Printable View
Dopple,
How many times have you been called a Retard in your life? 10-20 thousand?
And a fag? 5-10 thousand?
And a Nigger? 0?
If you don't see the difference between Strom Thurmond/Trent Lott's and Rahm Emanual's "verbal transgressions" then I guess maybe it was more like 30-40 thousand.
Schmoj,
I guess you must run with a very different crowd than I do based on your response. Retard? Fag? Folks didn't use that sort of language and remain healthy where I live.
Did you even know what Lott said? From your response I doubt it. FYI living in the south I have been called a nigger even though I am white. Also you should have noticed black folks call each other nigger with wild abandon yet if someone else uses the word they are racist.
My point in the prior post is the Republican's tend to do the "right thing" and resign while the Democrats / Liberals would not know the "right thing" if it bit them in the ass - which IMHO is going to happen in November this year.
I also think the whole thing is over blown but the Liberals / Democrats are great at dishing it out but pretty thin skinned when it comes to taking it.
Exit soapbox stage right!
Doppel, people aren't going to resign (or fire someone) just because someone from the other political party thinks they should.
Wild Walleye, you really do put the 'Wild' in your name.
Some of your stuff is so far out it cannot be taken seriously. But you do it so often it starts becoming difficult to take you seriously. I like your intellectual arguments (honest) but they are so frequently peppered with wild statements that I don't know what to make of it.
[QUOTE=Wild Walleye]He believes that capitalism is inherently evil [/QUOTE]Absurd. Obama like Dems in general recognize the shortcomings of capitalism, and want to address them while still maintaining a largely capitalistic system.
[QUOTE]He longs to seize the private property of individual citizens [/QUOTE]GM was a special situation. He has said and done little to suggest this is what he thinks about every day.
[QUOTE]The problem here is that while the right holds its own to certain standards, there are no standards for the left.[/QUOTE]Rather one-sided don't you think?
[QUOTE]Opposition to Obama's candidacy and opposing anything Obama proposes is racist [/QUOTE]Never heard anybody suggest that until now.
[QUOTE]His intended swan song is to bankrupt the US[/QUOTE]Oh boy.
Yes, I believe I will now have to address you by your first name.
Folks. Why can't we all get along.
When it comes to blacks, African Americans, coloreds, Negros, or what ever.
The truth be told, if you meet someone from above and their nasty mother fucker with no redeeming value as a human being (I. E rappers, thugs, gang bangers) the're a NIGGER in my book.
But if their civilized and willing to assimilate and contribute to society and leave the race issue in the past, then their cool. Using the word NIGGER is a racist comment and reflects badly on you as a person.
Bottom line:
The word NIGGER is fitting and appropriate in my opinion to reflect the distain society should have for people who are undermining spciety and trying to game the system, regardless of color.
[blue]Greetings Everyone,.
I am aware that the vast majority of references to racial issues are legitimate. However, past discussions in the Forum has repeatedly demonstrated that the subject simply cannot be discussed intelligently, in any form or for any reason, without being misinterpreted and without starting flame wars.
Please do not engage in discussions about race or racism in the Forum. Please read the Forum's Posting Guidelines for further information.
Thanks,.
Jackson[/blue]
Feel free to take issue with any of the facts or opinions that I have stated. You may label me any way you like, cast dispersions, what have you. As you have hopefully noticed, I enjoy deploying the razor tongue and being part armadillo, I have thick skin. However, your rush to dismiss me as a right wing kook is an obvious ploy to try to discredit anything I say, a tactic seen over and over again.
Scmoj, welcome back. The attached photo is for you.
My personal opinion, formed within my own tiny brain, is that Obama is bad for the nation, its citizens and its founding principles. I prefer not to wait until the country is broken and on its knees to take issue with 'leadership' that promises to destroy what has made this nation great. If you cannot or chose not to see the facts, you will need to rely on others to protect your rights for you.
If you were screaming about Bush, you should be howling about Obama. His words and deeds speak volumes for his disregard for the rule of law, specifically the Constitution (not that he, as a 'Constitutional Expert' should be expected to be able to discern between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution) The left seems to think that he is so brilliant and special that we should allow him to be untethered from the constraints of the Constitution so that he can fix what is wrong with the country. Further, because he is do divine and the Democrats so enlightened, we should weaken checks and balances so that they don't get in the way either. Silly supreme court justices making decisions he doesn't like (and clearly doesn't understand) While we are at it, why don't we reduce the number of votes needed for a super majority in the Senate (you might be surprised to know that it wasn't always 3/5s (used to take 2/3s) to make a super majority) so the pesky minority doesn't get in the way?
Look, I am certain Obama is much smarter than all of the founding fathers combined, so let's just make him Supreme Ruler.
You dismiss out of hand the very real example of what happened in the case of GM.
[QUOTE=Esten]GM was a special situation. He has said and done little to suggest this is what he thinks about every day.[/QUOTE]Obama: "Because of the terrible mess I inherited from George W. Bush (who by the way is really Beelzebub) I am going to ignore and willingly contravene the Constitution and take these assets (GM) from their legal owners (bondholders in top UCC position (you probably don't know or care what that means) and give them to the unions (who were instrumental in getting me this gig) Just this one time. OK, just twice because I am going to do it with Chrysler, too." "Other than that, I am A-O-K with that Constitution thingy."
Suspending provisions of the Constitution is no small matter that can be dismissed as a special situation. Lincoln suspended habeus-corpus in 1862 and that is a major moment in US history. This is a slippery slope. Next stop, tracking your every move via your cell phone.
Exhibit #1: Case 08-4227 "In the Matter of the Application of the United States of America For An Order Directing A Provider of Electronic Communication Service To Disclose Records to the Government United States of America" The appellant in that case is none other than the Obama administration, which "has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts. U. S. Department of Justice lawyers say that "a customer's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records" that show where a mobile device placed and received calls."
I am sure you were all over Bush for 'warrantless wiretapping' (which was nothing of the sort and is an activity currently being used by the Obama Administration.
Esten,
Perhaps you could explain that to Trent Lott et al.
[QUOTE=Doppelganger]Perhaps you could explain that to Trent Lott et al.[/QUOTE]That's hilarious. Notice how you (and some Republicans) make the comparison with Lott as the entire basis of your position. Rather than judge what Reid said on its own.
I'm not going to debate what they said, it would bore me to tears. I think what they said was different, though neither warranting a resignation. Though Lott's statement was a bit on the edge. Black leaders did not have an issue with Reid's statement. Please note the use of the word 'just' in my prior post.
Esten,
Trent Lott is only one of several Republicans which could be named. That aside, based on your postings - it seems you are permitted to make grand pronouncements on your beliefs but no one else is afforded this "privilege" if they disagree with you.
Is this a case of either "Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story" or "Don't confuse me with the facts"?
By the way – I'm an independent not a Republican.
Because I never said that. We are all entitled to post and respond to what we wish to.
[QUOTE=Esten]Black leaders did not have an issue with Reid's statement. [/QUOTE]This is not critical of Esten's statement.
Just pointing out that feigned outrage is overflowing when a republican says something that is inappropriate or can be misconstrued, however, when the source is a protected liberal, the aggrieved constituency is silent, or at least the anointed leaders (I. E. Those I nlock-step with the left) speaking for them (or more accurately claiming to speak for them) are notoriously absent.
I don't think that either Lott or Reid should be drummed out of office for their comments. Let the voters decide. That said, this is a blood sport and language is one of the avenues of attack favored by the left, therefore, the right cannot shy away from demanding a two-way street on this (although they will never get it)
[QUOTE=Sidney]Just saw where the U. S. Govt. Is spending $400,000 to pay for Gay men to troll Gay Bars in Arg. To study their frequency of having sex after drinking alcohol.[/QUOTE]I bet it's part of their "Stimulus Plan".
ROTFLMAF!
Jackson
[QUOTE=Esten]Though Lott's statement was a bit on the edge. Black leaders did not have an issue with Reid's statement. Please note the use of the word 'just' in my prior post.[/QUOTE]Esten:
How can you take Palin to task for giving Limbaugh a pass but not do the same for the self-appointed "black leaders" who gave Reid a pass? It's the exact same issue. Each chooses not to feign offense when members of their own constituency utter supposedly off-color remarks.
Candidly, what Reid said is objectively more offensive than anything Limbaugh and especially Lott said.
The idea that black leaders didn't have an issue with what Reid said is the point: They've got a double standard. If they want to insist that Lott resign, they darn well better stand on the same principles with Harry Reid. The fact that they didn't just shows that they are obvious hypocrites. And, yes, I would paint Palin with that same brush.
[QUOTE=Sidney]Did the Obomination fund the study?
Hey Sid,
Just saw where the U. S. Govt. Is spending $400,000 to pay for Gay men to troll Gay Bars in Arg. To study their frequency of having sex after drinking alcohol.[/QUOTE]I'm afraid this $400,000 study funded by the National Institutes of Health will not in the end result in scientific data that will demonstrate why some gay men engage in high risk behaviors that could result in the acquiring or transmitting of the virus that causes AIDS.
By research standards this is a small study. Only $275,000 will be used for direct costs (to actually conduct the study in the field) and $125,000 (about 45% for doing little) is for indirect costs (this will go to the New York Psychiatric Hospital Institute that is the recipient of the grant)
I can't imagine they will have a sufficient large pool of subjects interviewed and observed such that they can conduct a power analysis of the raw data. In the end they will end up with wording such as: "Gay men under the influence of licit / illicit intoxicants will participate in high risk sex in the presence of an environment that presents highly eroticized stimuli." By the way, you can replace gay men with heterosexual men and you would end up with the same results.
This is what we see and hear about the US economy in Australia. I just thought I'd pass it on for comment.
[url]http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Cloud-over-US-retail-pd20100223-2WRJQ?OpenDocument&src=kgb[/url]
One of the more sobering pieces of US economic data came out last week when retail giant Wal-Mart released its fourth quarter results.
The world's largest retailer saw its same-store sales drop 1.7 per cent in the final three months of 2009, the first decline in its history.
Wal-Mart boss, Mike Duke, was wary about the immediate outlook, commenting that the economy remained "challenged" for many of the stores' customers around the world, and that US sales in the first quarter of 2010 were likely to be "difficult".
Now, Wal-Mart picks up about $1 of every $10 spent at stores in America, so signs that its sales are flagging suggest the US consumer is in trouble.
And that's bad news for the US economy, because the US consumer accounts for more than 70 per cent of gross domestic product.
US consumers are in bad shape for two reasons. In the first place, they've got too much mortgage and credit card debt. Consumers built up heavy debt loads over the past decade, lured by easy credit conditions and low interest rates. As a result, they're now saddled with an estimated $4 trillion of debt that they have to progressively work off.
But an even more pressing problem is the poor state of the US labour market. Because without jobs, consumers can't spend.
The US unemployment rate edged down to 9.7 per cent in January, but many argue that this figure significantly understates the size of problems in the jobs markets.
That's because the figures only count those people who have been unemployed for 15 weeks or longer, and are actively looking for work. In contrast, the broader measures which include discouraged workers currently stands at a massive 16.5 per cent.
What's more, the dismal jobs market over the past two years has prompted a large number of people to decide to permanently quit the labour market.
It's estimated that if the labour force participation rate had stayed at its 2000 levels, the official US unemployment rate would be closer to 13 per cent.
There's also evidence that employers are responding to the uncertain economic conditions by hiring part-time, rather than full-time workers. This has led to a 3 per cent drop in the number of people working full-time.
The weak state of the US jobs market has led to an increased dependence on the government benefit payments. A staggering 20 per cent of personal income in the United States now comes from transfer payments, which is money handed over by the government.
It's difficult to see how the US is going to rectify its unemployment problem, given that so many of the big employers – such as state and local governments, and the construction, retailing and finance sectors – are facing huge stresses.
There are tentative signs that US factories are hiring more staff, but this is unlikely to be sufficient to compensate for the likely job cuts in other areas.
As David Rosenberg, chief economist and strategist at Gluskin Sheff notes, manufacturing only employs 11.5 million workers in the United States, or about 9 per cent of the workforce.
Even a 5 per cent pick up in hiring in the manufacturing sector would only generate slightly more than 500,000 new jobs.
In contrast, there are 7.7 million people working in the financial services sector – which is facing huge downsizing pressures.
The retail sector employs 14.4 million people, but this sector is under stress due to lower sales and pressure on margins.
Another 20 million people work for US state and local governments, but many of these institutions are grappling with budgetary problems.
And there are 5.7 million people working in the embattled construction industry.
As Rosenberg notes, "The bottom line is that any improvement we are going to see in that 11.5 million manufacturing workforce is going to have to be pretty impressive in order to cushion the blow from what is likely to be downsizing in the combined 48 million workforce in the lower levels of government and the retail, financial and construction sectors."
The combination of hefty debt burdens and weak employment conditions means that US consumers are not likely to start spending any time soon.
In fact, many are worried that bankruptcies are set to rise as consumers find their income is not enough to meet the interest payments on their debt.
[QUOTE=Sidney]Ford + 43%! Your Obomination's government ''working for you''![/QUOTE]Like pre-embargo cuban cigars. Collectors' items.
Sidney,
Obviously we don't share the same political views and I respect that but your constant blaming of Obama for GM's capitulation is so off base that I just don't understand why you keep bringing it up. GM is a failure and a loser because of incompetent management and engineers who design shitty cars that the consumer does not want. GM and Chrysler had no hope long before Obama even considered running for office. Ford, which did not go bankrupt, showed a $1 billion + profit in Q4 2009 and just reported a 40%+ sales increase from February 2009. Why is Ford successful? Good management and excellent engineers who design quality cars that can compete with the best in the world. Stop blaming the government for destroying your beloved GM when you know that they are a failure only from their own incompetence.
Suerte,
Rock Harders
[QUOTE=Rock Harders]Sidney-
Obviously we don't share the same political views and I respect that but your constant blaming of Obama for GM's capitulation is so off base that I just don't understand why you keep bringing it up. GM is a failure and a loser because of incompetent management and engineers who design shitty cars that the consumer does not want. GM and Chrysler had not hope long before Obama even considered running for office. Ford, which did not go bankrupt, showed a $1 billion + profit in Q4 2009 and just reported a 40%+ sales increase from February 2009. Why is Ford successful? Good management and excellent engineers who design quality cars that can compete with the best in the world. Stop blaming the government for destroying your beloved GM when you know that they are a failure only from their own incompetence.
Suerte,
Rock Harders[/QUOTE]And it's Harders for the win. Again. Sidney, you just got served.
There is a deep divide between those who see "government is the solution" and those who see "government is the problem". Whichever side you take, you're going to see the other side's arguments as "obviously flawed" and your own viewpoint as "unassailable."
I find myself straddling that divide: There are functions of "societal survival" that are best performed by government - for instance, the justice system, or "the national defense" - but there are other functions that are [I]worst[/i] done by government, where "the public interest" is better served by the marketplace.
The problem I see in the USA's auto industry isn't "Ford vs GM" - it's [u]government intervention[/u] into industry, into commerce, into the marketplace. The USA's current government (executive and legislative branches) appear, to me, "interventionist" to a degree that makes FDR look like an enlightened libertarian.
I don't like this situation, not at all, but I recognize that none of my arguments will make sense to those who see government intervention as the solution to society's problems.
Not sure what the local papers are saying (for two reasons, my Spanish sucks and I am not in Bs As) about the second major international policy f-up in the last week or so.
A stop in Argentina was not on Hilary's itinerary. I suspect that Bill was on board and wanted some Bs As 'strange.' Whatever the reason, her visit to Bs As is appalling. I am not opining on any issue related to the sovereignty of Falklands, rather one of US foreign policy. Last I checked, Great Britain was an ally of ours--not just an ally, perhaps our best and most important ally.
There was no driving reason for the US to stick its nose into the issue, especially in a manner that allies us with Hugo Chavez and puts us in opposition to one of our most important allies. What has Christina done for the US?
I am pretty sure that the attached picture includes two of the most unattractive women ever posted to this forum. All that plastic surgery would have been better spent on giving hot young women bigger breasts.
Christina looks like she is saying "yes, those buck teeth really are unfortunate. Why don't you call my private dentist and see if he can't fix them?" Hilary can't hear a thing. She's guffawing (just like Bill would) grabbing her shoulder and thinking "hmm, your kinda toned for a woman of your vintage. I've never eaten penguin before."
[QUOTE]Christina looks like she is saying "yes, those buck teeth really are unfortunate. Why don't you call my private dentist and see if he can't fix them?" Hilary can't hear a thing. She's guffawing (just like Bill would) grabbing her shoulder and thinking "hmm, your kinda toned for a woman of your vintage. I've never eaten penguin before."[/QUOTE]You are killing me dude. F*cking Hillarious!
Happy Mongering All.
Toymann
The issue of the "Malvinas" is really just one of internal Argentina politics. Oh, sure they have some sort of formal protest or resolution in the UN, but it's really only something that Argentinians even know about.
Here is a little on the latest "saber" rattling:
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8518982.stm[/url]
The key quote being:
"It's more of the same and we come to expect it when Argentina's government are experiencing difficulties at home. We're a very convenient distraction."
Walleye, if you were here and could read Spanish, you would see more and more in the coming weeks. Early April is "Malvinas Day" (Translation: Falkland Islands day) Each year, they drag out the veterans and children of veterans and let them tell their tearful stories on Cronica and C5N. Culminating in getting everyone riled up in a nationalistic fervor. I think there is a parade. Then it's forgotten about for 10.5 months.
Leaked documents reveal GOP plan to use scare tactics to raise money.
news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1217
[QUOTE=Esten]Leaked documents reveal GOP plan to use scare tactics to raise money.
news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1217[/QUOTE]How can anything be leaked if it is presented to a sizable audience?
As an aside, "scare tactics" infers that a sense of fear is being inappropriately inserted into something that no one should fear. How can it be "scare tactics" if the subject is something that everyone should fear?
[QUOTE=Wild Walleye]How can anything be leaked if it is presented to a sizable audience?
As an aside, "scare tactics" infers that a sense of fear is being inappropriately inserted into something that no one should fear. How can it be "scare tactics" if the subject is something that everyone should fear?[/QUOTE]I've got to agree with you there. This is just one more of the many examples of the media's pronounced left-wing bias. The writer inserted "scare tactics" for the notion that the GOP is going to address people's fears. Essentially telling that their fears are real. The leap from 'playing to people's fears' to 'scare tactics' is typical left-wing media hyperbole.
Although this article discussed it, the most telling thing is the stark absence of similar articles about the Democrats while George Bush was in office. He and Cheney were held up as 'evil incarnate' by so many in the Democratic party, yet those same tactics got a pass from the media. Indeed, if anything, the media just threw gasoline on the flames. It was the same when Reagan was in office. He was portrayed as a mentally-challenged-religious-zealot-war-monger, and the left wing media was complicit in the affair the entire way. It was only after he left office. When the left was forced to acknowledge Reagan's obvious successes. That the media finally gave the guy a modicum of credit.
Chalk this story up to 4th Branch bias. It's pure hogwash.
The only thing was that they were around words like "terrorist." We were also being taught that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."
Anyhow, what should scare everyone is the slight of hand going on with health care. The talk about reconciliation is bogus.
Reconciliation is being sold to the public as some deliberative machination that will make this colossal cock-up into something wonderful. Gullible and dishonest Dems in the house who don't like the bill that the Senate passed will attempt to use this as cover but it is nothing. There is nothing to be reconciled without a bill passed by both Houses. A bill passed by both houses goes somewhere else (not back to the Senate for reconciliation)
The only way to get to reconciliation is for the House to pass the Senate bill and then reconcile it. Funny thing is, that if the House passes the Senate bill, it then goes to the President's desk where Obama will sign it and it will become law. There is absolutely no requirement that there be any reconciliation once it becomes law.
If the House passes the Senate bill, we have Obamacare, end of story.
Wild, It was leaked because it wasn't intended to be seen by the general public. The direct references to fear and childish cartoons of top Dems in a fundraising document aren't likely to impress voters. The RNC chairman was on FOX saying it was unfortunate and inappropriate. Even the reporter said it didn't look good and asked if someone would get fired.
The FOX video: GOP's Steele in damage control mode after 'Evil Empire' presentation.
rawstory.com/2010/03/steele-evil-empire-presentation/
I also thought it interesting how the RNC document apparently described some Republican donors as "ego-driven" who can be made to give money by appealing to their animosity against the Obama administration.
Esten, are you telling me the Left did not do the exact same thing in spades with Bush in the last election - didn't matter Bush was not even on the ticket - to motivate their donors casting Bush as Beelzebub reborn?
From healthcare reform, to climate change, to "green" jobs, to the reduction of dependence on foreign energy sources the Left has been nothing but one big fear factory – manufacturing one "crisis" after another to further their own ends.
Question: as an aside, how did a liberal suave man about town such as yourself get "ripped off" by one of the liberal loving chicas? It boggles the mind.
While many of us would agree the insurance companies, the pharmaceutical companies, and many others in the medical provider world are probably ripping us off, if you subtract their profits from our medical costs, we still are going broke paying for medical care.
Obamacare is not enough. It is not the cure. It's a placebo.
Republicans offer nothing, but political chicanery. A man without a suit.
What's the solution? Simple, the only way to solve this is demand destruction. You can take all the sick people and kill them (not an ideal solution if your sick) or you can change the SOP (standard operating procedure.
I have had doctors tell me they are running a test on me 'just to cover my ass', or 'why do you care, your insurance company will pay for it.'
I resent wasting my time and money just to increase the revenues of the medical establishment. We are spoiled. We think more tests; more procedures will extend our life, improve our quality of life, or lessen our pain. Not true. In many cases, it's just entertainment. Your pain will not be less, nor will you live longer. They are just more tests and procedures without any value.
Much money is spent on patients with cancer, heart disease, obesity, and diabetes. We must find more productive ways to improve the quality of life and efficacy of care for those with these afflications. Give us a better bang for our buck, not enrichment of those who offer promises but deliver snake oil. We are quick to throw money at those who offer miracles and deliver excuses. Stop it.
The medical community is rewarded on pay for services rendered. The more services rendered, the more money earned.
We need to change the rules. Pay for good outcomes. If they fix your problem, they get N dollars based upon the diagnosis. If they keep you out of the hospital with a flu, they get N. If they extend your life by a year with cancer, they get X. If it takes twenty visits or five visits, the payment is the same. Guess what. Great doctors will make a lot of money. Poor doctors will go broke, and take up work at a restaurant serving meals. We will do fewer tests, less procedures and live longer with less pain. I can hear the medical community and the politicos screaming about 'death panels'. Pendejadas. Bullshit.
Sound simple. It isn't. It will take many safeguards. Make sure the diagnosis is valid. Medical auditors to certify the books will be needed. Make sure the docs don't kill you to make more money. Get the medical boards and the AMA to pull the license of bad docs. Slow the ambulance chasers with tort reform. Capitalism is the best system if you can control the cheaters. Determine how to cheat and provide strong disincentives to doing so. We don't need Bernie Madoff running this scheme.
When I was a young man in the 60s and 70s, healthcare for me (and my elderly mother) was a small percent of my income. Not anymore. It overwhelms many today. We can't go on like this.
If you're a medical provider, you will not like my plan. You will get your lobbyist to try to defeat it. But let me tell you, you will need to find a different line of work. Believe as you will, you can't win. If medical costs keep rising, death will be the only affordable alternative. You will lose your job anyway, because your patients are dead or broke.
Mongers. I hold little hope. I ask that you don't take the sugar pill. On the next election, vote only for those who have appeared on Comedy Central. If congress is going to be a joke, let's have a few laughs.
Seriously, I hope someone has the guts to ride the third rail and solve this death spiral. I'll vote for him / her. Will you?
Respectfully,
MFN
I know the title of this thread is about Obama s presidency, but most of his decisions are the result of a generation scale political orientations.
I found Generation Zero extremely instructive about the irresponsablity chain that lead to the financial collapse. This is more than just a question of political party, it s a cultural question: the loss of common sense.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sss0irwcOX8&feature=related[/url]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbSny44Je-s&feature=related[/url]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8O_FDz7H3M&feature=related[/url]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN-hO7RVlkE&feature=related[/url]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NzLIMcyCxg&feature=related[/url]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsI41CFby1s&feature=related[/url]