Monday, July 25, 2016

Hillary and Uncle Bernie

Michael L.

sanders_hillary_debate3I sometimes think of Bernie Sanders as "Uncle Bernie."

I do so because he was raised a stone's throw from my dad's house in Brooklyn, back in the day.

His accent is the accent of the adult men of my youth.

Writing in the Times of Israel, Eric Cortellessa tells us:

The DNC email scandal is multilayered. Beyond the fact that a series of exchanges raised ideas of ways to weaken Sanders’s candidacy, there is also the nature of the proposals that were discussed. DNC finance chief Brad Marshall pitched Schultz on portraying Sanders as an atheist who rejected his Judaism in states where candidates’ religiosity holds sway with voters, like in Kentucky and West Virginia.

“Does he believe in a God,” Marshall asked. “He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist.”
My issue here is not that the Democratic National Committee (the DNC) considered using Uncle Bernie's atheism as a political club, but that they lied to the American public, and their Democratic Party constituents, in insisting upon the neutrality of the designee process.

They weren't neutral.

I do not mind that Debbie Wasserman Schultz sides with Hillary in this presidential campaign. That is to be expected.

What I do mind, however, is that the DNC lied to all of us when they claimed neutrality in the process. There was no neutrality. The thumb was definitely on the scales for Hillary and it's going to take considerable research into DNC media statements to figure out the extent of the rigged game.

But a rigged game it was for the obvious reason that we were lied to and the DNC was not neutral, but put their weight behind Hillary.
According to campaign officials, (Wasserman Shultz) will still keep her leadership role at the convention and deliver her scheduled address. For the rest of the election, she will continue to assist the presumptive Democratic nominee, along with other down-ballot races throughout the country. Longtime Democratic strategist Donna Brazile will take the helm as interim chair.
Donna Brazile, huh? Gee, that name sounds a tad familiar.

It is unclear, though, just how damaging these email revelations are going to be for the Clinton campaign and these rumors of Russian intervention as the source of the leak are exceedingly unusual.

My suspicion is that they will roll out Wasserman Schultz in the convention only if the powers-that-be determine that this story is a non-story and that they will not make any such determination.

Wasserman Schultz will likely play a significant behind-the-scenes role in Hillary's campaign, but she will continue to draw fire from her Republican rivals.

This issue is not likely to seriously hobble the Clinton campaign, but it certainly does not help arriving directly at the beginning of the Democratic Party convention.

We shall see.

65 comments:

  1. big thing to watch IS how involved Russia was; Russia has had a massive role in building up Iran's nuclear weapons program, funding Israel's enemies and giving Hamas a place to parade around the world stage, and RT is vehemently anti-Israel.

    Even for as much as getting revenge against the Democrats for Obama and his shoddy treatment of Israel would feel great, if Russia indeed was involved, and further evidence shows it was trying to aide Trump (who DID once talk being "neutral" on I/P and does have a decent amount of anti-Semite alt-right types), then one can say Trump is WORSE for Israel.

    Solution: if that's the case, vote HRC for POTUS, but GOP for all downticket seats. The GOP in Congress has done a good job trying to fight the Iran deal, Muslim refugees, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  2. and don't forget the Bolshevik Soviet record in the Middle East: handing the Muslims weapons, money, and political clout. Nasser? Soviet toady. Hafez al-Assad? Also a Soviet toady. And don't get me started on Arafat, who the USSR made. Not to mention the "Zionism is Racism" resolution.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If you're first willing to buy off and break the DoJ, commit treason and fraud and bribery, you're not going to sit back and leave the outcome to the 'voters'. There isn't any primary process, there is no convention. It's all theater, a sham and it doesn't matter what you or I think, do, say, want, need or feel. But moreover, it doesn't matter. The outcome has been predetermined. They election will be as fake as all of this. It's simply irrelevant.

    For decades the left justified their hatred of the US because it wasn't like all the other countries. They denigrated the exceptionalism that brought them there and then excoriated the rest of us for it.

    But what they thought they were selling was Denmark or Iceland or Norway. That's the 'rest of the world' they pretended to foist on us.

    Guess what? We ARE the rest of the world and the rest of the world is El Salvador, Paraguay, Turkmenistan, Egypt, Burma, Vietnam, Congo. We ARE another broken banana republic, a cannibal kingdom where there are no rights or freedoms, there are no votes that matter in the way they're pitched. We ARE finally brought down to everyone else's level. We're 47th in health care, 29th in education, and now in the middle of the pack in terms of political legitimacy and independence and integrity of the press. We Are the World and it's shitty.

    Kiss Noise and Fuck Off. You won now shut the fuck up and stop complaining.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. btw, Trudy, this is the second time that you've told me to fuck off.

      If you continue to speak to me, or anyone here like this, you are gone.

      Delete
    2. I didn't get that the "fuck off" was directed at you. Am I wrong?

      Delete
    3. Nor did I.
      Very sad to see you take this attitude to one of your best and most passionate commenters.
      Very sad.
      For what it's worth you are welcome at my place anytime, Trudy.

      Delete
  4. “Lock her up!” chanted Democratic activists in the streets of Philadelphia. Wow!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Democrats come off so saintly, spouting love and togetherness, until, of course, it concerns their political adversaries.

    It's unfortunate so many cannot see through the ruse that they perpetuate of being on the side of all, and especially the less fortunate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'll say. I just heard Elizabeth Warren, progressive. She was saying that the Democrats are the party that wants to treat everyone the same. Do today's progressives really treat everyone the same? I would say no. How can one be for identity politics and the cult of the virtuous victim, intersectionality, and claim to treat everyone the same? Do they treat Israel the same as other states? I would say no.

      Delete
    2. I did however agree with some of what Bernie Sanders said. The interests of working class people have been sold down the tubes. What I don't see is how that is in its entirety the fault of just one party. Also, Bernie's foreign policy, especially concerning Israel, is clueless and a reflection of the leftish anti-zionist echo chamber.

      Delete
  6. US intelligence thinks Russia was behind the leak to help Trump
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/25/fbi-suspects-russia-hacked-dnc-u-s-officials-say-it-was-to-elect-donald-trump.html and Trump really likes Russia and Putin http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/07/are-donald-trump-and-vladimir-putin-really-bffs

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, and they hacked the White House, IRS, and probably Clinton. They did it for Trump, not themselves, according to progressives.

      In any event, they showed how the platitudes we hear are far from the reality of the beliefs.

      Delete
  7. [Hello, glad to have found this blog via my friend Mara.]

    It's sad that the nation's health care and education, as school26 said, is mediocrity-- while we have endless cash for campaigns.

    Campaigns between the feel-good corporatoxicity of Hillary and the 21st century king of scapegoating, the Trump.
    He'll likely push foreign & domestic conflicts into overdrive because he might need more diamonds.
    Or more of that gold-plated apartment he used to show off to our media-saturated-public that rings as the symbol of a nation that sides with aristocracy in some mass version of victims siding w/ an abuser.

    Oi, it goes fairly ignorant on the other side: so-called progressive supporters of Hillary have, for years, considered Monsanto to be the poster-child of corrupt world domination in the vein of the Franken-food monsterism, yet they ignore the fact that Shillary's campaign manager was a top Monsanto lobbyist.

    How fake can it get ?

    Perhaps even the Russian hacker story will be endlessly used as a game.
    I speak as an old-geezer-geek who worked as a technical artist in San Fran/Silicon Valley (simulations/modeling for games, engineering, etc.),
    and to this day, I'm surprised that the recurring problems of hacker-security breaches have not reached farther into DC politics even more-so than the current case.

    [btw Mike, was good to read about your days of standing-firm among the classic debates there at SF St. Univ.]--

    When we consider some of the recent hack history involving Russia, it gets dicey:
    Recall E.Snowden was involved in that case of political asylum in Russia no-less;

    And the twists of Syrian airspace in which Russia's jet was downed. Could involve an exchange of revenge games among Count Vladimir's sore-loser mentality.

    One issue is still, for me, the issue that rings clearest:
    Gut-check reminders from Holocaust survivors that Trump's tone is the tone they will never forget from the days of 1930s Germany when everyone (including the fool running the bizarre British empire) kept making excuses for the rising sickness,

    e.g. "oh well, Jew hating & persecution, well u know, it's nothing new.."

    I'm not an alarmist; in fact it's a bit bizarre to think about our issues here in the US when comparing our woes to human trafficking or slavery
    (that are oh so popular in various MidEast nations in which women/children have rights-that-are-no-higher-than-cattle).

    Yet Israel is singled out time & again.
    The bottom line is that we need to be leaders, not just in some idealistic way, but bluntly (and as Israel's only real ally);
    I think about age-old prejudice "you Jews with your chosen-people rhetoric" yet America has the similar role, no matter the false charges, of responsibility to illuminate and do so on a real level--
    no matter how disaffected the young(er) electorate has become.

    No matter that our Jewish ancient message of illuminating Truth to Power sounds metaphysically out-of-place among Hillary's Wall St pals or Drumpf's transparent-bullying.

    I'm concerned with apathy, all too similar to the attitudes toward Israel, i.e. the sense that "hey it's an old story" or "they're so belligerent while their defense is so, u'know, overpowering." meh.

    We might be falling into an electorate that sees things as if being disaffected is some some kind of "fake sense of rights"--
    In 60s/Civil Rights people died for such & would not have let these excuses-for-leaders, Trumpf & Shillary, push real rights to the margins.

    I'm concerned with how we get this across to young(er) voters.
    I don't have an answer but I'm attempting to raise the apathy-question everywhere in the online realms as possible.

    Well that is, even though Drumpf had gone so far as to take a sh0t at online connectivity itself :
    (because, y'know...he'll defend us.)

    http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/08/technology/donald-trump-internet/

    ReplyDelete
  8. Please, the DNC has often placed a finger, thumb, or fist on the scale. In 2008, they were for Hillary, until Obama entered the race, at which time they decided to throw Hillary overboard. What's so surprising about the DNC showing support for a long time Democrat who has been helping the DNC get other Democrats elected over a Democrat of convenience. And you're shocked about the DNC lying about it? I'll bet you were shocked too that Bill Clinton didn't readily admit to dalliances with Ms. Lewinsky.

    ReplyDelete
  9. DNC Convention 2016: Soviet Flags, Palestinian Flag – BUT NO US FLAGS

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/07/dnc-convention-2016-soviet-flags-palestinian-flag-no-us-flags/

    That about does it for me....buncha a-holes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Democratic Party died about 15 years ago. Joe Lieberman was the last Democrat I might have considered voting for. Now it's ideology is antisemitic (PLO flags) socialism (Soviet flags).

      Delete
    2. Jacob, I never thought I'd live to see this crap. The Dems need a huge purge.

      Delete
    3. Doodad, lets hope when Barry Hussein Islama is gone, the general anti-Israel atmosphere he enabled cools down.

      Delete
    4. Is this a joke? Trump is so tight with Russia that George Will left the party. So have Max Boot and Daniel Pipes. One would have to be willfully ignorant to ignore the dangers of a Trump presidency. Just google Trump and Putin. Here's a start http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/trump-russia-great-article-1.2725698

      Delete
    5. here's the Islamo-communist POS who raised the Islamistinian flag at the Dem convention: https://twitter.com/AliAkinK/with_replies He's also Bernie or Bust (surprise). You can message him too. Let's give this POS a piece of our minds.

      Delete
    6. Be careful who you call willfully ignorant.

      One could say a person is willfully ignorant when they proclaim to know things that are just opinion.

      Delete
    7. Were it not for the fact of political Islam, not to mention 4 terror attacks in Germany within just the last week, I would probably vote Clinton.

      I voted for Bill twice.

      But the Democrats have thrown my trust into the garbage.

      As I write this I am looking at Bill on the tube at the Democratic Convention in Philadelphia and he's hard guy not to like.

      I am not sure that we can say the same about his wife, tho.

      Delete
    8. Hardly goes without saying that when something goes wrong, can she be trusted to be honest with the American people? Under Obama, the art of dissembling has gone to new heights, like Obamacare, Iran, and Benghazi.

      Delete
    9. He is a gifted master of the political speech. He can connect with people. In that respect he is everything his wife isn't.
      (I remember when Bill was first elected that many were calling him a bumpkin and saying we should have elected her, because she's the smart one. )
      I saw the PLO flag at the convention. They co-opt EVERYTHING. Nothing is left untouched. Nothing is sacred, except maybe the Pact of Omar. Also, heard disquieting murmurs in the audience when Bill mentioned Hillary's involvement in getting a cease fire between the Islamo-fascistic Nazis of Hamas and Israel - I don't think it was coming from proud zionists, if you get my meaning.
      I cannot vote for the Democrats in this election because they lie about this conflict. There, I said it. They lie about it at the expense of Israel and the Jews to get votes from purveyors of lockstep hate and ignorance, the ignoramuses who racialize every single issue under the sun.
      Did you hear about the black congressman who compared settlers to termites? Can we imagine the ruckus if someone called the Palestinian Arabs termites? How about someone calling the congressional Black Caucus termites? Wouldn't go over well, you say?
      So, which bully do we want? The mob driving the Democratic Party or Trump, (or "Drumpf" for those who would never dream of calling the German Chancellor of unrestricted Muslim immigration and mayhem "Angela Jerkel")?

      Delete
  10. " Video: US Democrats burn the Israeli flag

    'Protesters' burned the Israeli flag at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia on Tuesday night."

    http://israelmatzav.blogspot.ca/2016/07/video-us-democrats-burn-israeli-flag.html#links

    Democrats....on the side of Jew killing Terrorists.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-sanders-delegates-walk-out-of-convention-after-clinton-nomination/

      A more convincing source. At least these people aren't voting for either Hillary or Trump. They aren't real Democrats; they're anarchists/Greens.

      Delete
    2. Bur they ARE the real Democrats. What you think of as "real" Democrats are all over 50. New crop is mostly Prog/Nazi.

      Delete
    3. The Greens ran Cynthia McKinney, a wild eyed antisemite, for president in 2008.

      Delete
  11. none of my comments are ever or have ever been directed at you or anyone in particular. I use second person plural out of convenience and habit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In that case you have my sincerest apologies.

      You know that I value your participation, Trudy.

      Delete
    2. OK
      I put up that last comment before I got here but I withdraw nothing.
      Maybe you need to apologize to all of us, Mike.

      Delete
    3. OK
      I put up that last comment before I got here but I withdraw nothing.
      Maybe you need to apologize to all of us, Mike.

      Delete
  12. Obama could not even write a new speech. Just retreads.

    The claim that they stand for all people and respect the beliefs of all is the biggest joke.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Must add: Obama has made mistakes?

      Delete
    2. It will probably get acclaim from talking heads, but seemed the most canned, vacuous speech.

      Delete
    3. To be honest, oldschooltwentysix, I listened to about 2 seconds of Obama's speech. He was congratulating himself for the Iran Nuclear Deal and I said, "that's enough," went into my studio and read.
      As far as it getting acclaim from talking heads I am sure you are right. What has happened to the press in this country? What has happened to this country?

      Delete
    4. OldSchool, you might find Ben Shapiro's take on Obama's speech interesting.

      "Then Obama launched into the most rankling moment of his speech: his proclamation that Trump is an authoritarian, and authoritarianism is unworthy of America."

      "It’s perfectly conservative. Americans do not rely on the Great Leader. The Constitution was formulated in open opposition to the Great Leader idea.

      But Obama is that self-proclaimed Great Leader, that self-styled savior.

      Obama is the guy who declared that if elected, he would slow the rise of the tides. He’s the fellow who threatened Congress that if they didn’t do what he wanted, he would simply bulldoze them with executive power. Obama believes that America needs a ruler, and he is that ruler. Hearing this petty, vain, arrogant tyrant decry petty, vain, arrogant tyranny is absolutely maddening.
      "

      http://www.dailywire.com/news/7888/obama-hijacks-reagan-conservatism-clubs-trump-it-ben-shapiro

      Delete
    5. I think this is as apt:

      From a September 2008 New York Times profile of Obama:

      “I think that I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters,” Mr. Obama told Patrick Gaspard, his political director, at the start of the 2008 campaign, according to The New Yorker. “I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m going to think I’m a better political director than my political director.”

      Shapiro screwed up in the Fields episode and lost some respect for his vicious rantings.

      Delete
  13. I agree with this strongly Jeff/J : >"What has happened to the press in this country?"
    It's amazing how the heroic press of E. Murrow once stood up to scapegoating whereas today, the press has withered, no matter conservative nor liberal etc nor etc..

    I remember when *even the most establishment press* was still competing for news: not ratings.

    Then every network decided (late 70s & 80s, just recall the genius film "Network"), that their news/press departments had to get ratings as much as their
    dumbed-down sitcoms.

    The net (blogs like this) are the only source of facts yet it takes time--
    whereas the current wave of "disengaged, apathetic Americans" are a combination of
    1) intellectual laziness;
    2) and such sarcasm about media that they fall back into non-voting/dis-engagement from politics and media criticism.

    Again-- apathy & media may be the largest foes we face, perhaps the 21st century of a twisted-version of propaganda that is a different beast from Nazi propaganda but will result in mob-rule based on mob-emotions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. rob M.,

      Yes, "Network" was a work of true genius. And we have a press that is too lazy to fact check or hold a meaningful discussion. It's all bottom line driven.

      Delete
  14. So, to be clear, people who vote for Trump trust Putin for Israel's security more than Hillary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, I don't think any of it is clear.

      Delete
    2. What about people that voted for Obama twice? Did they admit they were wrong? No? Why should we listen to them now?

      Delete
    3. I was wrong Jacob. I thought two things: that Obama might see that "daylight" failed, because he seemed so sincere, and yea, I wanted free stuff. I've donated since to Mark Kirk, Jack Martins and other Republicans. But I can't vote for Trump, who with his "neutrality," seems like he might make anti-Israelism ascendant in his party. Plus, Putin is bad as hell for Israel.

      A Hillary Prez, who like the Clintons listens to the polls (and polls favor Israel by a mile) and a GOP congress free of Trump (pro-Israel), is the best way.

      Delete
    4. Don't assume so much.

      "Why Israel and Russia’s Relationship Continues to Warm"

      http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/204802/why-israel-and-russias-relationship-continues-to-warm

      Trump said yesterday he is 100% behind Israel. Have you noticed Clinton's party lately?

      Delete
    5. while they've warmed, they're still pretty cold. And Russia is one entity, with Putin, that's less trustworthy than Barry Hussein.

      Delete
    6. see: http://www.jpost.com/International/Iran-and-Russia-discuss-increasing-military-ties-Iran-blasts-US-for-violation-of-nuclear-deal-462894

      Delete
  15. Looks like Count Vlad & disinfo.
    Hence i hold to the fact that this will be spun endlessly. Russian hackers love cash like no tomorrow:

    > "It is not surprising, then, that the Kremlin would pay internet trolls to pose as Trump supporters and build him up online. In fact,
    that would be the easy part..

    > "Trump's seemingly shady financial overtures to Russian oligarchs have since resurfaced, perhaps as evidence that the real-estate mogul or his top advisers may have had a hand in the hack that made his opponents look so bad."

    > "The very fact that we are discussing this and believing that Putin has the skill,
    inside knowledge, and wherewithal to field a candidate in an American presidential election and get him through the primaries to the nomination means we are imbuing him with the very power
    and importance he so craves"

    http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-internet-trolls-and-donald-trump-2016-7

    ReplyDelete
  16. Clinton's speech. She cares, got it! Stronger together (so long as you vote for me). Don't believe a word of her call for unity. It's just identity politics under a different label. After all, she has proven not to be trustworthy. Imagine when the first crisis hits and she reverts to what she has become, even though she "cares."

    She will call for taking money out of politics while she takes more than anyone ever. Par for the course. Criticizes Wall Street while being its puppet.

    Sounds like the status quo.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. who, of Trump or Clinton, is "trustworthy?" First of all, they're both politicians. While I abhor Muslim immigration, I worse abhor Putin's influence; he built Iran's nuke program pretty much. He gives Hamas an open stage in the world.

      Clinton for prez, GOP for Congress. The solution is easy; keep Trump away from the POTUSy, keep the Obama Hussein party out of Congress. The Clintons know Israel is popular, and unlike the Muslim-in-Chief; they care, and don't have a media to suck their dick at all times (as they did Hussein Obama).

      Delete
    2. Neither may be "trustworthy," but Clinton is not trustworthy.

      Have you not seen the damage and deceit that an executive can wreak, especially one that is prone to mislead and abuse authority in public affairs? Trump has no pattern of such behavior.

      Not to mention her judgment hasn't proven so great.

      No need to disparage Obama that way. It adds nothing to the discussion.

      Delete
    3. Kumar,
      Obama knew Israel was popular, so I don't exactly feel reassured. Did you hear her luke warm support for Israel during the speech? Will the press pay homage to her once in office as it has to Obama? Doubtful, but who knows? I think the Democratic Party is fast becoming a party with a growing antisemitism problem, because the "progressive" left does, and that is the direction of the party right now. Let's not forget Hillary's dressing down of Netanyahu because the Jerusalem municipal government approved the building of apartments in Israel's capital. Forces at work have been put in place to make Israel appear to be an unappealing country whose right to self-defense we support, but to a really limited degree. All the policies which have been put into place give the Arabs assurances they will live to fight another day. The simple truth is that the Pal Arab leadership and significant portions of its "electorate" want Israel gone. Our government ought to finally recognize this fact, and recognize this war on the Jews of Israel for what it is. It should also embarrass the Europeans for their latest efforts in demonizing the Jews. Anti-racists? Give me a break!

      Delete
    4. Jeff, one huge thing Hillary lacks that Obama has is a Muslim background and Muslim-shaped worldview, from his time in an Indonesian school. She also lacks the friendship of Rashid Khalidi and Edward Said that Obama had. As well as the critical race worldview that Hussein 0bama has.

      If Rubio or Cruz were the nominee, I'd 100% agree with "to hell with any D party nominee." And I was tempted to go for Trump during their convention. But sometimes, you can't always punish everyone as much as you want. Even for as crazed as liberal anti-Zionists are, the alt-right is no better with regard to the Jewish State. And if Trump pulls alt-right out of the woodwork the way Hussein Obama brought anti-Zionists out of the woodwork, game over.

      Delete
  17. Americans don't understand the second person plural. The concept is beyond the range of their intellect.

    I've encountered this problem before.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Nor irony.

    When was the last time you met an American who had a feel for irony?

    Maybe the guy who dropped the big one on Hiroshima.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. More Americans have a feel for irony and the second person plural than there are Australians.

      Ironic that someone would criticize American intellect with such unintellectual remarks.

      Delete
  19. Sorry about the language confusion - I didn't speak till I was nearly 5. And English is not entirely my first language, sort of in that we were required to use it at home but neither parent are/were native speakers

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My father didn't know English until he started school. What was your parents native tongue?

      Delete
  20. Replies
    1. Thank you. I always look forward to your take on things. I have read your comments here and there for some years now.
      My father's first language was Yiddish.

      Delete
    2. Am I wrong to think that the stereotype of Russians as a rather blunt people tends to be true?

      :O)

      Delete
    3. Maybe it's something to do with the bitter cold of the Russian winters. People who are freezing tend to get right to the point.

      Delete
    4. I seem to recall that a number of years ago they did a study in which sociologists were trying to determine the relative happiness of Europeans by nation-state. The most general kind of question they asked their polling set was something like, "On a scale of one to ten, how happy would you say that you are?"

      The Russians, however, did not seem to quite relate to the question, so they changed it to read something like, "On a scale of one to ten, how miserable would you say that you are?"

      Delete
  21. Russians are not really very direct in their speech. A thousand years of serfdom makes them circumspect.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting. I think that I may be confusing a sort-of heavy brusqueness with brutal honesty. They often look the same, dontcha know.

      Delete