSM's 12th Commandment. I just don't know whether to laugh or to be disgusted.

ruth| 3.29.09 @ 4:22PM

Ran, why should Basil have mercy on Bob?

ruth| 3.29.09 @ 4:29PM

Laura, you think the meaning of the term crapweasel is not self-evident? All I know from the sound of it--is; I sure wouldn't want to be one. 'Splains it enough for me.

ruth| 3.29.09 @ 4:31PM

'Idiot dog behind the fence Bob'--LOL! You crack me up, Ran.

Ran| 3.29.09 @ 4:37PM

Gee Ruth, according to the 12th Commandment, he shouldn't. It's just that when our Crapweasel in Chief comes around barking, expecting everyone to sniff below his tail in approbation, along comes Basil with his slingshot. Thwip ... whack! There's sort of a pathetic sadism to it. Bob's brand is so badly damaged it seems rather unfair or something.

Then again, RSM's 12th isn't about sadism, it's about getting rid of the statist-socialist bullshitters polluting the Conservative message. If it means the Frum's and the Brooks' and the Bob's have to take a few hits, I say,

Basil old chap...

Nice shooting!

ruth| 3.29.09 @ 4:46PM

Ran, I remember when you were taken aback when I called Jeremiah a weasel. Things got a little, ahem, heated on that thread. Maybe it's just something about that particular word with you. Hmmmm?

Ran| 3.29.09 @ 5:52PM

LOL! [takes a bow] My apologies, good Lady Ruth.

Laura: Crapweasel and crap weasel. If those don't work, just read Bob's stuff.

Bob| 3.29.09 @ 6:18PM

Ruth/Ran -- It is interesting that when people have nothing of value to say, they descend into personal attacks. You both said you were going to ignore me. This obviously means you both lack any integrity. You do understand that your actions just encourage me more....

I'm having fun, are you?

ruth| 3.29.09 @ 9:10PM

I've never said I was going to ignore you, Bobbo--it's too much fun giving you a smack ever so often. Always in good fun, of course.

Basil Plumley| 3.29.09 @ 10:22PM

Bob
You said-I have consistently said that debt is the major problem and that the Obama budget is irresponsible for that reason. But you, as a non-listening social conservative, don't want a real discussion on the issues.

I initially said-you claim to be a "fiscal conservative". All your brand of "fiscal conservative" means is spend, tax-to pay for the programs, and leave no deficit. How quaint.

Hmmm ...... who has the comprehension problem?

Besides, FYI, I was a Guiliani supporter. I put a high premium on leadership. I suggest you look at Rudy's legal, economic, and foreign policy teams. He was much more libertarian than liberal.

Romney bothered me because he was never a leader. No decision was made without a study. Thus, every decision he made was a consensus. This is quite problematic since consensus is the absense of leadership.
It also showed in Romney's "woodenness". Romney was great in small groups but ineffective as the groups got larger.

I probably would have sat out the election had McCain not chosen Palin. I like her a lot. She has great political instincts and strong leadership skills. I think many of the attacks on her have been unfair and dishonest. (hint, hint)

Am I pro-life? You bet!!
I am also aware that abortion is not going away quickly. It will disappear incrementally. As a fiscal conservative, I will not advocate spending money on abortions overseas. I strongly want a foreign policy that strengthens us and let's the bad actors know that we do not fear them. The current Apology Tour by this administration is an embarrassment.
The bottom line is we have a Constitution that guidelines Congress what can and cannot be done with the people's money.

What bothers me about you is that none of this registers with you. You mock pro-lifers (thank goodness your mom was one--I guess). You are utterly clueless what to do w/r/t spending and taxes. You have nary a thought about foreign policy other than what is good for this country, you don't support.

You see Bob, it's all about leadership. You would have Einstein as a General of our Armies, while I prefer a Patton or a Grant. Einstein would not make a good POTUS but you would support him because he is smart. And we are supposed to take you seriously?

Yet, you pontificate ......

Dai Alanye| 3.29.09 @ 10:44PM

"McCain graduated 5th from the bottom of his class and didn't know anything about economics. "

Is this person who calls himself 'Bob' stupid or merely self-deluding? He points out McCain's weakness in economics as an excuse for voting for someone whose knowledge of economics is limited to Marxist theory. Obama is one of those who believe the cow can be continually milked whether you feed her or not. How this nation will survive his policies is a frightening question at this point.

It's obvious that Bob votes with his emotions rather than reason. Or he's stupid—you make the choice.

Interested Conservative| 3.29.09 @ 11:17PM

An interesting string of back and forth here.

Bob - your latest comment to me called me irrational and knowing that two months is too short to judge the POTUS. You asked for at least a year.

What's the difference between two months and a year?

Meanwhile, in the 12 hours since that comment, he's fired the president of GM.

How long do I have to wait to judge that action?

As for your other comments, others have noted the line about Reagan. It's more than a bit curious that perhaps the largest initial act Reagan took was firing striking PATCO members. Three decades on, POTUS Obama fires the CEO - talk about the worm turning!

ruth| 3.30.09 @ 1:01AM

I'm sure Bob will explain to us slowly and methodically that Obummer fired the GM CEO-- not because he's President Hitler--but because of all of his 'knowledge'; that and the fact that we took Obama's words out of context. I don't even know what the last part meant. Perhaps el Bobbo will be back to explain it to me. Please try do it in under 10,000 words. Thanks.