The main problem I see ... it's always someone else to blame or someone elses fault for perceived woes of the world. There is no winning of this kind of debate. If it's not the large pharmacuticals, it's hospital management. If it's not big oil, it's the republicans/Bush. The truth of the matter, it's just someone smarter/more educated, more talented/ambitious, or just more fortunate/luckier than another (regardless of race, creed, color, or religion). Jealousy and envy of those who simply have more. Fortunately, we don't all have that union "gimme, gimme, gimme" mentality and capable of striving for and achieving the better things in life without the "collective".

As per this nurses union, Using human life as a bargaining chip is as about despicable as it gets. The same tactics the Palestinians, using innocent human beings as shields. Just imagine if all healthcare providers were unionized and you or children had a life- threatening crisis whilst they were out on strike (wildcat or other). Unions are simply for the losers and truly selfish in my opinion... me, me, me.

While I would agree with think2deep's observation in regards to a Federal Reserve/fiat currency and such, I can only point out that it's the only standard system widely accepted in the US... one step away from a North American Union and two steps from a one world currency. As our currency becomes devalued, the Amero and one world currency look more appealing... at the cost of our sovereignty.

Thanks for taking the time and effort to peruse my profile, I'm sincerely flattered. I honestly wish I had the inclination and incentive to reciprocate. I apologize for my shortcomings in regards to not taking a fingerpainting art class in college. Unfortunately, people like myself were just too busy creating/working on the formulas for things like the paints for individuals like yourself to play with (and not harm yourself at the same time).

1. Judging by the venacular of your posts I'll maintain hills instead of mountains are more your skill level.

2. I'm curious to hear why you believe water based paint on a jacket is a stupid idea. Are you trying to imply water based paints can't adhere to fabrics or what? C'mon, you look like the type who would engage in facepainting and such.

3. You're absolutely correct about the lasting effects of THC (the physiological effects), the psychological effect are obvious.

4. "Tatoos are for girls to decorate their body, and boys trying to act tough". Judging by your photograph on this topic thread I honestly can't determine whether a tatoo on you would be to decorate your body or to act tough (please, no audible snickering from others for having the same observation).

5. I was just imagining if all those who believed in a "supernatural immortal being" were locked up in a padded room. It would be interesting to see how an individual like yourself would survive. "Where I come from, only children have little imaginary friends". I'll guess San Francisco. If so, your ilk on Haight-Ashbury might disagree.

Yes, I typed the word "very" three times... very, very, very good addition and observation. It's been my experience with those inflicted with perhaps certain organic issues of the cranium that it's best to reinforce positive statements multiple times. You're correct again, I'm struggling in trying to come up with a way to explaining the definition of the phrase "gainful employment" in terms I believe you could grasp. Yes, it is that difficult. Quantum particle physics was much easier.

Forgotten whether or not I studied physics or not already? Did you not make mention of it at the beginning of your post, yes? I would respectfully submit that if you are wearing a helmet or not... the mass of the helmet in conjuction to the vacuum in the cranial cavity would still fall at rate of 32 feet per second squared. What I find intriguing, the vacuous state of the cranium being significantly more dense than the mass of the helmet. Keep on truckin'.

Not at all, have fun on the hills. You could use a magic marker (hopefully benzene free for your own safety's sake) scratch that... (to err on the side of caution better make it non-toxic water based finger paints instead) to inscribe the words "Free Muntadhar al-Zeidi" on the back of your jacket. People can see your message whilst hittin' the slopes. You might attract some followers there(until the effects of the THC wears off). Someone of your obvious zeal, passion, and deep reasoning skills might even consider a tattoo of al-Zeidi on your forehead. I would suggest you first consult with your deity of choice though... WWJSD (What Would Jeff Spicoli Do)? Whatever your choice of action, I'm confident it will be reflective of his profound inspiration/actions.

Very, very, very good question as per inquiring about gainful employment! In order to reply in a fashion/manner I believe you might optimally comprehend, I first must consult with an online version of the "Beavis and Butt-Head" dictionary/thesaurus and combination nachos cookbook" for the proper translations. In the meantime, be safe and enjoy the slopes. Normally I would encourage anyone participating is activities such as snowboarding to wear a helmet; However, in your case I don't believe it would be of any benefit.

I believe the poster of this topic should start a petition drive. Call all relevant leaders/groups/organizations that could assist in this matter. Start a webpage blogging about this. Call all news agencies and radio talk shows demanding his release. Write president Obama begging for his intervention. Print posters, t-shirts, and coffee mugs saying "Free Muntadhar al-Zeidi". Rally friends and neighbors to protest nude at the local courthouse (a la PETA members). Make symbolic "Muntadhar al-Zeidi" freedom medals and/or ribbons and distribute them at the local college campus. Get a booth at the local mall selling "freedom beads" and balloons with the image if al- Zeidi printed on them. Hold daily Muntadhar al-Zeidi awareness seminars at the park. Have a shoe throwing (dunk style tank) at the local fair/carnival using a Bush mannequin and shoes donated by Nike. These suggestions should either give mental healthcare providers enough time to find a vacant padded room or provide the poster with gainful employment.

So long as you aren't a financial burden to anyone (I.E. me), it's not my place to question/criticize your or anyones lifestyle choices. You are assuming personal responsibility for your actions. That is the only thing required to statiate me. Unfortunately, we have too many people in the US that aren't willing to accept personal responsibility for their actions and opt to take the path of least resistance instead. The "sense of entitlement" mentality coupled with too many safety nets. Failure is rewared more than success (under the guise of "help") in the delusional quest for equality, fairness, and "common good".

I'm going to have to ponder your "articulate and doing well equated to being "uptight" observation further. The ability to clearly articulate, I believe is one of the cornerstones of success (both in personal and professional matters). It leaves less room for misinterpretation (especially in venues like this where vocal inflection is limited). As per "doing well" (I assume professionally). I'll only say that I'm doing better than Barack Hussein Obama's half-brother and worse Bill Gates. In regards to being "uptight"- If one is serious, one will generally be taken seriously. If one acts like a clown, one gets treated as one. There is an appropriate time and place for both.

The "Little Red Hen" Plot summary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Red_Hen

"In the tale, the little red hen finds a grain of wheat, and asks for help from the other farmyard animals to plant it. However, no animal is willing to volunteer to help her."

"At each further stage (harvest, threshing, milling the wheat into flour, and baking the flour into bread), the hen again asks for help from the other animals, but again she gets no assistance."

"Finally, the hen has completed her task, and asks who will help her eat the bread. This time, all the previous non-participants eagerly volunteer. However, she declines their help and eats it with her chicks, leaving none for anyone else."

"The moral of the story is that those who show no will to contribute to an end product do not deserve to enjoy the end product."

Ambition has it's rewards.

People that I employ are soley for optimal production and profits. I could manufacture my products by myself (and actually started out that way); However, I wouldn't manufacture near as many items and wouldn't profit near as much. I am dependent upon other entrepreneurs for goods and services (I.E. raw materials and such)... who hire workers for the same reason I do. Dependent upon consumers to purchase my products.

As I stated earlier, you are free do whatever you choose to do (that would apply in the subjective realm of ambition as well). This doesn't make you my enemy. It's when you become dependent upon me financially for your means to exist (when you have the ways and means) without reciprocal compensation to be independent is when you become my "enemy".

Taxes are an entirely different topic. If something should incapacitate me, I can only claim that not one cent of your taxes will go towards my treatments and/or recovery. Insurance aside, wise and prudent investments will guarantee that (which includes hiring good, intelligent, ambitious, and motivated employees who are compensated for their time and efforts). So long as traditional capitalist values are maintained, I shall not be a finanical burden to anyone. It's not a matter of if we are dependent upon others (that is a given in modern industrialized society), it's to what degree and who pays and who doesn't that is the source of controversy. I would generally tend to believe that the more one is forced to pay, the more it would bug them.

In regards to this topic... you too may benefit from the story of "The Little Red Hen" as per "ambition".

The rich are rich (financially)for the direct opposite reasons the poor are poor. Hard work, ambition, luck/timing, or education/intelligence. Proof once again that life just ain't fair nor equal.

Great call there nogames!

Great post niceguy! What you are currently encountering are over-rationalizations and over-justifications of claimed individual lifestyle choices. In forums like this there will always be the ones who claim to be the "exception to the rule". They may claim they possess all the prerequisites of "traditional" success (I.E. good education and such); In conjunction, claim to have made a cognitive choice not to earn more/better money to obtain the better things in life... which is fine. It's my belief and understanding that these are the first to beg for a handout when times get financially rough as well. It would make more sense to me that one optimize ones G*d given talents and abilities to the most (which includes making as much money as possible). If for nothing else, puting it away for a rainy day... or retirement (instead of completely relying upon the government for Social Security and other entitlements). So long as one takes personal responsibility for his/her life and all it entails, people can do as they wish. Unfortunately, chances are that won't happen. Personal happiness (coupled with a sense of entitlement) quite often gets in the way.

Under normal circumstances I would encourage you to stay the course and wish you nothing but success in regards to your joining the ranks of self-employed entrepreneurs. These not being normal times though, I've seriously considered closing my doors and releasing my employees if for no other reason than to prove the point that if it weren't for people like you and I (those who risk our own capital, put up with all the headaches, those who produce, and employ others) are the backbone of this economy, this nation. Rugged individualism is quickly being replaced with collectivism and chronic victimhood/excuses. If others (able bodied and mentally competent) can hop onto that government gravy train (even if for a year)... why not sit back and enjoy the life of Riely as well. I haven't had a vacation in my adult life. Free healthcare, food stamps (debit card)... my mistake was paying off my vehicles, house, and properties in cash (otherwise, I could have posibly received some form of assistance for those things as well). Too late for me to claim illegal alien status?

Money may not buy love or happiness; However, it does pay the bills and prevents one becoming a burden to others (interfering with their happiness and persuits).

This is indicative of how spoiled Americans are. How much does Obama's half-brother make/live on in a year again in Kenya? Twelve dollars.

Another entitlement program that needs to bite the dust in my opinion. There is a direct correlation between my income and my compassion for the "needy". They are both quickly dwindling at the same rate.

Boo- Your cynical comment is represenative of the ungrateful ilk. Not even remotely thankful for what has been "given" (more like stolen) to give to less than productive citizens. It's never enough. Just keep trying to steal what others have worked hard for. I don't even receive thank you for working, owning/operating businesses with employees, and supporting the non-producers. Just a demanding "gimme more". You want to feel real pain, I close my doors, get rid of my employees, and start suckling off the government teat as well. What will the likes of these "needy" do when the likes of me join their ranks? People like Winx who perpetually preach "fairness" and "equality"... better think a lot more about what is wished for.

This article is nothing but more smoke and mirrors. The politician or political party that gives away the most stays in power. What part of "there's no such thing as a free lunch" that isn't understood? Taxing hospitals? Insanity, and a nice little step towards "nationalization". I simply can't afford it anymore and neither can a "compassionate" government. The more I see articles I see like this, the more I pray for another (real) Great Depression and a 50.1% unemployment rate, bread/soup lines blocks long. Let the herd thin out naturally.

A verifiable link would be appreciated. While I would agree with Anne Wortham's message 1000%, I completely disagree upon the premise she bases it on... race. Just because she's a black female and I assume a conservative, doesn't give her any more credibility than anyone else in philosophical/political/moral matters of this nature in my opinion. It's akin to Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe in Roe v. Wade) voicing her opinion against abortion (as she does now). A liberal Jew living in Israel speaking out against attacks in Gaza. A gay individual against same sex marriage/benefits. It's an arguement typically used by liberals when a perceived "right-winger" would disagree wih Bush or one of their "own". Using that logic, the only ones with "perceived" credibility to speak out then would have been caucasian males. One or a few exceptions to the perceived rule/belief does not a compelling arguement make (at least to me). Too much emphasis placed upon the messenger instead of the message.

The message is strong... the foundation it's built upon weak. The only reason this woman is cited here is because she's black and a female. Filter through the racial and gender stuff, what do you have? Another person/academic who disagrees with the policies and beliefs of Obama; In which, I'm in complete agreement with.

I admit my postition concerning race and gender here kinda falls apart at the mention of the name Amy Holmes though. She's just flat out hot! Her being a conservative is just icing on the cake.

A case of shooting the messenger (Putin) for dislike of the message?

Might be so bold as to suggest that Putin (aside from having more overall experience) has more knowledge/experience of/with communism and socialism than the current US president is why we should perhaps heed his words? The "dissing"... err... education for Obama continues. (Singing the song "Where is the Love?" as I type).

Kudos think2deep... a job well done! The enemy of my enemy (philosophically speaking)is my friend... very effective. Enjoy your victory but would encourage you not to overplay your hand by diluting your strongest point though. Congratulations again!

I tend to believe he supports Obama's plan because he has something to gain. Nobody (in their right mind) does things that would intentionally harm their own financial interests (especially at Buffett's level). His whole life has been nothing but conquering (I.E. acquisitions) in the markets. Wealth, power, and influence. Once one has accumulated more wealth than most everyone else in the world, what worlds are left to conquer (other than obtaining more wealth)? What greater power could a private citizen have than having influence advising a president or world leader?

Once one obtains a high level of income (500K +) on a consistent basis, I believe worrying about taxes is one of their least concerns. They usually retain others to worry about that and to find other "investment shelters" to either retain or increase their personal wealth. For good public relations (and a tax shelters), endowment foundations are created. Surrounding yourself with the best and brightest people is the key to optimal success.

In matters of employment, loyalty can not be bought... just rented. The more valued the employee to the business the more the employee gets paid. Hopefully to expand the wealth, value, and production of the company. The lower the pay, the more expendable (and more easily replaceable) the employee. Whose spirits do you believe someone like Buffett would be concerned about is the true question I believe- the 17K a year janitor who cleans his office or the 500K a year broker who helped him make millions of dollars? Buffett didn't become as wealthy as he did by having a clean office.

While Buffett is in Obama's "camp" (other than being a life long democrat), the first logical question I would ask would be "why"? One of the wealthiest people in the world, the man probably knows every single angle on how to invest money and wouldn't miss a trick to earn more. Lo and behold... guess what?

http://www.stockpickr.com/problog/820/

Capital Gains: Obama wants to raise long-term capital gains taxes. Under Bill Clinton, they were 20%. Under George W. Bush, they were reduced to 15%. The idea behind raising the taxes is that this primarily effects the wealthy and does not affect middle-income or lower-income people.

This is a not a Democrat vs. Republican issue. In fact, the largest increase in capital gains occurred when Richard Nixon became president in 1969 and raised the tax from 28% to 49%. What happened then? It effectively eliminated the revenue that the government collected from the capital gains taxes, because there was a negative incentive to sell shares.

When there is negative incentive to sell, not only is less revenue raised by the government but there is less money reallocated from older business to new, entrepreneurial ventures. The market and the economy began to slide in the early '70s, creating the worst bear market since World War II, until Buffett, in 1974, found himself in a situation in which he felt like an "oversexed man in a harem" because stocks were so cheap.

Buffett would like to find himself in that situation again.

Well, will Buffett be penalized by any raise in capital gains taxes? No. Buffett has already determined that the bulk of his estate would be left to charity (notably the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Microsoft (MSFT) founder Bill Gates being one of Buffett’s closest friends), making it tax-free.

Also, a raise in capital gains taxes will penalize any long-term shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway should they want to invest elsewhere or start new companies, in the case of significant changes at Berkshire. This helps Buffett’s estate by freezing the mobility of cash. An increase in capital gains is, in effect, a tax on asset mobility. This freezing benefits Berkshire Hathaway and hurts newer companies in need of capital, driving down asset prices of growth companies.

Congress finally slashed the Nixon capital gains raises in 1978 (under Carter), giving rise to the venture capital boom that spurred on Silicon Valley all through the '80s and '90s. Anybody who thinks an increase in capital gains taxes will result in more government revenue only need look at the '70s as a prime example of the reverse.

Obama has stated that he will most likely go beyond the 20% long-term capital gains tax that existed during the Clinton administration and aim for somewhere between 20% and 25%.

Higher Estate Taxes: Both Buffett and Obama are against repealing the estate tax. Obama has stated: "Let's call this trillion-dollar giveaway what it is: the Paris Hilton Tax Break. It's about giving billions of dollars to billionaire heirs and heiresses as a time when American taxpayers just can't afford it."

Obama has proposed to "reverse some of those tax cuts that went to the wealthiest Americans." Buffett has stated that repealing the estate tax “would be a terrible mistake.”

The estate tax is at the crux of a philosophical debate going back to the founding of America, which rejected the idea of privilege and status being inherited from one generation to the next. Buffett has said: "The idea that you get a lifetime of privately funded food stamps based on coming out of the right womb strikes at my idea of fairness." This statement has its roots in Thomas Paine’s Common Sense, which states: "Hereditary succession ... is in its nature an absurdity, because it is impossible to make wisdom hereditary."

The big problem with the estate tax as it is right now is that it forces inheritors to value illiquid assets -- for instance, a family business. Once those illiquid assets are valued, the inheritor pays a tax.

I don’t want to argue against a founding father such as Thomas Paine. Perhaps heirs should not inherit family businesses they are ill-equipped to run. However, because of this quirk of the estate tax, founders of businesses, or their immediate heirs, are often forced to sell the businesses they spent a lifetime building. Because of the forced motivation of the sale, it's often done at depressed prices before the IRS comes calling.

Who benefits? Well, the deep-pocketed, entrenched corporations whose business it is to buy stable family-run businesses that are forced to sell. Who could that be? Berkshire Hathaway.

My partial liberal/socialist checklist

1. Dependency upon others (to feel "at home" and the need to fit in). Check
2. Blame republicans for every single woe in the world. Check
3. Worried about what other countries/people think. Check
4. Wanting "free" healthcare instead of working personally for it. Check
5. Sense of entitlement for a college education. Check
6. Emotional name calling (E.G. dumbass, douche). Check
7. Thinking they are smarter than everyone else by saying "WAKE UP". Check
8. Use a democrat catch phrase "for the children", "I feel your pain", ect.. Check.
9. The abdication of personal responsibility. Check

If I have seen or listened to Fox news ever, that is relavent in what way? I mere posed a simple question... since 1981 have there been no democrat controlled congresses? Furthermore, there is not one single democrat who is even remotely responsible for any negative thing that's affecting this current economy? Granted, part of liberalism entails the abdication of personal responsibility; However, it's nothing short of disingenuous even amongst the simplest of simpletons to say democrats aren't responsible one iota.

In regards to (Republican) "military theory" proven wrong. I've been pondering the "correct" military theories by democrats that have been effective (since Carter)... no need reminding people that Johnson's "Gulf of Tonkin" resolution for troop escalation was based on a complete lie. The failed hostage rescue in Iran? The boycotting of the 1980 olympics? The bombing of a basically empty "aspirin" factory in the desert to cover up an "innapropriate relationship" with an intern? The response after the first world trade center bombing? The "Black Hawk (down) incident in Somalia? If I haven't erred (which I know I haven't) I believe Clinton mentioned the WMD's in Iraq and the response was? What are the correct military theories again?

Yawn... the ramblings of a two-bit liberal editorial cartoonist (Ted Rall). The athiest who gets louder/angrier, more disconnected from reality the more he's ignored and marginalized (like most liberals). Playing loose and fast with the "facts" equals no credibility. Why no mention of the Carter years (that led to the Reagan revolution)? Since 1981, at no time have democrats controlled congress?

madisonman- Please explain to me why I should give this topic/Ted Rall any further consideration/thought. What is the point you're trying to prove/assert (other than pure emotionalism)?

"It's frightening that conservatives continue to believe in economic and military theories that have been proven wrong again and again. What's downright terrifying is the way they think. They don't bother to present proof, evidence or even arguments to support their claims. They believe what they believe because they believe it. That's it. Q.E.D."

Where's his (or your) proof?

Lynann, I always have restrained fun with your topics. This one just provided a little more lateral flexibility for creativity is all.

My apologies for not dedicating more attention to and towards you and your topics as of late... and allowing your thoughts wander.

Granted, there are many sites that allow anonymous rating sites; In which, the credibility is about as reliable as the cost to post on them too.

I wouldn't say you were indifferent about this issue. You stated initially "This is really incredible". One may generally believe that "any rational adult" would take the comments with a grain of salt (hopefully more like deer salt-lick block); However, many a topic posted here of the actions and endeavors of others should serve as the prime example that we don't reside in a world of neurosurgeons also. You know... like all those brainwashed Rush Limbaugh listeners mention in other threads here (arid sarcasm).

Yes, you did bring this matter to the attention other posters (giving proverbial birth to it so to speak). I merely provided the substance/sustenance you failed to provide in nourishing this topic; Hence, dependent upon by the likes of me for growth. As per missing the point, tis appears to be a bullseye afterall.

You are more than welcome I have chosen to return to the warmth of your ample... topics and you firmly embracing me back into their folds ever so tightly. It's flattering to know my certain touch with words has been missed and yearned for.

Once again being one the voices of reason here, it appears I have to take it upon myself to provide this topic with a little perspective. The comment mentioned in the article was posted anonymously. Perhaps a disgruntled/fired employee? A competitor/rival? A former patient with other issues (E.G. Offended that the Dr. said this person needs to lose weight and should exercise/advice contrary to the patients belief)? It very well might have been a legitimate opinion as well. Who knows.

Using this forum site as my example, there are "rules" in regards to comments about other posters, correct? I ask you, the gentle reader to pretend for a moment that this is RateMD.com instead. The below mentioned comment is for analgonous purposes ONLY. Using Lynann "the doctor" and me as "the patient" as the example.

"Lynann is a lesbian pedophile who freqently engages in beastiality. She doesn't have a job. She's spent the last five years in prison for child molestation and shoplifting. She has frequent bouts with herpes and has genital warts. She hates men and anything of the male species (including a tattoo with an arrow pointing down saying "no men allowed" on her bikini line), so guys don't even bother e-mailing her."

The first legitimate question would naturally be, "Are his comments true (assuming I'm even a male to begin with)"? Who knows for sure but Lynann and myself. Maybe Lynann and I had a secret real life relationship in the past that ended badly (disgruntled ex). Maybe the above opinion/comments was an attempt to make her stop e-mailing me, telling me how much she loves and wants me. There is no way a third party can deem how accurate the comment is; Hence, pointless and perhaps libelous.

As a former med student, we were taught/bound by ethics not to discuss patients specifically (as by full name/specific identity) aside from professional consultations. Later came HIPAA and medical privacy for patients (which prevents healthcare providers from releasing specific medical records about specific individuals on places like online without permission). What is present is a double standard. A POSSIBLE patient may speak about a physician anonymously, yet the physician must remain silent and must defend themselves even more. Patients are provided questionaires and an opportunity to voice their opinions at all major medical facilities. When it comes to medical services, word of mouth by friends, family, and those held in personal high regard are far better than ANY anonymous online opinion... in my opinion. Experiences will still vary regardless.

Just like in any profession, there are good doctors and bad doctors (as the article pointed out). There are a plethora of "checks and balances" in the medical profession already. Board/peer reviews, lawyers, patient and administrative evaluations. Doctors have to practice defensive medicine and try to eliminate as much liability as possible just to stay in business. Taking the path of least resistance to find a good dr. by relying on "anonymous" comments is just plain stupidity in my opinion.

I've only had the opportunity to occasionally listen to Rush several times over the years and have yet hear anything I consider bigoted or extremist; Therefore, I'll ask you for the 2nd time for verbatum quotes that you personally heard and/or have read (in context and can verify) to enlighten me and convice me otherwise, please? Being the open-minded individual you are, all I seek and desire is to equal the vast knowledge you claim you possess in this matter. It's only fair. Fairness and equality is your mantra, is it not? Please don't make me beg a 3rd time with my humble request... others here might start considering you nothing more than the hypocritical cyber-equivalent of "Old Faithful"... frequently/routinely spouting off useless steam. Feel free to call for help if you need it (as I suspect you do/will... in more ways than one).

If what you say is true- "He is garbage and if he is the best the republican party can come up with they are in TROUBLE!!!! ", you and your ilk should be rejoycing; However, judging by all the negative posts here, it appears quite the opposite. Here I thought liberals hated and despised labels too... quite the creative labelists they are I must say.

Obviously you opted not to peruse and reply to the links I provided, it's ok and I understand. You're probably too busy looking out the window waiting for a reply in the mail from the president (or personal visit). I'm confident he's taking your advice under consideration and will heed that advice concerning Rush (especially after the latest Dow-Jones numbers). The plan to create more green jobs by recycling worthless stock certificates into toilet paper... great plan.

In the event you suffer from some form of attention/selective reading deficit disorder, just a friendly reminder. Quotes by Rush... bigot and extremist... links in context to support, please? Thanks dear. I'm a very patient and understanding person and will have no problem making this request daily until you comply or mysterious disappear from this topic (through no fault of your own of course).