Republican convention

A place for intelligent and well-thought-out discussion involving politics and associated topics. No nonsense will be tolerated at all.
User avatar
Bubba1
Moderator
Posts: 16082
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2024 Honda HR-V
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS

Post

Did anyone watch any of it? I normally devote minimal but equal time to each convention but I was particularly curious how Chris Christie would do, given how close I live to Trenton.

Perhaps it was me. I didn't think Christie gave a particularly great speech, as it seemed to be more about him than Romney. I had to laugh when he talked about preferring respect over love. Especially since it came minutes after Ann Romney's speech, who promoted the power of love. :facepalm:
Both speeches seemed okay on their own, but taken together seemed kinda conflicted, but then again that seems to be the RNC these days.

Thoughts?


User avatar
Marenta
Posts: 2424
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 3:34 pm
Car: 2008 Mopar Crap
'91 Isuzu Impulse RS

Post

I didn't watch it, but I heard that Santorum has a hand fetish?

User avatar
Bubba1
Moderator
Posts: 16082
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2024 Honda HR-V
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS

Post

Marenta wrote:I didn't watch it, but I heard that Santorum has a hand fetish?
I didn't watch it either. I'm a tad surprised the RNC let him speak, given the negative things he's said about Romney during primary season.

User avatar
szh
Posts: 15932
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Post

I didn't watch, but did hear some of the speeches on the radio in my car.

Z

User avatar
WDRacing
Moderator
Posts: 15983
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:00 am
Car: 95 240SX, 99 BMW 540i, 01 Chevy Express, 14 Ford Escape
Location: MFFO
Contact:

Post

I've watched some here and there, not impressed.

User avatar
themadscientist
Posts: 26254
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 3:30 pm
Car: R32 GTR, DR30 RS Turbo, BRZ, Lunchbox, NSR50 Sportster 883 Iron
Location: Staring down at you with disdain from the spooky mountaintop castle.

Post

It should be posted on poison center websites for people to click so they can induce vomiting.

User avatar
IBCoupe
Posts: 7534
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am
Car: '08 Nissan Altima Coupe 3.5SE
'19 Infiniti QX50 FWD
'17 BMW 330e iPerformance
Location: Orange County, CA

Post

I was stuck in the car on the way home from school last night, and NPR was broadcasting the speeches. I made it through Pawlenty and Huckabee, but about halfway through Rice's speech, I had to turn it off. I was driving with a tension headache (possibly from caffeine withdrawal), and the sound of that war drum just made it worse.

User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

I was pretty moved by Condi and Ryan's speeches, but then Im pretty moved by taco bell food too. I usually always like what republicans have to SAY, its what they end up DOING that frustrates me to no end.

User avatar
WDRacing
Moderator
Posts: 15983
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:00 am
Car: 95 240SX, 99 BMW 540i, 01 Chevy Express, 14 Ford Escape
Location: MFFO
Contact:

Post

Live Mas!

Some good speakers today/tonight.

User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

I really wanna see how the Eastwood speech goes, he's fairly moderate, will he tell them to get their abortocentrist heads out of their a**es?

User avatar
WDRacing
Moderator
Posts: 15983
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:00 am
Car: 95 240SX, 99 BMW 540i, 01 Chevy Express, 14 Ford Escape
Location: MFFO
Contact:

Post

I f*** hope so, Eastwood is THE MAN.

User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

No, no admonition of the Repubes. But his speech was a riot, he pretended he had Obama on a stool talking to him. Was pretty entertaining, and he hit a few nerves I think LOL

User avatar
WDRacing
Moderator
Posts: 15983
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:00 am
Car: 95 240SX, 99 BMW 540i, 01 Chevy Express, 14 Ford Escape
Location: MFFO
Contact:

Post

An excellent ending. Romney ftw.

User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

Again, Ill say the same thing. I rather enjoyed both Rubio and Romney, but as a true conservative, its hard so see what Bush was suppose to have stood for, and what he actually did, and then expect Romney to make good on his claims tonight. Still, even if he doesn't make good on everything, giving him the chance makes so much more sense to me than another 4 years of mediocrity in the oval office.

User avatar
themadscientist
Posts: 26254
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 3:30 pm
Car: R32 GTR, DR30 RS Turbo, BRZ, Lunchbox, NSR50 Sportster 883 Iron
Location: Staring down at you with disdain from the spooky mountaintop castle.

Post

And Reince Priebus drops back. The Democrats are throwing up a heavy defensive wall, no room to execute a run play. Paul is stuck on the bench since questioning the quarterback's judgement in the pregame meeting. The only other open guy is the new receiver Johnson who was recently traded to the Libertarians, but for the purposes of this strained metaphor is on the field. :chuckle: He was a second string draft pick with some sticky hands and showed good hustle in the preseason. He's wide open, nobody is covering him. NO! Priebus throws a long hail mary pass to Romney. Romney has been talking trash all season, but has yet to put up the numbers until the Republicans sued to have the rules changed that nobody could actually touch their anointed receiver and even then he's had several fumbles this season. Romney's got it, no, he's bobbling it. He's stumbling, still trying to get control of the ball and here comes Obama, the Democrat's star defensive back. Didn't he get the word that Romney is not to be touched? The crowd is on its feet, some because they are walking out in disgust some because they still think one of these teams deserves the trophy. Can, he, make it!?

User avatar
WDRacing
Moderator
Posts: 15983
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:00 am
Car: 95 240SX, 99 BMW 540i, 01 Chevy Express, 14 Ford Escape
Location: MFFO
Contact:

Post

:bowrofl:

That was funny as hell!

User avatar
AppleBonker
Posts: 17313
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:40 am
Car: Useful: 2011 Nissan Titan Pro-4x
Daily: 2003 Honda Accord EX-L Coupe
Hers: 2014 Nissan Rogue SL AWD
Location: NW Indiana

Post

Sorry to sidetrack a bit, but does anyone have a link to a more defined budget plan from Romney? After watching his speech last night, I'm having a really tough time with the math. At the end, he raised five points of importance that I can't completely piece together. I found the transcript and here is the relevant part:
Romney wrote:And fourth, to assure every entrepreneur and every job
creator that their investments in America will not vanish, as
have those in Greece. We will cut the deficit and put America
on track to a balanced budget.
(APPLAUSE)
And fifth, we will champion small businesses, America's
engine of job growth. That means reducing taxes on business,
not raising them. It means simplifying and modernizing the
regulations that hurt small businesses the most, and it means we
must rein in skyrocketing cost of health care by repealing and
replacing Obamacare.
(APPLAUSE)
Today women are more likely than men to start of business.
They need a president who respect and understand what they do.
And let me make this clear. Unlike President Obama, I will not
raise taxes on the middle class of America.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08 ... z2589xUobo
So he wants to cut the deficit (point 4), reduce taxes on business (point 5) and not increase taxes on the "middle class" (point 5.5). Where is all of this money coming from? Clearly, we are spending a lot right now. But if we reduce revenues in a few key areas, there either needs to be an increase in revenues elsewhere, or a pretty big cut to other programs. I get the feeling that he's trying to avoid touching medicare or defense spending, so how does this balance out?

User avatar
WDRacing
Moderator
Posts: 15983
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:00 am
Car: 95 240SX, 99 BMW 540i, 01 Chevy Express, 14 Ford Escape
Location: MFFO
Contact:

Post

Tax decreases help create business, more business creates more jobs, more jobs create more taxable revenue. Same thing he did in Massachusetts which happened to work fantastic btw. Also, more jobs not only create more taxable revenue, they decrease the demand for UI and welfare. So you get more jobs, more revenue and less out going expense all at the same time.

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5762
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

Yea right!

Bush did that.
His tax cuts and spending left us in great shape when Obama came into office
So what happened to the jobs?

User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

Gotta give OWS folks props on this one, toooo funny!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dTs_40q5tA[/youtube]

User avatar
WDRacing
Moderator
Posts: 15983
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:00 am
Car: 95 240SX, 99 BMW 540i, 01 Chevy Express, 14 Ford Escape
Location: MFFO
Contact:

Post

telcoman wrote:Yea right!

Bush did that.
His tax cuts and spending left us in great shape when Obama came into office
So what happened to the jobs?
Waaaah it's Bush's fault...waaaaaah...taxes...waaaaah f*** waaaah f*** waaaaah. Your excuses are exhausted and your policies are utter failure.

Bush was in office over 3.5 years ago smaht guy. Obama is in office NOW. Take your lunacy and sell it to someone that doesn't mind hearing Liberal subversion. Answer your own question, where are the jobs? Your guy is steering the ship and you're still whining, complaining and blaming someone else.

If the example I gave doesn't work, explain to me how Reagan did it in the 80's. Explain to me how Romney did it while Gov of Massachusetts.

Obama is a failure, period. Anyone that see's anything else is lying to themselves.

Romney/Ryan 2012

User avatar
ImStricken06
Posts: 4511
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:45 am
Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue (sold)
2013 Hyundai Santa Fe
2016 Kia Sorento
Location: Within Range
Contact:

Post

stebo0728 wrote:but then Im pretty moved by taco bell food too.
man, now i want a volcano taco, light on the sauce... mmmmmmmm :) :BnB:

anyway, im not impressed with politicians recently. not the right, not the left. all have good speeches, talk a lot of game, and then when in office most of the republicans are moderate as hell, and the democrats are as socialist as possible. i dont pay attention to speeches nor conventions anymore. its all BS. nothing but pep-rallies. i pay attention to the person when they are in an actual position to do something.... do they deliver?(most dont)

User avatar
Bubba1
Moderator
Posts: 16082
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2024 Honda HR-V
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS

Post

I think this might sum it up..... :)

Image

User avatar
AppleBonker
Posts: 17313
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:40 am
Car: Useful: 2011 Nissan Titan Pro-4x
Daily: 2003 Honda Accord EX-L Coupe
Hers: 2014 Nissan Rogue SL AWD
Location: NW Indiana

Post

WDRacing wrote:Tax decreases help create business, more business creates more jobs, more jobs create more taxable revenue. Same thing he did in Massachusetts which happened to work fantastic btw. Also, more jobs not only create more taxable revenue, they decrease the demand for UI and welfare. So you get more jobs, more revenue and less out going expense all at the same time.
I'm familiar with trickle-down economics. It is fairly hotly debated amongst economists, so I can't consider it anything more than a theory. I know the principles behind the theory, which you outlined above. However, I'm not so sure that end result is guaranteed.

And Romney may have employed a similar idea in Mass, but that is a state and not a nation (I know, no sh*t). The nation has a lot more expenditures when it comes to the elderly (medicare) and the impoverished (welfare) and national defense that states don't really have to worry about (at least not to the same degree). Those are only a few key differences . Therefore, the nation has a lot more "fixed" costs. I added quotes because cuts certainly aren't off-limits, but deep cuts might lead to many other adverse consequences. This is why I asked my original question (I just want some actual numbers that demonstrate this was thought out and not just flinging crap at the wall to see what sticks).

If Romney is proposing a revenue decrease (at least short term), he either needs to cut spending or have the debt increase rapidly (moreso than it is now). And if he's proposing a revenue decrease with a equal cut in spending (keeping the budget close to balanced) AND he's trying to avoid cutting medicare or defense spending, the cuts to everything else would have to be pretty deep to offset the money loss.

Also, I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure the national debt rose somewhat dramatically (for that time, anyway) during Reagan's term. While that might be an acceptable side effect of getting people back to work, when it happened to Reagan the starting debt was a much more reasonable number.

For the record, I don't expect anybody at the democratic convention to offer anything of value either. I'm pretty sure bothy parties are equally guilty of throwing sh*t at the wall to see what sticks.

User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

AppleBonker wrote: And Romney may have employed a similar idea in Mass, but that is a state and not a nation (I know, no sh*t). The nation has a lot more expenditures when it comes to the elderly (medicare) and the impoverished (welfare) and national defense that states don't really have to worry about (at least not to the same degree).
State's also get bailed out by the Fed, there's no one to bail out the Fed. That is a pretty key difference. I don't say that to say Mitt can't handle it, I still think he can, but will he is the question.

User avatar
AppleBonker
Posts: 17313
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:40 am
Car: Useful: 2011 Nissan Titan Pro-4x
Daily: 2003 Honda Accord EX-L Coupe
Hers: 2014 Nissan Rogue SL AWD
Location: NW Indiana

Post

Good point. And I guess that's kind of what I'm looking for. I'd like to see that he has the stones to make the tough call (cutting spending on "popular" items). I know that's a tough pill to swallow for many citizens, but if Romney wants my vote he needs to prove he can concoct a plan and then have the balls to stand behind it, even if parts aren't popular. Better yet, he can prove he has the ability to convince people of the necessity.

User avatar
WDRacing
Moderator
Posts: 15983
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:00 am
Car: 95 240SX, 99 BMW 540i, 01 Chevy Express, 14 Ford Escape
Location: MFFO
Contact:

Post

Supply side economics does work, you just can't continue to spend like a drunk in free fall at the same time. No doubt cuts will have to be made. That's something that has got be done regardless of the approach taken by either candidate. A simpler question would be, do you think Obama is ever going to reduce spending? You have to go by his record, because that's all he has. 5 trillion in under 4 years added to the debt. He is for bigger Gov, not less, he's already shown us this by example. The Gov is good at 2 things, spending and mishandling. That's not just a Dem problem, that one reaches across both sides of the aisle.

Romney spent his entire tenure as Governor of Mass pushing for tighter welfare rules and restrictions. In a state that's 80% Dem, that shows he'll go against the grain on big issues. He wanted more people to work in order to receive welfare, like single mothers with very young children. If they could attain state subsidized child care, they needed to work 20 hrs a week to continue to get a check. No one could receive a check for more then a life time span of 5 years. I agree with that particular stance because it allows for those in need to get help, but it places a fair amount of restrictions on how they can receive the help and for how long.

You couldn't be more right about the big issues causing wild fires in Congress. Those fools haven't managed to do a damn thing in like 25 years. Their idea of compromise seems to be just giving both sides what they want in order to pass a bill. So a simple bill for education benefits becomes a bloated pig full of waste. Which has led us straight to where we are now.

Ron Paul would no doubt have taken the bull by the horns, his idea's and thought process as a whole were right on par with someone truly looking to get America out of debt. But they scared the hell out of a lot of people. I wish he would have been more reserved until he got nominated, at which point he could have unleashed the hounds!

Neither here nor there at this point though.

The only opposition to righting our fiscal ship will be Congressional road blocks. I'm very pro defense, but I'd like to see some earnest spending cuts in this area. Ones that will help ease some other cuts to entitlement programs. Hell, we have to have cuts across the board if we truly want to have more inflow than outflow.

User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

What I don't get, is what is so hard to understand about what capitalism stands for? You make business and entrepreneurship your primary focus, you keep the market free of any and all manipulations, except discrimination protections, you don't tax business and you don't make success have a higher price tag than failure. Capitalism is not about "trickle down" economics, sure there are some trickle down effects, but when the markets are free, and opportunity is maximized, prosperity does not have to trickle down, it can be injected, or created at any level.

We've never in our history had a time like this. We've had close, before the income tax, but we had oppression of opportunity due to our still evolving civil rights. But we made a mistake, we started reforming civil rights AND restricting the market at the same time. We put a price on success by instituting an income tax. Anti-trust law and monopoly protection is good law, but we let other market obstruction become part of our tool bag. Things such as overbearing environmental policy, overbearing business regulations. We've coddled the stupid with ridiculous tort policy, we've allowed ambulance chasers to logarithmically increase the cost business by forcing businesses to carry overbearing amounts of liability insurance. We've allowed affirmative action to reverse the discrimination tables, rather than just level them. Instead of NOT hiring based on skin color, we've enacted policy that require businesses TO hire because of skin color. We've buckled to the long arm of the labor union, jobs that should net someone $15 an hour now gets $30, which completely skews the costs of goods. We've forced businesses to pay jobs worth $5 an hour, to pay $7 or more because of minimum wage law. Businesses hire under the table, often illegal immigrants, rather than hiring a more expensive American worker. There's nothing wrong with someone earning what a job is worth, and we need to realize that. We've decided to completely ignore our own law, and reward those who break it by coming here illegally. They make use of our public programs and services, yet pay not a dime for them.

This nation will only work at peak efficiency with a free market, powered by a free people. We've never had that combination before, but if we want to survive, it is essential that we figure this out. We pretty much have the free people part down now, not completely, there's more work to do, and that IS a proper function of government, to ensure that its people are free, free from both domestic and foreign oppression. Free from any undue discrimination. But there is a clear distinction to be made. Government's role is not to CREATE opportunity, but to remove any obstruction to opportunity. It is the job of the market, of the people in the market, to CREATE opportunity.

Success should not come at a price, income tax is NOT the way to tax a free people. Consumption tax is unequivocally the ONLY way to properly tax a free people. It puts the power in the hands of the people, where it belongs. Corporations and businesses DO NOT PAY taxes. This is not debatable, this is fact. Though they may write a tax check, they have NOT PAID the taxes. You have, I have, we have, embedded in the prices of the products we buy. But you don't know it, you don't see it, its not on your receipt as a tax, its just part of the price, and that is the way Washington has grown to like it. Half our nations revenue comes from corporate tax, but that comes out of OUR pockets and we're so blindly ignorant to it that we are apathetic to it. The people are the only source of revenue, did you get that, the ONLY source of revenue. Why not make that clear. Why not make that a clear choice when the people use they only real power they have, their wallet? Regardless of the actual plan we may choose to adopt, be it the FairTax, some modified form of it, or a new plan altogether, a consumption tax is what we require. Income tax was supposed to be a temporary measure folks, but it put the blood in the water, and once a politician tastes blood, look out! The income tax is yoke upon our shoulders as a people. It is THE method of oppression at every level. But its even more of an oppression to the poor. Sure wealthy hate paying tax, who doesn't, but the wealthy aren't dependent on the government, when an election comes up, their sole purpose for voting is not making sure their income tax based entitlements stay in place, their purpose is not voting to further entitlements for an bigger piece of the pie. The wealthy may vote based on trying to lower their tax burden, but they have the freedom to consider other issues as well. The entitlements are not their livelyhood. THIS is how the income tax has oppressed our nation.

Education is a big part of the problem, and we've discussed this at great length, but its essential that we realize that our education system is far overdue for an overhaul. We can debate, discuss, argue, whatever, about how that overhaul is supposed to look, but at the end of the day, our education system needs to look alot different than it does today. One thing that is essential, is that when we start to fix inequalities, we CANNOT swing the balance past the fulcrum as we did with employment. We have to be careful to fix the system so that it works for all, not fix it so that it works for those it didn't but is now broken for those that it did work for before. We need to be sure our children are educated on personal economics, how money works FOR YOU, how credit works, how budgets work.

Finally, there's one more bridge to gap. Its little understood, and that's a shame. I'll open the issue with a quote:

"Wealthy become wealthy and stay wealthy by acting wealthy. Poor become poor and stay poor by acting poor."

Now there's a mouthful. It should be noted that the "become" portions of that quote do transcend generations. The point is, poor people characterize and stereotype wealthy people by what they see in the media, either news, or entertainment media. Its understandable, since that's all they see, but its part of the problem. A big part of the problem. Successful wealthy people got that way, and stay that way, buy embracing and understanding a certain behavior system. Just because you have money, does not mean you spend money. For one, you have to account for the future. Secondly, you have to weigh the importance of your purchases. Until successful wealthy people have a discretionary fund, they don't make very many frivolous purchases. They don't drive lavish vehicles unless they have taken care of the important stuff. Up until very recently, the number one vehicle for wealthy people was the Ford Ranger pickup. Now, is that the answer a poor person would give if asked that question? No, their immediate guess would be a Ferrari or Porshe or Bentley. That's because they have a failed impression. But this is a bigger problem than just what they think about wealthy people. This causes a false mindset in the poor that keeps them poor. Take an NBA player, who came from a rough town, family has always been poor. He runs into all this new money, but he still acts poor, he still acts based on his impression of how wealthy people should act. And sooner rather than later, he's broke again, filing bankruptcy on million dollar accounts. Call it envy if you like, I dont know what to call it, but the poor keep themselves poor because of broken pattern of behavior. This has to be fixed. If we can't make rent, we dont have a smart phone with 4G internet, we dont have 500 cable channels, and we don't drive a Navigator that drinks gas by the barrel. Rent comes first, or mortgage, you need a roof over your head, if the power's out for a bit you can get by. But you have to have a responsible rent or mortgage as well. Utilities come second, you can walk or bus or carpool if you need to, and get food from charity, food banks, whatever if you need to. Food comes next, you can still walk or whatever. Ok here's the important part, most would say car next, but no. Savings comes next, first to your rainy day fund. Once that is capped at at least 6 months worth of the previous expenses, start on retirement, kick in 10%. Now car comes in if you still have budget left. Again same as lodging, it has to be a responsible car note, or preferably not car note at all, only insurance fuel and maintenance costs, but if you have to have a note, make it as low as you can get by with. Now you can have play time with whatever is left. That is how the wealthy stay wealthy. Breaking these rules on a regular basis is how the poor stay poor. The left speak of this class of institutionally poor people, and they are there, but then the left have no interest in elevating them. The left wouldn't have anyone to vote for them if this class elevated themselves. We have to educate this class, show them how the real wealthy live, not just how the rock star wealthy live, so that when opportunity does knock at their door, they can make a permanent change with it, not just a temporary change, then back to the slums.


Sorry for the wall of text....

User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

http://www.caintv.com/Whatreallykilledt ... myDebu-341

Very well put. Spot on. This man should be debating Obama, not Romney.

User avatar
themadscientist
Posts: 26254
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 3:30 pm
Car: R32 GTR, DR30 RS Turbo, BRZ, Lunchbox, NSR50 Sportster 883 Iron
Location: Staring down at you with disdain from the spooky mountaintop castle.

Post

It's to even-handed and factual. It will be rejected.


Return to “Politics Etc.”