Associated Press
President Obama will have his first official 2012 campaign rally tomorrow in Columbus, Ohio, with a major event at Ohio State University. To mark the occasion, Mitt Romney has an op-ed in the Cleveland Plain Dealer today, "welcoming" the president to the Buckeye State (via Greg Sargent).
Most of the piece is fairly predictable -- it uses the word "fail" four times -- and some of it is just odd. Romney argues that the economy hasn't turned around in places like Ohio, which just isn't true -- the jobless rate in the state is down to 7.5%, dropping to its best level in several years.
Here's Romney's pitch, ostensibly to the president:
Unlike you, I am not a career politician. Unlike you, I've spent more than two decades working in the private sector, starting new businesses and turning around failing ones. Undoing the damage you've done will be a daunting challenge. But I've learned a thing or two about how government policies can kill private investment and stifle job creation and I have a plan to get government out of the way. [...]
I have spent much of my life in business, turning around troubled enterprises. I can do the same for the most troubled of all enterprises: our federal government.
Let's put aside the fact that Romney arguably is a "career politician" -- the guy's been running for various offices for 18 years -- as well the rather ridiculous notion that Obama has done "damage" to the economy. Instead, there are two broad angles to the piece that stood out for me.
The first is that Romney had a chance to put his know-how to use when he, after making a similar pitch, got elected governor of Massachusetts. And yet, Romney's entire op-ed doesn't include any references at all to his only leadership experience in public office. How can Romney boast about his background, and pretend his life experiences stopped in 2002?
Perhaps because while Romney was in office, applying all of those lessons he learned about the economy, Massachusetts' job creation was "one of the worst in the country," ranking 47th out of 50 states in job growth.
If Romney's such a turnaround artist, aside from the mass layoffs he orchestrated at his vulture capital firm, shouldn't Massachusetts have fared far better under his leadership? Wouldn't he have been able to leave Boston as a success, rather than a wildly unpopular one-term governor?
The second angle has to do with what we talked about yesterday: Romney still can't engage in any meaningful form of transactional politics.
Romney's op-ed says he's constantly meeting Americans "who are tired of being tired" -- a line his speechwriters appear to have stolen from Joe Biden -- but note just how little he has to offer those who are struggling. Romney's "path forward," as he puts it, is to simply "get government out of the way."
That's nice enough rhetoric, I suppose, but it reinforces an unavoidable truth: there are no public constituencies with which Romney has anything constructive to offer.
When he talks to students, "getting government out of the way" means cutting off their college aid and health insurance.
When he talks to seniors, "getting government out of the way" means raising the cost of prescription drugs and turning Medicare into a voucher scheme.
When he talks to firefighters, teachers, and police officers, "getting government out of the way" means massive layoffs and pay cuts.
When he talks to those worried about foreclosure or hospital bills or paying for groceries, "getting government out of the way" means wishing them luck, because a Romney administration plans to tell them they're on their own.
As we discussed yesterday, campaign politics, especially at the national level, tends to have a definite transactional quality. A candidate will identify a group of voters and offer to make what is, in effect, a trade -- in exchange for your support in the election, the candidate will deliver a policy that will make a material difference in your life.
But Romney's appeal to the American mainstream, reinforced by today's op-ed, is to tell them that public institutions will simply stop trying to offer them benefits, protections, and safeguards. He doesn't have anything to offer in exchange for votes, except a pat on the back and best wishes when already-struggling people find themselves more isolated and on their own.
His is an agenda of austerity, a sharp reduction in public investments, and hostility towards government activism in general. In a transactional sense, Romney has to hope most voters aren't looking to make a traditional electoral trade, because he doesn't intend to give them anything.
Leave a Comment:
Good post Steve B.
That last paragraph sums up this fake-smiling jackass's "policies" to a T. Not to mention blustery BS saber rattling and a potential windfall for no-bid contractors after the invasion of Iran.
There once was a Romney who ran
For the President of this great land
He flipped and he flopped
While fake comments he dropped
And was known as the Etch-A-Scetch Man
*
As the Kettle the Pot he'd call black
And for twisting the truth had a knack
Pants were always on fire
'Cause he was a big liar
For a conscience and soul he did lack
Awesome limerick!
Thanks. His bankrupt ethics, fascistic tendencies and Vulture Capitalist past create a wealth of topics to poke at for sure !
I second on the awesomeness of your limericks Hope.
Limericks rhyme on the 1st, 2nd and 5th lines grouping, and 3rd and 4th line groupings
----
Stop being so darn pendant
And likely to be so irrelevant
Make it up or fake it
Etch-a-Sketch and shake it
Oppose it all and be observant
Thank you.
How to Write a Limerick
Edited by PoofBird and 40 others
http://www.wikihow.com/Write-a-Limerick
A limerick is a short, comical, and almost musical poem that often borders on the nonsensical or obscene. It was popularized in English by Edward Lear (and thus Limerick Day is celebrated on his birthday, May 12). Writing them takes a little practice at first, but before long you'll be addicted to coming up with these witty, whimsical rhymes.
Know the basic characteristics of a limerick.
Rhyming pattern. A limerick has five lines; the first, second, and fifth rhyme with each other, and the third and fourth rhyme with each other.
Number of syllables. The first, second and fifth lines should have eight or nine syllables, while the third and fourth lines should have five or six.
Meter. A limerick has a certain "rhythm" created by how the syllables are stressed.
Lets examine :
There once was a Romney who ran ( 8 )
For the President of this great land ( 9 )
He flipped and he flopped ( 5 )
While fake comments he dropped ( 6 )
And was known as the Etch-A-Scetch Man ( 9 )
Hmmm. Meets all the criteria for a limerick. I believe it's a limerick !!
America is for Americans they say
Not Mexicans or Afro-Americans or Americans that are gay
No sir no yellow, brown or even red
Just plain old white bread
European Americans see it this way
Obama has fought for and spoken up for and thus tried to unite people of all incomes, all races, all genders, all orientations and time and time again has spoken of all of us as Americans.
On the other hand, Republicans and Right-Wingers are the ultimate dividers. If you are not a White, Radical, Religious-Fanatic, Right-Wing, Racist, Homophobic, Misogynistic, Social Engineer - and especially a rich one of all of these - you do not belong in America.
Obama truly loves America AND Americans.
The Radical, Right-Wing Republicans pretend to love America - but hate Americans - and are destroying the fabric of this country so it can be turned into a Plantation for the Fascist Billionaires to run and make a profit from.
I am for a level playing field that everyone can enter and make of their own lives what they will no matter what political, social or cultural labels anyone chooses to live by or that are involuntarily placed on them.
Romney still can't engage in any meaningful form of
transactional politicstruth telling.WFT again! If you are a republican and/or want Obama to lose, it is unreasonable to expect Romney to tell the truth or run on his actual policies. Even for the 'low information base' of the republican party, learning of his actual policies would be a non-starter.
I look forward to this afternoon's installment of Mitt's
LiesMendacities.I'm tired ... I'm tired ..... I'm really tired ..... of Romney
and I'm really tired of being tired of Romney
and this is not the end, it is not even the beginning of the end, its just the beginning .... and I AM TIRED ......
Can you all just picture Ann Romney in the Whitehouse with that awful boobasaywhat $1000 T-Shirt in the Whitehouse ..... man what a sick couple they do make.
Obama is really going to have to implode to lose this election ...........
But we cannot afford to assume that President Obama will be re-elected. We all need to get out and work for him
Make sure your friends are registered, and that they have voter ID in states where that is required (like my home state of Pennsylvania). The voter ID part is especially important for our seniors, some of whom no longer have a driver's license. And those same seniors may need rides to the polls...ask!
We sat on our laurels in 2010, relishing the 2008 election results, and look what happened...the House of Representatives, and many state legislatures were taken over by the Republicants/conservatives. NOT AGAIN!
P D Hunn,
I agree 100%. But we have to go further this time. Not only do we need to re-elect PBO and all downticket Dems in 2012; we MUST then show up at the 2014 midterms, to make up for our complacency in 2010.
Mitt is a weasel! Mitt is a weasel!
Actually, I believe he's just stupid -- the kind of stupid that comes from having your money work and think for you, without your having to lift a little finger.
There's a difference between "ignorant" and "stupid".
Ignorance can be fixed, stupidity is incurable.
Steve- If I were an Obama speechwriter, I would steal your "getting government out of the way" theme today, and drum that home every day from now until November. Great, great post.
I can't wait for the presidential debates! President Obama is going to CREAM him, and Mittney'd better not lie, because the President will call him on each and every one.
Anyone have any idea how we can get MSNBC to host one of the debates, and have Rachel moderate it? That would be the icing on the cake!
Indeed. I hope Obama's debate preparation includes a study of Steve's complete Mitt's Mendacity Chronicles.
Oh really.... sure... like the corporate masters would let Rachel have her way with him at a debate. They need a horse race damnit and Rachel would disembowel Romney and send his poll numbers crashing . They need to sell those pharmaceuticals and beer and need a close race to do it. Can you imagine Faux Nooze howling about librul media clutching their pearls and fainting on the couch.
I guess you can dream
Instead we will get Wolf Blitzer asking if they like cats or dogs and why?
He only served one term because he accomplished all that he wanted to accomplish.
So all he wanted to accomplish included being 47th in the nation in job growth? Wow, what a lofty goal THAT was.
and a good health care plan
No, what he wanted to accomplish was being called "Governor Romney" for the rest of his life.
Exactly. He and his ilk want to ' be ' in politics and ' be ' given powerful titles rather than ' do ' the right thing for Americans or ' do ' powerful things for the progress of all.
Marginalized hit the nail on the head: people all over are feeling the same way. In 2004, I knew people who really liked W and thought he should be president again, not just that they didn't like Kerry. In 2008, I knew people who really liked McCain, and weren't just voting against Obama.
I've never, not a single time, heard anyone outside of Romney's gaggle of sycophants say that they actually like the man or think that he has good policies. People either hate him, are sick of him, are tolerating him, or some combination of those.
I remember that there was a period of time when it looked like McCain was probably going to pull it out in a squeaker. That won't happen with Romney, no chance. His past, his ideas, his religion, his background, even his personality; they're poison.
He's not just unlikable, he's very easy to hate. Doing things like writing this op-ed? Not going to help with that. Regardless of what the polls may say, I live in Ohio, and let me tell you: the feeling on the street here is not friendly to Mitt Romney.
Back in the 1980's, there was a similar effect going on in the UK: Labour looked poised to win, but the Conservatives knew that the polling was wrong. Their polling and focus groups showed that people said they were going to vote Labour, but they were planning to vote for the Tories, there was just too much social pressure against that to say it out loud.
I think we see the opposite here. People are saying they're going to vote Republican, because "liberal" is a dirty word and Obama is seen as King of the Liberals, regardless of how untrue that is.
The fact is that young people will never vote for Romney, he doesn't give them what they want psychologically. Obama does. Women for the same reason. Even middle-income men, in the end, won't be wooed by Romney.
Obama, and the ideals that he stands for an represents, really reflect the best of America. Romney, and his ideals, reflect the most parasitic, ugly parts of America.
So, right here and now, I'm going to propose a 10,000 Internets bet:
1. IF the election is Obama v Romney: Obama wins by 10% of the popular vote.
2. IF the election is Obama v Romney v 3rd Party: Obama wins a plurality or around 46%, Mitt gets 25%, the 3rd party challenger gets the remainder.
3. IF Ron Paul uses his delegates to somehow get on the ticket as VP ... all bets are off, and the election will be so close that this will be a rehash of Bush v Gore.
Well the state of Massachusetts certainly got the governor "out of the way". You know it never ceases to amaze me that if Republican's hate government so much why American's continue to elect someone with such an obvious conflict of interest.
I use to like Ms. Maddow, Now im not so sure she is a true news reporter. To bad I had great hopes for her. Now she is almost as bad as Fox. Just more entertainment for the blunt skulls.
Doncat, are you referring to this article or just throwing your opinion out there. This article was not written by Ms. Maddow, but by a writer Steve Benen. Don't really read much do you?
RM is the host of a talk/opinion show and never has put herself forward as a reporter but as a truth teller,albeit, by her lights.
First of all, Rachel does some fantastic reporting on her show, that's not even up for debate. However, TRMS is first and foremost political commentary, not news. There's a huge difference between commenting and informing people on the days events, and simply reporting them as news.
To say that she's "almost as bad as Fox" is, first and foremost, a meaningless statement (What aspects of Fox? What particular shows on Fox?) and second, of course it's entertainment. That's what people watch television for at 9pm. If you want news, you might want to try the Google. It's chock full of news. Hell, you can even customize the types of news you see on it!
Welcome to 2012. Enjoy your stay. But, please stop leaving idiotic comments.
Excellent post. I would add that all this makes clear that Romney doesn't want the job, he wants the job title.
Too many people here are operating under a false assumption. Romney's goal (and that of other Republicans) isn't to actually accomplish anything once they're in power. It's to be in power. Period.
Other than the impact it would have on their re-election chances, few Republicans would care if unemployment went to 20%, if 90% of the people were completely without health care, or if the masses are safe.
It isn't about solving problems. It's about making sure that nobody else is in charge. And about dismantling government at every level so that there are no barriers to wealth accumulation by the uber rich. That's why Republicans don't worry about their past statements and policy positions. They have no intention of living up to them anyway--other than those about tax cuts--which, of course, are the universal solution to all of society's problems.
When you're neither responsible for your past nor burdened by expectations, statements are nothing more than meaningless combinations of letters and syllables.
Well said . They have all the money . health care , recessions , security are other peoples problems . They want a permanent underclass willing to scramble for a few jobs at China wages
That is a good point. Again, sounds a lot like George Bush.
And perhaps to permit his church to begin to define our society. I would not put this past him as a genuine motivation.
I swear, if I could be sure that Breyer and Ginsberg could survive until 2017 I'd almost wish for a Republican sweep this fall. 51 Republicans in the Senate and a stacked House, with President Sock Puppet.
Because, at the rate we're going, we might as well let the public discover what these Yahoos are really all about -- and after four years of serious Hell on Earth, we might actually get down to solving real problems. And it would be Hell, because the first thing they'd do would crash the economy in a way that would make 1929 look like a lovely spring day, all while gutting the safety net.
I entertain the same thoughts , we have about 1/2 of the electorate thinking if we can just shut down all gov programs , then everything will be just fine , but once grandpa moves in and they start paying all his med bills , reality will drill a bigger hole in their heads , until it actually happens to these schleps , they will just will just keep getting no where
Ending the filibuster would help expose the gop and their policies for what they are
I have been active in green policies locally and nationally for 30 years , and it has done no good at all , 1 step forward , the gop takes us 3 steps back , now it is to late imo , the gangrene of the gop gov polices need to to be felt in full effect , other wise they will NEVER stfu
I agree that the voters should get exactly what they are voting for. When the Republicans take over and run the country into the ground, the following midterm elections will see the Republican party become extinct. Grover Norquist, the Tea Party and trickle down economics will never rise again.
D.C. Sessions,
I hear what you are saying, but inasmuch as it may sound tempting do not forget these guys are playing for keeps.
It is not difficult to envision that by the time the 4th year ended, our government would be dismantled, most of which would be privatized if not eliminated: environmental regulations gone, financial regulations gone, healthcare gone, Social Security & Medicare gone or privatized, pell grants gone, food stamps gone, unions busted & unemployment benefits gone, labour laws gone, consumer protection laws gone, public education gone, middle class gone.
This is what the Republicans have been wanting to do for decades, but dared not speak of their plans to the public at least not until recently when they started putting them into action.
In less than 2-years Republican-held state legislators pushed through bills that were signed into law by Republican governors: Voter ID laws, anti-abortion laws, right-to-work (for less) laws, anti-immigration laws, drug tests for anyone collecting government benefits, etc. etc. etc.
Many of those states have also either shut-down or defunded Planned Parenthood & healthcare clinics for women, eliminated collective bargaining rights for public employees, reduced the number of weeks unemployment insurance benefits can be collected, so on and so on.
They have also laid-off massive numbers of public workers: teachers, nurses, firemen & police. Hundreds of public schools shuttered, overcrowded classrooms, extracurricular activities ended ... The lists are endless.
Considering the Republicans accomplished all that & more in a short 1.5 years or actually less, I shudder to think what they would do in 4 years! Because by then, what was done could not be undone. It would be too late.
Be careful for what you wish for; it just might come true!
Thank you!
This, IMO, is why Romney's entire candidacy is a joke. This is his only selling point in his argument that he would be superior to Obama. If he had never ventured into the area of governance, then I could understand people giving this argument some credence. But, he did venture into governance, and the results were terrible.
So in order to take Romney's case for the Presidency seriously, voters would have to ignore the results and facts of his job creation record in Massachusetts.
But, what's really alarming and irritating is:
Why is the MSM ignoring these facts?
"This is his only selling point in his argument that he would be superior to Obama."
I would make a subtle distinction. His main selling point is that he isn't Obama. Period. (Especially the part about not being black.) I'm not even sure how important the "superior" part is to their argument, since that superiority is achieved by his simply not being this hated man.
The Romney campaign can use this handy slogan, "Not Obama."
Or: "Romney will be just like George Bush!"
He can't run on his record as governor, good lord no, because he was Practically a Moderate. We know he passed health care. So if he won't talk about that, then really he's just a Republican Face. He's the most palatable thing the GOP could come up with to be the face of the campaign.
If I really wanted an alternative to Obama, or if I really believed in Ryan's budget, I wouldn't trust this guy. He lies and flip flops. What does he stand for?
So: if Romney gets in office, he'll do as he's told... by the conservative movement, presumably. So he's no different than George Bush.
Excellent article Mr. Benen. Good follow up on yesterday's piece about Romney's inability to offer anything of value to citizens like support or security.
Thom Hartmann suggested the GOP is not a political party anymore but rather a corporation and should be called the Republican Party Inc. because all their candidates are really just 'investments' that will bring them big returns and so voters are just objects to be manipulated in order to get their investments in place. No programs will be in linfe with voter's needs...just corporate needs. Here is Romney runing for that CEO position of the Republican Party Inc.
Can anyone recommend an article about Bain Capital? I would like to know some specifics about how the company operated and what it accomplished.
The following should give you a good idea of ins and outs of Bain Capital:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/26/1040130/-Redstate:-Romney-Unelectable-Because-of-Bain-Capital-Ties?via=siderec
kind of “unemployed”
Josh Kosman's book The Buyout of America: How Private Equity Will Cause the Next Great Credit Crisis. There is an entire chapter on Mitt Romney and Bain Capital. Kosman describes in detail how Bain and Romney bought up troubled companies, slashed budgets and pensions, and then used the savings to pay huge dividends to themselves, often leaving the company for dead.
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/mitt-romneys-bain-problem-worsens.php?ref=fpblg
Greg Sargent:
Romney continues to make assertions about his Bain years that are skating by without challenge. He has now repeatedly claimed that the Bain years ended up creating over 100,000 jobs, even though independent fact checkers have concluded that this is unsubstantiated and that there’s no way of being sure his Bain years led to more jobs than layoffs.
The Wall Street Journal examined 77 businesses Mitt Romney invested in while running Bain Capital from its 1984 start until early 1999, to see how they fared during Bain's involvement and shortly afterward.
"Among the findings: 22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost. Another finding was that Bain produced stellar returns for its investors -- yet the bulk of these came from just a small number of its investments. Ten deals produced more than 70% of the dollar gains."
I think you'll find what you are looking for, but if not I've got many more links if you need them.
Romney is just a pen holder for Grover Norquist.
That's it. They are not expecting him to be Presidential, he can go ahead and look the part.
They just want him there to not object to anything they tell him to sign. He won't be able to take a dump without checking in with Boehner, Grover Cantor, and Rush, first.
A signature writing machine would suffice?
The Nation Cannot Remember?
Didn't the "Etch-a-Sketch" candidate Romney, as Governor of Massachusetts, order his hard drives erased?
The shiny, silvery, glitter particles that cling to the inside surface of plastic screen of the "Etch-a-Sketch" toy device; hide the strings, rods and springs and knobs of the contraption.
Aren't these the unseen hands of market forces, the manipulative tools, to shape and sculpt the image, the places to pull the strings of this low productivity graphic tool?
Economics is the business of counting the results of market activity after it has already happened; it is not the knob on the toy that produces the results, it is only the place to grip and turn the controls to produce the results. The energy for the economy, like the energy for the "Etch-a-Sketch" tool comes from the outside of the "Etch-a-Sketch" box, you have to provide that energy. If all you have to work within the "Etch-a-Sketch" box, the silvery currency and passing the erase stylus over the dusted surface you produce a vague image, and then you have used time and energy to produce only what is possible, with that limited tool.
The state of the graphic art, hasn’t changes much since "Etch-a-Sketch" days, even today we have such poor tools to help us?
Romney cannot claim to know anything about the economy, because he has not "created" anything new, his accomplishments are like drilling a hole in the "Etch-a-Sketch" box and taking out the shiny silver glittery particles and taking them to the pawn shop, at least the "Etch-a-Sketch" could not be erased, but left to stare at blank screen, not entertaining. The product was outsourced to China, the silver glitter taken from company piggy banks, and sold to other companies who also had piggy banks, well at least some of the mess would stick to the hands, those big hands, those hands that gave rise to the nick name, that seeing the hand prints on the birth certificate, name as mittens.
What would the "Etch-a-Sketch" inspiration become, a revolution in the graphs arts, the refinement of numerical machinery, the rendering of product ideas, new things. None of those? We break into many small piggy banks, and we fill our own large piggy bank, and make sure that those small piggy banks walk toward us with the promise of riches.
If we produced paper products, and sold those products, by delivering them across town, we would expense energy cost of our delivery into the product, as well as everything else that accounting dictates. At some point we might raise our prices as resource costs increase. This is what economics measures, and does so after the business is built, and did not predict in the remotest way how to build a business. Things change, our prices may not be set right, and we are loath to review them. Then things change, new roads were built by client taxes, all the old clients acquired their own transportation, and their own delivery vehicles, and client expenses went up, all sooner or later sought to lower their costs. Having paper supplies delivered to the office meant supporting two fleets of vehicles. What economics told you was that if you could transfer all of your business overhead from your account to your client's account you could lower your prices and make a bigger profit. But your old client delivery base was leaving faster than you change your profit model. Hence on the outside of town a new discount business was started, with low prices, and sure enough all the old delivery business closed giving the new business temporary short term edge. Grasp the profit as the temporary gain is available and don't hang on to it, sell it like a hot potato.
Need I go on about the costs, high salaries, expenses, health insurance, pensions, finance, and sales to mutual funds? In the end the same products are delivered and the whole net profit motive becomes the "Etch-a-Sketch" dream, and not one ounce of new product is created, and there you have it everyone has the same old "Etch-a-Sketch" tools, is drawing the same picture, the same way, with the same training, and the same prospects for achievements. How the blue blazes are the "Etch-a-Sketch" users of the world supposed to add value to a product, to add their experience and their own ways of doing things create a new business if all we have is the same tool over and over again the "Etch-a-Sketch"?????????????
What have I done here?
I have taken an "Etch-a-Sketch" toy apart, exposed its inner workings and made several implied analogies. Among them drawing with crude tools, be they, crayons or "Etch-a-Sketch" produces poor images, and net dissatisfaction that the tool the "Etch-a-Sketch" did not improve my drawing as hoped when the product was purchased.
The "Etch-a-Sketch" tool is very modestly an example for the modern PC, purchased with the hope of building out beyond what was already there, and overcoming the lack of fine motor skills, this did not happen on either a personal level or with society at large.
The pathetic understanding of science; is the erroneous and dual misunderstanding of science and the empirical methods that result in economics being called a science, the word "empirical" is worth looking up since it key to the point; economics is made up science and as such is subject of immediate and whole sale revision (dump the system you have is it is not working.)
The disassembled parts of the "Etch-a-Sketch", illustrate that the product, does not have into itself enough creative power to do much, but is central to most plotters, and printers, and modern numerical control machines, modern robotic devices, all the technology begging to be used in automating production, noting that after all this automation/production has been achieved there is more to do.
More to do means that the business model here is quite shallow, narrow, obvious, purposeful, and illustrative of success and of failure all wrapped in the same plastic we cannot seem to tear off to get to meaning.
The business model has to do with the dull point that delivering supplies effectively has limiting value since it not repeatable profit model. The business model is not a version of musical chairs. But the business models is exactly like what it was that we were supposed to do with that effortless productivity, both produce one side effect called "time". Using that "time" has effected produced the longest "duh" moment in history.
Yes we are into a multi-year recession, and having atrophied mental powers in the houses of governments, of Congress, the Senate, and the House of Representatives, sitting on their full moons for 3.5 years.
The country needs a really, really big "Etch-a-Sketch" and to be shaken vigorously, and get over the longest "Duh moment" since the dark ages, even the Black Plague (Death) only lasted 4 years (1347,1351).