19
Apr
09

Tea Party Spin:The Story Inside The Story

Yesterday, thousands across America celebrated “tax day” by attending tea party protests. The protests were held in opposition to activities-such as the shredding of the Constitution, socialism, out of control spending, fiscal child abuse and etc-being perpetrated by Obama-Lama-Ding-Dong and friends.

I have never seen anything like these massive protests in my life. Forever the romantic, I truly believed myself to be witnessing the media event of the century. WRONG!!! The media-with the exception of Fox News which broadcasted live from various protests-appeared to have only one objective in mind: damage control. Hence they provided minimal coverage. Let’s take a look.

Reporters at the LA Times want you to think that the gatherings were nothing more than hand full of Republicans delivering the same old “they are going to raise your taxes” message.

Reporting from Washington and Santa Ana — Republicans sought to ignite a popular revolt against President Obama on Wednesday by staging “tea party” protests across the nation to demand lower taxes and less government spending — but the tactic carried risk for the party.

“Nothing is as pressing a concern as the economy,” said Republican pollster Whit Ayres, adding that even among Republicans the political salience of taxes is not what it once was.

Uh…Those thousands of angry people hanging out in front of the Alamo in San Antonio, calling for a third party were just Republican spinsters? Riiiigght.

Across the pond at BBC, it is unimaginable that Obama can be anything but “worshiped” in America and they have obviously concluded that the “half dozen or so” people who have an issue with his socialistic agenda must be nuts and sexual deviants as well.

….And in truth, this is not the kind of political movement that really worries governments (least of all recently elected and still-popular governments like Barack Obama’s).

…They seemed undeterred by the fact that the phrase “tea-bagging” (which has a sexual connotation in some circles) is a bit of a gift to their critics on the left, who are inclined to snigger at them.

Was it not the Brits’ bums that America kicked after the original tea party?

I’m sure Arianna Huffington had to take a Valium before bedtime on Wednesday. But never fear my dearies, her flying monkeys were working hard into the night.

Before a crowd that organizers claimed was 15,000 to 20,000, but these experienced ex-advance man’s eyes saw as about 3,000, a parade of right-wing personalities used tax day to decry taxation, government, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, and President Barack Obama with a rally outside California’s state Capitol in Sacramento…

Barack Obama, sworn in as president of the United States on January 20th, is Public Enemy Number One of the small but virulent American Tea Party movement….

The NYT: Tea party? What tea party? Blah..Blah…Blah…Guess what? Obama is the greatest and guess what he did today??!!!

With his conservative critics staging “taxpayer tea parties” to protest his fiscal policies, President Obama marked the April 15th tax-filing deadline on Wednesday by delivering a sales pitch for what he called “the most progressive tax cut in American history…..’’

OK. I’m getting bored now. For more examples, just “Google” news listings for “tea party.” You will see pretty much more of the same. It’s quite telling and almost funny how the various news agencies seem most interested in covering up the realities of the event. Is it because the story did not involve six women wearing pink boas or is someone afraid that not all is well in Obamaland? For the Obama PR teams, the latter just won’t do.

(Original here)

Advertisements

17 Responses to “Tea Party Spin:The Story Inside The Story”


  1. 1 DJ
    20 April 2009 at 07:11

    LOL, The MSM just can’t seem to accept that the Tea Parties of today are NOT partisan, they are real no shit grassroots movements. There were Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, White, Black, Mexican, Blue Collar, White Collar and no Collar. Each and every event had a diverse make up. One would think the MSM would applaud such bi=partisanship…

  2. 21 April 2009 at 08:12

    Anything or anyone that speaks out against any part of this administration or it’s policies or this Congress and it’s bills is automatically going to be deemed to be right-wing conservatism drivel. I mean, look at the last campaign’s slogans.

    McCain: Country First
    Obama: I’m not Bush

    DJ, you know as well as I do… It doesn’t matter how factual something is… it is how it feels. And right now, America is in trouble and the belief is that the only way to get out is to have big-daddy government pull us out. So if you say anything adverse to that idea, then you are an outsider. It seems that Obama & Co (and their lemmings) have adopted a general policy from Bush himself, “If yer not with us, then yer against us.” Only difference is that Bush was talking about fighting terrorism and fighting against people who want to kill innocent people. Obama & Co are talking about anyone that doesn’t blindly follow whatever Obama says.

    I find it somewhat ironic that so many people over the last 5 years have proudly proclaimed that “dissent is patriotic” (in reference to the Iraq War) and now, today, feel the need to shut their mouth and tow-the-line with whatever our government decides. I dissented with the Iraq war and I most certainly dissent with this garbage that is going on now.

  3. 3 Alan Scott
    24 April 2009 at 16:58

    For 8 years the idiots held rallies and protests to whine about everything Republicans did. Now when regular people hold harmless tea parties the media does not like it. Did we expect the hypocrites to approve? The media are up Obama’s butt like polyps. If Obama ever gets a colonoscopy, they will find Charley Gibson, Brian Williams, John Stewart, Chris Mathews, Rachael Maddow, and way, way up, Keith Olbermann. The polyp media and the polyp internet community are having a real pigfest laughing about how they changed the term tea partying to tea bagging. “Those Conservatives don’t know how dum they sound.” No morons we get the joke. Do you kiss your mothers with those mouths?

  4. 24 April 2009 at 19:41

    Alan,
    This brings us to the fact that many conservative thinkers will openly admit things that they did not like with Republican party or Bush. However, many liberal thinkers will never admit that they disagree or that something went wrong.

    I know a lot of Liberals. A lot of them are very educated people. But for some reason they feel that they can give up their logical thinking in lieu of someone else thinking for them (because that person is smart too). In other words, why question another person when that person is also well educated? This, in some fashion, seems logical – give the decision to someone that has more education in that area then me. However, when said person makes retarded mistakes, like crying about how in debt we are and then going and spending trillions, then you should be telling yourself to renig on the trust you gave that person. I don’t think that a lot of Liberals do that.

    I remember my old roommate – a flaming Liberal – had her guy, Kucinich, loose the primary. I remember her going, “Oh well, Obama will be just fine.” She didn’t care what his stances were. She didn’t care anything about him, all she knew was that he was “not Bush” and that he was a Democrat. If this makes any sense, I think Liberals are sore losers.

  5. 5 DJ
    27 April 2009 at 15:03

    @KK,

    “…I think Liberals are sore losers.”

    I don’t think you quite get the liberal mindset. Liberals NEVER lose. If a bill, law, idea or program doesn’t get implemented, they work on changing the minds of those that disagree with them, if they can’t change minds, they spin it into a “civil rights” issue, if they still don’t get the outcome they want, they sue, when they fail to get a court to agree, they go back to the beginning and rephrase the issue. Look at gay marriage, they have tried for years to get America to accept it, America doesn’t, they screamed about civil rights, America said NO! They pushed ballot issues in many State, lost ALL OF THEM, then they started in the courts, lost again, more ballot issues, more defeats (even with BHO on the ballot), now they are in the upper courts, where the people can’t have a say! They won. They did not look at each of the setbacks as a loss, only a new opportunity to engage, when they run out of engagement ideas, they get mean and take the people out of the equation.

  6. 6 Alan Scott
    3 May 2009 at 17:47

    DJ,

    “if they still don’t get the outcome they want, they sue, when they fail to get a court to agree, they go back to the beginning and rephrase the issue.”

    This is why the Supreme Court is so important to them. The Supreme Court can just make new things up out of thin air or cite foreign law. The clowns are supposed to interpret the Constitution. Where in the Constitution does it say anything about abortion, gay marriage, universal health care, or Carbon Dioxide?

  7. 7 DJ
    4 May 2009 at 01:02

    Alan Scott,

    NOWHERE!

    When I heard BHO talking about his criteria for judge being someone who could empathize with (insert group here), I about shit my pants! John Adams, during his defense of the British troops who were arrested for the Boston Massacre said “We are a nation of Laws, not men” I have always taken that mean the law is without feeling. It is rigid and does not allow ones “feelings” or emotions to cloud the law. Man, on the other hand, has feelings and emotions (I don’t, just ask my wife…) and when feelings and emotions are are relied on to pass judgment, we the people do not get justice, we get socialism.

    I am a fan of the law, I firmly believe the law establishes boundaries and those boundaries allow a society to grow upwards from a solid foundation. When there are no laws (or in the current case here in the USA) the laws are watered down to be “fair” or to “increase diversity” the foundation crumbles and the society grows outward in an ever expanding circle, eventually, the circle gets so big it collapses from the center and the whole thing folds in on it self.

  8. 8 Alan Scott
    4 May 2009 at 18:40

    DJ,

    The Constitution was a set of rules to live by, drawn up by the first American generation. Each generation has to decide whether to live by them or not. If the rules must be updated there is a mechanism for amending them. From FDR’s time until the present, they don’t bother to amend, the Supreme Court just makes up things out of thin air. The more this is done, the weaker we are.

  9. 9 DJ
    5 May 2009 at 01:13

    Alan Scott,

    First, may I refer to yo as “Alan”?

    Second, I agree with you in part. I don’t hold t he SCOTUS to blame, I think the are more activist Judges at the Appellate level. I swear not a week goes by where I don’t read about some dopey, touchy-feely decision handed down from an Appellate court.

  10. 10 Alan Scott
    5 May 2009 at 18:19

    DJ,

    All I ask is that you spell it right. I also post under Wamba and Witless, ( from the book Ivanhoe ) when I’m on certain news site boards such as NY Times and Fox News. Although Fox News’s boards are almost useless anymore. Hopefully President Obama will be a one termer. If he gets to appoint judges for 8 years, we are royally screwed.

  11. 18 September 2009 at 21:00

    @Johnrj08: Hi and welcome to my blog. If you wish to debate, please submit your full argument instead of just a link. Links by themselves are normally called trolling or spamming. Please come back and discuss your views.

    I did visit your link and I can’t even get past the first two sentences.

    I would have to agree with President Carter’s assessment, when he says that racism lies at the core of the current venomous attacks on President Obama. (To be clear, Carter said that he was talking about a “radical fringe element”, rather than all people who oppose Obama’s policies).

    I am “attacking” Obama all over this blog. I don’t like his policies. So I assume that my venomous attacks are racist? Am I or am I not on a radical fringe element? If so, please prove.
    -Kyle

  12. 13 johnrj08
    19 September 2009 at 08:53

    There is no point in debating with you here or anywhere else. The reason you don’t like Obama’s policies are either because you don’t understand them or you just don’t trust a black in the White House. The very first paragraph of your blog says it all:

    “Yesterday, thousands across America celebrated “tax day” by attending tea party protests. The protests were held in opposition to activities-such as the shredding of the Constitution, socialism, out of control spending, fiscal child abuse and etc-being perpetrated by Obama-Lama-Ding-Dong and friends.”

    “Thousands” of people in a country of +300 million amounts to insignificance. The fact that the racist organizer of the Tea Party movement was able to attract a few lunatics who like to march around carrying signs that insult the President of the United States should surprise no one. Print and broadcast journalists embedded in the events have reported widespread racist attitudes being expressed away from cameras and microphones. Ironically, the majority of people who have had the free-time to travel to these events are probably on Medicare and social security, so the hypocrisy has been free-flowing.

    One has to wonder why anybody in these crowds would be complaining about taxes, given that most of them pay lower taxes than people in the majority of western democracies and the fact that President Obama has vowed time and again not to raise taxes on those earning less than $200,000/year. Basically, the taxes that they’re paying were set by George W. Bush, not Obama. Another irony of these events is that these ‘big government haters’ all got there driving on interstate highways, which were built with federal funding.

    Do you even know what “socialism” is? (A rhetorical question). YOu state without providing a single fact that the Constitution, which you probably have never even read, is being shredded, and then you whine about “out of control spending”. Thank God that ideologues like you have not been in power for the last 8 months. If you had, we would have seen the major auto manufacturers fail, tens of thousands of unemployed auto workers slide into poverty and go on government assistance, and we would have conceded the largest marketplace in the world to foreign auto manufacturers. That would have been REAL smart.

    We also would have allowed the banking system to fail, which would have shut off all credit to small and mid-sized businesses which rely on credit for payroll and maintaining inventories, so even more people would have lost their jobs and gone on public assistance. But, as far as you’re concerned, better all those people’s lives should go down in flames to preserve your ideology. How stupid and self-destructive can pig-headed
    politics get?

    So, no, I’m not going to debate you. Why? Because your anger about this president isn’t based on facts or even rational thinking. You’re not coming from a place of respect for the office or even a basic understanding of the President’s policies. You’ve probably never visited websites such as PolitiFact.com, FactCheck,org or the AARP because you don’t want to be confused by contrary information that doesn’t validate your point of view. Face it, you’re here to talk shit about this president. Like a lot of the tea-baggers, you probably don’t even think he’s an American citizen and I’m sure you’re convinced that he’s an undercover Muslim agent.

    See you at the cross-burning.

  13. 19 September 2009 at 22:42

    @Johnrj08: There is no point to debating me here or anywhere else. So in other words, your hit and run was just trolling for trouble?

    “The reason you don’t like Obama’s policies are either because you don’t understand them or you just don’t trust a black in the White House.”

    REALLY? So it is not possible that I understand them and don’t agree with them?

    The very first paragraph of your blog says it all: “Yesterday, thousands across America celebrated “tax day” by attending tea party protests. The protests were held in opposition to activities-such as the shredding of the Constitution, socialism, out of control spending, fiscal child abuse and etc-being perpetrated by Obama-Lama-Ding-Dong and friends.”

    First off, this is not my original writing as evidenced by the link at the very bottom of the page. Please notate this next time.

    “Thousands” of people in a country of +300 million amounts to insignificance. The fact that the racist organizer of the Tea Party movement was able to attract a few lunatics who like to march around carrying signs that insult the President of the United States should surprise no one. Print and broadcast journalists embedded in the events have reported widespread racist attitudes being expressed away from cameras and microphones. Ironically, the majority of people who have had the free-time to travel to these events are probably on Medicare and social security, so the hypocrisy has been free-flowing.

    You are right. A “thousand” people is a drop in the bucket when it comes to the grand scheme. However, I’d like to know how many people have to march to “make a difference” to you.
    1913 – Women’s Suffrage March, 5,000 people.
    1963 – March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom (MLK), 250,000 people.
    1969 – National Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam, 600,000 people.
    2009 – Tea Party on Washington, 75,000 people.
    But that is not even all of the story. Tea Parties were held all over the United States, not just in Washington DC. Adding it all up some estimate the turnout to be 500,000 (link)

    So the question now is… is 500,000 disgruntled Americans across the country still just a drop in the bucket to you? I’d especially like to hear your answer in light of the other protests which we can effectively say changed America.

    As for the racism. Well, I think people converged to protest the policies, not the skin color. I don’t buy the “widespread racist attitudes being expressed away from cameras and microphones” bit either. Are you SERIOUS that in an age of cameras and microphones being everywhere that not a single reporter can capture someone, much less an entire crowd, being racist. What a puff of smoke you are!

    One has to wonder why anybody in these crowds would be complaining about taxes, given that most of them pay lower taxes than people in the majority of western democracies and the fact that President Obama has vowed time and again not to raise taxes on those earning less than $200,000/year. Basically, the taxes that they’re paying were set by George W. Bush, not Obama. Another irony of these events is that these ‘big government haters’ all got there driving on interstate highways, which were built with federal funding.

    So this is all about numbers? And because people in Europe pay more in taxes, that means that we must pay more taxes?

    Do you even know what “socialism” is? (A rhetorical question). YOu state without providing a single fact that the Constitution, which you probably have never even read, is being shredded, and then you whine about “out of control spending”. Thank God that ideologues like you have not been in power for the last 8 months. If you had, we would have seen the major auto manufacturers fail, tens of thousands of unemployed auto workers slide into poverty and go on government assistance, and we would have conceded the largest marketplace in the world to foreign auto manufacturers. That would have been REAL smart.

    Again, I did not write the article. For the article to go into how government is spending out of control would have been a college dissertation versus a news article.

    And ah yes… the domino effect fallacy. We let the auto manufactures fail and we all go down. Too bad we injected millions into them and they are STILL failing.

    The rest of what you wrote has no basis in real economics.

    We also would have allowed the banking system to fail, which would have shut off all credit to small and mid-sized businesses which rely on credit for payroll and maintaining inventories, so even more people would have lost their jobs and gone on public assistance. But, as far as you’re concerned, better all those people’s lives should go down in flames to preserve your ideology. How stupid and self-destructive can pig-headed politics get?

    Hey you know what? I remember us proping up banks and them still not lending money. How about that! But hey, since you seem to know my idealogy so well, can you please tell me what it is?

    So, no, I’m not going to debate you. Why? Because your anger about this president isn’t based on facts or even rational thinking. You’re not coming from a place of respect for the office or even a basic understanding of the President’s policies. You’ve probably never visited websites such as PolitiFact.com, FactCheck,org or the AARP because you don’t want to be confused by contrary information that doesn’t validate your point of view.

    Goodness. You are an interesting one. You are right – I do not like my current President. I don’t like what political idealogy he is based in. Period. I respect the office. If I didn’t respect the office then I wouldn’t be advocating to follow the rules. If we, people with the same mindset as myself, didn’t respect the office, we would be trying for a coup. But we are all trying to work within the system. Is this wrong?

    Politifact. Hmmm… you mean the fact checker that openly uses severely liberal news sources (i.e. Mediamatters) to “verify” their rankings? Or the fact checking that slammed Michelle Bachmann for being right about ACORN. Or the politifact publisher, Nelson Poynter, who said of Oswalk with the assasination of JFK, “Oh, no, I was hoping it would be a right-winger.” Ha! No bias there!

    Factcheck. The one that is funded/ran by Annenberg Public Policy Center? The same APPC that Barack Obama spent as founding chairman of the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge for 4 years? Well, no bias there either…

    AARP. The ones that state, “We believe strongly in the principles of collective purpose, collective voice, and collective purchasing power, and these principles guide all organization efforts.” Collective, or specifically collectivism is a Liberal idea. Also, the same non-profit organization that pays their CEO half a million a year? And then that CEO gives Obama $4300 for the election (link). Again, no bias there.

    Face it, you’re here to talk shit about this president. Like a lot of the tea-baggers, you probably don’t even think he’s an American citizen and I’m sure you’re convinced that he’s an undercover Muslim agent.

    I’m not here to “talk shit” about anyone. I am here to express MY views. If you don’t like them, then buzz off.

    As for his citizenship, that is still in the air, isn’t it? he STILL hasn’t submitted his school documents or his long form birth certificate. All he has supplied to the public is a certificate of birth, which is not the same as a long form birth certificate. Until he provides that, nobody knows if he is or is not. I for one would like him to prove it.

    See you at the cross-burning.

    Are you insinuating that I am racist and or a member of the KKK? If so, please cite your evidence. I still see none.

  14. 15 johnrj08
    21 September 2009 at 09:57

    Over 120,000,000 people cast votes in the last election. Even one million ignorant nuts marching on Washington would amount to less than 1% of that number, and i would say that definitely amounts to a “drop in the bucket”. The number of tea-baggers at the “massive” Washington march amounted to .0005% of the people who voted last November.

    Anybody who suggests that AARP.com, PolitiFact or FactCheck are biased information sourcss, yet they accept statements by Glenn Beck and Michelle Malkin as undeniable fact are not functioning on all cylinders. The eagerness of some people to accept and even promote the outrageous lies and half-truths being spread by right-wing attack dogs makes it quite clear that no amount of logic and footnoting would persuade them.

    Hence, no debate.

  15. 16 DJ
    21 September 2009 at 12:37

    @johnrj08,

    No debate because you have no data to support your assertion. It is quite obvious by the pictures of the Washington mall that well over 1 million people were present.

    AARP.com, PolitiFact or FactCheck ARE biased information sourcss, just as moveon.org and Salon.com. Where has ANYONE on this blog quoted Beck or Malkin as gospel? You are making an intlellectually dishonest argumnet.

    “the outrageous lies and half-truths being spread by right-wing attack dogs…” please provide some examples or go away.

    You are a typical Obama-zombie, you have fogotten how to think for yourself, you do NO independent research, you take your marching orders from Chairman MaObama and his Chicago thug machine, I doubt you have ever read the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution of the United States, you have no concept of why this nation was founded, and you cannot comprhend the concepts of “liberty and Freedom”. I pity you sir…

  16. 21 September 2009 at 19:19

    @johnrj08: There is a debate and I am pretty sure you missed my ENTIRE point of my above post.

    In that post I admitted that a ton of people did not attend the march on Washington. I would never expect the entire United States population to march on Washington. That is crazy talk. So I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish with this number throwing game.

    But the real meat of my post were MY numbers.

    1913 – Women’s Suffrage March, 5,000 people.
    1963 – March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom (MLK), 250,000 people.
    1969 – National Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam, 600,000 people.
    2009 – Tea Party on Washington, 75,000 people.
    But that is not even all of the story. Tea Parties were held all over the United States, not just in Washington DC. Adding it all up some estimate the turnout to be 500,000 (link)

    1913 – As you can see, not a TON of people marched for women’s suffrage… then seven years later in 1920 we gave the right to vote to women. So, did the march not matter? I’d beg to differ.

    1963 – MLK gives the “I Have a Dream Speech” and then a year later in 1964 we got the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and then a year after that Civil Rights Act of 1965. So did the “drop in the bucket” march mean nothing? I beg to differ.

    1969 – Biggest vietnam protest is held. Six years later in 1975 the war is ended. Did this “small” demonstration mean nothing. I beg to differ.

    So as you can see, while these protests/marches were “drops in the bucket” I don’t think that you or anyone can reasonably argue that they “meant nothing.” But, I think I understand your mentaility better than you do. Numbers do mean everything to you. You are a collectivist and it is more important to be a part of a group, specifically a winning group, than it is to do what is right. This is why a million people flooding into Washington to show their dissent is nothing to you. It is nothing to you because your group is perceived to be bigger than their group. This is simply not the case in my opinion. While a million people may have physically attended the march(es), the sentiment goes way beyond the attendees. This can be seen by the above examples that I have provided – not a lot of people marched, but the country had the same sentiment as those who marched, so stuff changed. Do you really disagree with this logic or are you so caught up on numbers that you can’t see the big picture?

    And I didn’t suggest that those sources are biased – I showed you that they were biased. There are plenty of other people out there that have examined each of those sites to show their bias. I am not alone. But, for some reason you think that just by you saying they are unbiased, they are unbiased. Where is it that I am taking Glenn Beck and/or Michelle Malkin as universal truth?

    Again, you provide nothing of substance. You accuse me of multiple things and refuse to answer any of my questions (yes, my above post is plagued with multiple questions for you to answer, which you conveniently missed). Furthermore, you accuse Glenn Beck and Michelle Malkin of “outrageous lies” and “half-truths” but provide… nothing… to support that accusation. Face it sir, if you cannot come here and answer questions… you are a troll.

    As DJ said above, “please provide some examples or go away.”

    Hence, debate is valid. Look forward to seeing your answers.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Quotes:

"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth... For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it." - Patrick Henry

"Politicians and diapers both need to be changed, and for the same reason." - Anonymous

"Right is right, even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it." - William Penn

"Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country" - Hermann Goering

"I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do this I keep on doing." - Romans 7:18-19

"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." - Mark Twain

Categories


%d bloggers like this: