The Third Distortion Star

Just finished filling out paperwork on a job I won't get. Tired. My living room light magically shut itself off. Creepy.

Vices.

As I wrote that the light turned itself back on. Even creepier. I have heard weird things here before. It's getting weirder. Normally I'd say it's because I'm tired, but I know that's a lie made to make myself feel better and sound less insane.

Digress. Back to vices.

I was reading an e-mail a friend sent. She told me she thought my vices were sex and violence, perhaps combined in a safe, fun manner. Can't say she's wrong on that one. I feel strongly about both. She also said she thought I should really, really think about a new job where the stress level is different and I don't dread getting up every morning. "You need a place where it's not Hell on Earth."

I told a co-worker that when I come to work every morning I think I feel the same way the Jews did when they got off the train in Hitler's Germany. Maybe that's what she meant about Hell on Earth.

As usual with these tired posts, my mind wanders.

I hate Oprah. I feel she sells these feel-good messages to people who like to think they have some sort of connection to her but are really nothing more than housewives (or wannabe housewives) who will never get beyond the middle class and lack to the culture to survive in any other setting. She bothers me because she pretends it's something different. It's not. It's trash.

The Yankees should beat the Phillies. I'm from PA, but the Phillies suck. The team's fans are drunken halfwits who long for Tug McGraw to pound his chest again and wonder why more people don't have a Mike Schmidt style mustache.

I wish Lorna from AK Press good luck with her problem. I've missed talking to her, and it was nice to hear her voice today.

A noise just sounded in the bathroom. Sounded like someone bumped into the wall. You gotta be kidding me. If I even wrote half the stuff I heard you would either think I was crazy, lying or a combination of both.

I think only one person has ever really understood me when I said I gotta let a little evil out. The fact that that person got it so spot on should be scary. Very scary. Tick tock, right?

Celebrity Watchdog George Anthony Watson drives some folks up a wall. He's never done that to me, though. He hates whitey with good reason (nobody likes an occupying force), but I respect him. Not sure if he respects me, but I think he tolerates me. He and I have had many deep, interesting, honest discussions. I miss those. Don't get to talk to him much anymore because life likes to get in the way.

Just heard another noise that sounded like someone screwing with the toys I have displayed at the end of the hall.

I'm too tired, too stressed to sleep, but I know I should try. I have to go to work tomorrow and most likely start interviewing right away. I'll see who is out, who is late and won't be surprised by any of it. I will think how Italian fascists got music down right, and how capitalism may have run its course and has set the stage for a new paradigm.

One year ago today Obama was elected. Many people think he's a God. Me? He's just another politician. Chomsky's comments on the man were right on. What? You don't read Chomsky? Go fuck yourself.

I have Cannibal Holocaust on DVD. You can watch it with the animal violence (which is real) turned off. I've never done that, but that creature's screams still chill me to the bone.

I finished my latest draft of the cannibal manuscript. Feels good. Feels damn good. Chomp!

According to a new poll, the most popular sexual position is "woman on top." I could crack a joke or two here, say something about how I feel about that one (I'll save that for the other place), or be as disturbing as I feel I can be, but I won't. These hands ...

I believe I'm going to bed. If I think anymore I'll get stuck here all night. Nietzsche was right about many things. The Nazis warped his words, of course. And when it comes to his views on women he was a product of his time, but you can't help but wonder ... what if he was right? What if his views came not out of disrespect, but a healthy, honest respect that led to fear and anger? If you compare many of those views to the rest of his philosophy, you start to see what he is really saying.

Or maybe I'm just way too tired and going off on unrelated tangents.

Let a little evil out? If you don't get it yet ... tick tock.

My daughter just laughed in her sleep. It's a comforting sound. Makes me feel alive, whole. It's the sound that lets me know that even though everything is turning to shit, that is still the best thing in the whole fucking world.

Now I'm really going to bed because there is no better sound to go to sleep to tonight.

The Charges As Such

It has been said I am an Obama basher. This is, of course, partially true. I'm actually a president basher because I have no respect for the title. I don't respect the office. I don't respect the job. I don't respect the system. And I make no apologies for it.

Maybe in the future we'll have someone who isn't sucking on the corporate tit, who thinks war is the last resort, who keeps their promises, who is interested in actually seeing this country become what it could be. What we've been getting is the exact opposite of what should be. Obama is no different. He's just more articulate than our last jackass, and is slightly more reasonable. He hasn't stopped our illegal wars. He hasn't pulled this country out of an economic nosedive. He hasn't made the corporations a target (though he has targeted them more than any other president in recent history). He hasn't done much of what he promised, and that makes him a lot like every other president who came before him.

You shouldn't be asking why I don't like him or the job. I need to be asking you why you believe in that job and that man. Are you that easily sold? Are you that blindly patriotic? Do you really think that the title alone is worthy of respect? Why?

I'm not out to change anyone's mind. I am out to get people to question what they believe. I feel that's the only way people can progress. Question everything, including me. I can defend myself and my beliefs. Can you?

barack obama

Cash For Clunkers ... Suckers

Cash for Clunkers was, by some accounts, a tremendous success. Cash given for cars with poor mileage so that people could afford more fuel efficient cars? Seems like the perfect plan. And get this – it helped out the ailing auto industry. There was one word you didn't really hear too much about, though.

Subsidy.

Cash for Clunkers was a subsidy for the auto industry, which kind of deserves to be where it's at due to poor decisions made by the goons in charge. (Hyundai, it should be noted, does not seem to be having the same problems as the U.S. car companies.) It was another form of a bailout. That money wasn't given to people to buy bikes, which would have been even more fuel efficient. It was given to buy cars. Expensive cars. Jack your insurance rate up because you're making payments cars.

The auto industry, as to be expected, loved it. (Especially the Japanese manufacturers, who by some accounts are getting most of this money.) Many Americans loved it, too. I'm sure other ailing industries would love to have their customers wooed with payouts, too. Alas, poor Joe Six Pack, you'll get no money to buy your Schlitz.

Where's the Sixty for Sluts program? Sixty bucks to go to a hooker. What about G's for Games, where you get money to buy video games? Singles for Sodas? Money for Movies? Bills for Butts? Cash for Cable? It seems silly when you think about it, but I understand the thought process behind it. Help the auto industry. Clean up the environment ... somewhat. It's all very feel-good, typical liberal bullshit.

Obama has been, and I say this with all seriousness, a colossal disappointment. He spins a great speech, has tremendous plans, but can't seem to pull anything together and make it stick. Democrats paint him as a messiah with a degree and a knack for communication. Republicans paint him as a socialist of the worse sort (which is about the worse they are capable of saying without exposing any racist undertones inherent in the party). The truth is he's just another talking head who says things a lot of people (and other countries) want to hear. When you think about his record and a lot of his rhetoric, however, you start to see that there isn't much difference between him and any other president we've had since I've been alive. He's keeping the military-industrial complex firmly in place. He speaks of fixing healthcare. He values education. He wants to help the poor. About the only notable thing he's really done to set himself apart from his peers is to say that his administration will leave the medicinal marijuana operations alone. When it comes down to it, he's a more politically correct Clinton, a more articulate Baby Bush, a less secretive Father Bush, a better educated Reagan, and a more effective Carter. I fear that when he leaves office after his second term (and I think that we will have him for two terms) his greatest contribution to American history is that he will be the first black president ... and nothing else.

Cash for Clunkers is a bail-out like when the Baby Bush administration hooked up Haliburton. Yeah, one is less evil, but it's still capitalism at its finest. When social services are getting cut in almost all the states, pumping money into GM and Ford's coffers seems a little distasteful.

This is his standard MO. Sell a good plan and people seem to forget what it is they are buying. I think he's a better choice than some and not as good as others, and I like that he values intelligence and science, but I temper that with a realistic view of what he really is. He's the gatekeeper of the status quo. He may be better at keeping the rabble in line without the use of force, but make no mistake, he's still keeping us in line.

God, if only he did half of what he people think he's capable of we'd all be a lot better off. Unfortunately, he's part of a corrupt system, which ultimately limits his effectiveness. Cash for Clunkers may do exactly what he wants it to, and that's the problem.


barack obama
cash for clunkers

A Letter To Obama

Mr. President,

You've taken some heat lately for a handshake, a ritual done throughout the civilized world, with Chavez, a man whom many in this country think is another incarnation of Satan. Oddly enough, you haven't taken so much heat over not going after torturers and the men who gave them their orders, which includes most of the Bush administration.

How the hell are you going to discipline your girls when they hit the rebellious years? "But Dad, I'm just a half hour late. Bush caused people to die and he gets off scott-free while I lose use of the car for a month? How is that fair?" She's right.

You can't say torture is bad and then not do anything about it. You can't tell other countries that America is somehow different now under your regime, but not go after the people who started an illegal war. Bush and his people are war criminals by even the loosest of definitions. War criminals need to be tried for their crimes. You aren't even suggesting that. What kind of message does that send? Business as usual. Sure, you may not be ordering torture, but there's nothing stopping Cheney from serving in some future administration. You could help change that, but you aren't.

The men who actually did the torturing of hostages (and that's what a lot of them were)? They were just "following orders." Brilliant.

And people are upset about a handshake. A handshake! How is Chavez worse than Bush? Because Bush is a monster, but he's our monster? Chavez is a foreign monster? Chavez is so evil, he gave Obama a book! I know that the Fox demographic, which consists mainly of beer-swilling pedophiles, thinks books are learning tools and are therefore instruments of the devil, but come on. Obama likes to read. (Again, for the Fox crowd, reading is something you do with books.)

Obama, you, like Clinton and like Bush in many respects, take heat for all the wrong things. (Bush didn't take enough heat for his policies and actions, but the did get more than enough criticism for his vocabulary.) You need to do the right thing and go after our criminals, the ones still walking free in America. Just make sure you don't shake Bush's hand. You've already touched one too many "monsters" this month.

Leno Loves Obama

You can't miss the fact that Obama made "history" by appearing on "The Tonight Show." Why this is news or history is beyond me. No sitting president has ever appeared on "Attack of the Show," either. Who the fuck cares?

Leno, while not a political analyst, did ask a great question in regard to the financial destruction this country has faced. "Shouldn't someone go to jail?"

Yes. Lots of people.

Most of the Bush administration. A whole lot of CEOs and CFOs. Various politicians both in and out of office. Problem is, they won't go. Unfortunately, more attention is being paid to the president's comments about bowling and the Special Olympics.

Jesus, there's the problem with this country in a nutshell.

People should be in jail, but we don't discuss that in any serious manner. We don't debate it in the mass media on any level that matters. But the administration is forced to offer an apology on a remark that speaks for itself, but there is no press release regarding imprisonment. The news covers this apology with all the seriousness afforded to 9/11. The prison issue is passed over with a mere mention.

Bush should be in prison. Cheney should be in prison. Obama should be pushing to put them there. America should be pushing to put them there. And the rest should follow.

I make no apologies for my anarchist views. I believe in holding people responsible for their actions. I don't believe in prisons and jails, but as a society we seem to think this is okay, so I am asking society to follow through with its ideals and values. If some guy robbed a bank, and a jury found him guilty, he would go to jail. Why isn't America demanding the same thing of its political and business leaders? I don't think I'm being radical here. I think I'm being fair. If I ripped off people, if I conducted a home invasion (the mini version of Iraq), I'd be in jail. I'd be behind bars trading jokes for smokes.

Some mother fuckers need to be held responsible for this mess the country is in. No self-respecting Republican can disagree, either, since personal responsibility is such a big issue to them. (I often say that morals and values are a matter of convenience. I think the last eight years have proven this.)

When Americans are losing their homes at an alarming rate, when jobs bleed out like a slaughtered pig, when soldiers are fighting a war based on lies ... people need to be held responsible. You can't gloss over it and expect to maintain any sense of respect. You just can't.

If the justice system won't hold these people responsible, the people should. These people shop. They go out to eat. They go out on the town. People know who they are. Start to shame them. Start to shun them. Throw shoes. Demand they turn themselves in. Mock them. Make them feel like the scum they are.

If the justice system won't do it, the people need to. If they don't, it will happen again ... and they'll deserve it.

Obama Mania

There is little in the way of Obama coverage that surprises me. I don't know when I will get around to posting this (I'm writing it while camped out on the couch battling depression), but as of this draft it is 1/22/09. He's been in control for all of two days, so I wonder how much of what I write will hold up when this is actually posted.

I've covered the nomination of Obama in previous posts. I felt as if it had an almost fascistic air to it, and definitely reeked of propaganda. Even some of my friends who are Obama supporters are beginning to find the continuing coverage a little ... creepy. He's got the whole world in his hands, indeed.

Photos of the president adjusting his tie are described as “remarkable.” Pundits are saying he has changed the way black and white people are dealing with each other. Any moment I expect CNN to describe him as “the next Jesus.” Why is this? What is the fascination? I can only think of two things. History and Bush.

I think many journalists got so caught up in Obama-fever that they really couldn't criticize the man ... especially when other journalists were happily describing him as our next “ruler.” Sure, these various medias are trying to keep a sense of fairness, but look at NBC. That network has been selling an Obama DVD, with commercials for it during the nightly news. CNN makes the prideful boast that it is keeping the new administration honest, but the next commercial is for a CNN election day t-shirt (pro Obama). Am I the only one who finds irony here? It's kind of right on the nose. It's our first black president. Fine. We all can understand the historical impact of that (and that is nothing to be dismissed out of hand), but does that mean he and his administration are above serious examination and criticism? I don't think so, but it seems that Anderson Cooper does.

And then there's Bush. After close to a decade of that bumbling idiot's practically suicidal administration doing its best to run this country into the ground, Obama does seem like the Second Coming personified. He's everything Bush was not. Articulate. Intelligent. Well liked by people of his own country and leaders of other countries. Charming. Unfortunately, there are similarities, too. Both are shrewd men who aren't above throwing their friends to the lions (Obama even moreso), and both picked cabinets that are more than a little suspect. You won't find many in the mainstream media pointing this out.

McCain has become a footnote. Truth be told, however, I trusted him more. I wouldn't vote for him (my political leanings mean I don't really vote for leaders), but I did believe his words over Obama's. (Though toward the end of the campaign it was obvious McCain was listening to all the wrong people.) McCain may have been a bit of a racist, a hawk, and eventually easily manipulated, but he also spoke his mind for the most part. I'd rather hear things I don't agree with as opposed to rhetoric meant to draw a cheer and little in the way of thought.

The mainstream media truly dropped the ball when it came to the Bush years. It bought the lies and refused to ask the tough questions. And that is from a media that seemed to seriously dislike the man. When it comes to a media darling, does anyone seriously expect the mainstream media to deal with him with anything resembling tough questions? No. Like the feminists remaining quiet during Clinton's cigar fucking, the mainstream media will ignore that which takes more than a sound bite.

As I finish this up, I am watching Anderson Cooper's CNN show. Photos from the inauguration day are being described as “remarkable,” “incredible” and are compared to the footage of the plane that went down in the water. (One of those “incredible” pictures shows the First Lady putting a shoe on her daughter. I mean, that really is pretty damn fucking cool when you think about it. How many other parents do things like that? Not many, that's for sure.) Yeah, CNN can be trusted all right. It can be trusted not to delve into anything resembling truth (something that has been a problem for the network ever since it fired those journalists for doing their job). It can be trusted to not ask the tough questions regardless of what its commercials assure us. This is the network that shows footage of Obama ordering food on Air Force and describes it as “extraordinary.”

We have lost all sense of scope in this Obama-mania. Photos of the president with his eyes closed are now given the same consideration as photos of new galaxies forming. A dinner order is handled with the same seriousness as Hurricane Katrina. The “tough” questions asked are like this one, which was heard on CNN, “Can the president exercise on board [Air Force One]?” Granted, this was some from National Geographic special, but CNN ran it several times as news.

Those really are some tough questions. Somewhere in there I must have missed the one about why Obama broke his campaign contribution promise. Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but when a guy who wants to be president breaks a promise that was one of the backbones of his campaign, I think that says something about character. But what do I know?

So let's compare this, written on 1/22/09, compared to the day you are reading it. Have my words held up? Is he still being treated like a god, or has the media and the rest of America come to its senses? I think I know ... but I hope I'm wrong.

Where There Is Hope ...

I missed Obama taking the oath. I was busy working. My daughter got to see it, and was thrilled by it. She's four, and I thought that was pretty neat. She and I watched the news coverage up until the moment I had to leave for work. She took the opportunity to tell me that people sometimes treat people with brown skin badly, and that there is no real reason for that because it shouldn't matter what color skin you have.

I'm often proud of her. She's a smart kid. Wise beyond the four years she's spent on this planet. I was very proud of her then. She wanted to be part of history. I didn't spoil it by talking about my views. She knows them. This was her moment to take in something that she knew was special.

A lot of other people felt the same way.

My feelings on presidents, including this one, are well known. Seeing all those people that excited about politics, change, and the sense of history made me smile, though. Even if they forget about things like neoliberalism, NAFTA, Haliburton and so on tomorrow, today they were aware that politics could be more than just something you read about. It could be (and is) something you actively participate in. Granted, all they were doing was showing up, but in this country, that actually means something.

The news was full of the usual nonsense. Who made the First Lady's dress? Obama likes Spider-Man comic books. What kind of dog should they get? How can they make life normal for the kids? Fluff is easier to digest. We all know that. The mainstream media lost any sense of newsworthiness once their corporate owners started to get smarter.

But today that was okay. Those streets were packed. People were crying. They were stopping what they were doing. They were in awe. They were watching history unfold, and they were proud. If just ten percent of them become more politically aware (even if they don't agree with me on the issues -- and they won't), then that will be better for us all. An informed citizen is a dangerous citizen, and a dangerous citizen is my kind of people.

Where there is hope, there is fire. The advocates of cannibalistic capitalism, racism, anti-intellectualism, jingoism and hegemony should take note. The people watching that oath, the ones who took off work, the ones with tears in their eyes, they are the ones who believe that one word on Shepard's poster.

Hope.

At some point it may strike them that not only is the status quo corrupt, but that they can change it. It may suddenly make sense to them why some people riot when cops shoot unarmed men in the back. It may make them want to pick up a brick, or write a letter, or call a radio show, or vote outside the party lines. Obama's rhetoric, as inspirational as it may seem to be, may actually lead to his undoing ... and the undoing of this whole cancer-ridden system.

If all those people in the streets today said "no more," they could not be stoppped.

Here's to hope ...

Obama is Coming ... The Werewolves Are Here!

It's just days away ... history. Racists everywhere are downing Schlitz and lamenting the death of America. Liberals look to their copy of the "Hope" propaganda poster (for shame, Sheppard) and pray that all will be different.

Don't misunderstand me. I realize the importance of Obama's presidency, and I know what it will do for our image throughout the world. At this point, however, even electing Jack from Jack in the Box would help our world standing. I don't think, however, that much will change here in America.

As I write this, I am listening to the "Free the West Memphis 3" benefit CD. We should all know the story. Three teens charged with murder by a jury that couldn't tell its collective ass from a hole in the ground in a state where lynching is just something to do on a Sunday. It seems that the three are innocent, but the South was never very good at letting facts get in the way. The music community, among others, have rallied to the men's defense. People still think, however, that if you wear black you worship the devil. (Priest and Raiders fans excluded, of course.)

And that's why I don't think things will change with Obama.

Our stupidity is deeply rooted in a history of hypocritical morals and a superior sense of self. That sort of thing can't be overcome with grand speeches and basketball courts. It takes the equivalent of a cultural inferno to wipe that off the map. Hell, there are still people out there who seriously think black and white people shouldn't marry each other. Obama is not going to change any minds. He'll be a "credit" to his "race," that's for sure, but let's face it -- many people will never accept the fact that a black man holds the highest office in the land.

The flip side of all this is that he is still part of the status quo. He's a slimy politician who got to where he is by being shrewd (with a dose of backstabbing). You can say Baby Bush stole the election the first time around, but Obama manipulated this one from day one. He is politics as usual, and his cabinet proves it.

But isn't a little better better than no better at all?

I've never been one to believe in voting for the lesser of two evils. I can't give in like that. I can say this, though. Obama was the less scary of the two men if only for foreign policy. I'll grant him that. And the fact that he scares certain segments of the public makes me giggle. But hope? I have none. He didn't come out of left field to wow the public. He trapped people and set the stage for the masses several years ago with an incredible speech at the Democratic Convention ... one that assured he'd be looked at by the left and middle.

Kudos to you, Obama. Where Baby Bush is as subtle as a hand grenade, you proved you are as slick as poison in the well.

Oh, and unless the economy really tanks, I think you have fooled the public well enough to enjoy another four years.

You know who our first black president should have been? One who would have really stirred shit up? Huey P. Newton. Still think Obama is that progressive? I didn't think so.

Respect?

Today I was told I was disrespectful to the president. Not only was I disrespectful, but so was the journalist who tossed his shoes at him. The person who told me this wasn't too suprised I was being "a pill," but she was upset that "some foreign guy" would do such a thing.

Granted, the president declared war on the "foreign" guy's country, but that shouldn't matter. Even victims of invaders should show some respect. All the president did was send in troops who shoot first, ask questions later. He didn't throw his damn shoes at anyone. The nerve!

I always thought presidents were fair targets, no pun intended. They need to be questioned, mocked and every once in a while get a shoe in the face. When a president, such as Bush, is in charge of a country that has gone so deep into the shitter and has totally lost the respect of the world, you would think he would be thankful it was just a shoe or two. Let's not mince words, either. The economy and the country's credibility is actually small potatoes compared to Bush's other transgressions. He's a war criminal. At the very least, prison should be in his future ... along with several of his cabinet members. But that will never happen. If shoes are disrespectful, prison is off the fucking radar.

The United States government has a long history of playing the hypocrite, bully, and might is right card. If the US or one of its client states does it, it's legal and morally sound. If a country the US doesn't happen to agree with does the same action, it's a crime. This, of course, never even makes it into polite discussion. This, of course, is never even mentioned by those who think I'm disrespectful.

Bush is not the only bad president we've ever had. Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and many of the presidents (if not all) before them have done some truly horrible things. I can't think of a single president who doesn't have some blood on his hands. And the past few of them have also qualified as war criminals.

So, yes, Virginia, I am disrespectful. So are a bunch of other people ... and they should be. Sometimes, when you're morally outraged, you have to do act. You have to make a stand. If throwing shoes at a president who lied to the world in order to wage an illegal war on a country that had already been crippled by sanctions is your solution to the problem, then I say toss away. If throwing shoes is your response to a president who has only been reactive to nearly every single major problem that has hit his own country (even when he had plenty of warning on the issues such as the economy and Hurrican Katrina), then start practicing your aim.

Be disrespectful America, and don't let Obama off any easier.

Some of Them Looking Just Like You

Just a quick thought. How can you be a maverick or an icon for change if you are still wearing a three-piece suit? Just curious. Does anyone believe the presidential candidates when they say such things? (McCain and his trophy VP pick use the word "maverick" so much that you would think someone needs to change their batteries.)

As readers know, I don't like either of the fools, but I wonder how many fools the fools are fooling. Based on the excitement of my friends, most of whom support Obama, quite a few.

Change and the rugged individualism of being a "maverick" can be good things, but when they are thrown around by members of the establishment who haven't really done all that much to separate themselves from their peers, they mean very little. I know McCain has taken some unpopular stands within his own party, but I don't see him taking any truly innovative stands. The same holds true with Obama.

Mavericks? Agents of change? Nope. Just the standard talking heads feeding America what they think it wants to hear ... and so far they have been right.

The Race to (Mis)Lead

If you've been paying attention, you know the race for the next president of the United States is in full swing. Of all the candidates who threw their hats into the ring, the mass media only pays any attention to two of them now. You know their names. I don't need to rehash.

Some people claim the Democrat is humanity's salvation. Others claim the Republican is the only one who can keep this country on course. And the mass media acknowledges no other parties.

Many of my friends believe one will be better than the other. Perhaps it's due to a stance on the war. Perhaps it has to do with civil rights. The economy. Age. Experience. Wisdom. Hope. My friends, like most of the population, have chosen sides. They are ready to fight for their candidate. The better man must win.

I don't see two different people or two different parties. I see two piles of the same shit. I don't want to step in either, and while I realize one pile may have some slight differences, it all comes from the same source. The status quo will be protected.

Victory will be kind to one of the two candidates. Things may inadvertently get better for the country, but our reckless capitalistic ways will not change. Our moral arrogance will remain firmly in place. We may come out looking better, but you can only put so much make-up on a tumor, and our cancer is at the boiling point.

When I cast my vote, it will be "no confidence." I can't go any other way and still look at myself in the mirror in the morning. I can't vote for anyone who will keep the same lies in place, who will take the same money from the same sources, who will say one thing and cast a vote that goes the other way. I can't and won't. An old anarchist motto is "Only sheep need a leader." I firmly believe that. I'm just shocked that with the way the world is, we have so many people still willing to say, "Baaaa!"