KRISTEN'S BOARD
Congratulations to 2024 Pervert of the Year Shiela_M and 2024 Author of the Year Writers Bloque!

News:

The Clinton Thread: All things Hillary

thetaxmancometh · 33611

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline herschel

  • Freakishly Strange
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,702
    • Woos/Boos: +222/-1
Reply #120 on: January 14, 2016, 05:11:36 AM
Wall Street likes Hillary, and that's pretty much all you need. Nobody gets elected to Stooge-in-Chief without Wall Street backing. A little talent, a little charisma always helps, but George Bush proved even that was not a prime requisite.

Trump, on the other hand, is testing the theory that appealing to the morons of our great land is another avenue to political success. Even if he loses, he will find some way to exploit the special appeal he has built up so far. I'm thinking of a German politician from the 1930's whose ascent to power suffered many setbacks, but through defiant persistence went on to glory. For a while, anyway.

Meanwhile, I feel bad (only a little) for poor Jeb, to be outshone by a hopelessly incompetent jerk of a younger brother. There is no justice. Not for him, not for us.



Offline Katiebee

  • Shield Maiden POY 2018
  • Burnt at the stake
  • *******
    • Posts: 12,197
    • Woos/Boos: +946/-14
    • Gender: Female
  • Achieving world domination, one body at a time.
Reply #121 on: January 14, 2016, 05:24:32 AM
Oh, such an acidic wit you have. And a very perceptive eye.

There are three kinds of people in the world. Those who can count, and those who can't.


Offline Lois

  • Super Freak
  • Burnt at the stake
  • ******
    • Posts: 11,159
    • Woos/Boos: +768/-57
Reply #122 on: January 14, 2016, 03:47:37 PM
Agreed.



Offline watcher1

  • POY 2010
  • Burnt at the stake
  • *******
    • Posts: 16,989
    • Woos/Boos: +1722/-57
    • Gender: Male
  • Gentleman Pervert
Reply #123 on: January 14, 2016, 06:39:39 PM
Hillary is losing ground to Sanders in Iowa. Maybe not such a good idea having Bill campaign for her since the latest polls show 70% have a favorable view of Bill and only 45% of Hillary.

Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds.


Offline herschel

  • Freakishly Strange
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,702
    • Woos/Boos: +222/-1
Reply #124 on: January 14, 2016, 06:48:29 PM
"such an acidic wit"

Thank you, Katiebee, I love you for saying that.

When I was eleven, my scoutmaster told me I was the most sarcastic person he ever met. I don't think he meant it as a compliment, but I took it more that way than as a reproof.

It's not that I dislike defective people all that much, because who doesn't have a few teeny defects here and there? It's more that I hate when we don't all love one another, as Jesus urged. Not that I am a devout follower of that fine man, but he was an idealist dreaming of an impossible world, just like me, and you gotta give him credit for good ideas.

Lois, if you agree with that line of thought, I love you too.

I'm so happy to be on KB, just my third day here!



Offline joan1984

  • Burnt at the stake
  • *******
    • Posts: 11,270
    • Woos/Boos: +616/-270
    • Gender: Female
  • Co-POY 2011
Reply #125 on: January 15, 2016, 05:45:01 AM
« Last Edit: January 15, 2016, 05:46:39 AM by joan1984 »

Some people are like the 'slinky'. Not really good for much,
but they bring a smile to your face as they fall down stairs.


Offline Lois

  • Super Freak
  • Burnt at the stake
  • ******
    • Posts: 11,159
    • Woos/Boos: +768/-57
Reply #126 on: January 17, 2016, 02:51:16 AM
Interesting.  Bernie is also polling well against any of the current Republican contenders.  I guess the years of calling Obama a socialist (when he wasn't) has brought folks to realize socialism is not a horrible thing.

Run Bernie Run!



Offline joan1984

  • Burnt at the stake
  • *******
    • Posts: 11,270
    • Woos/Boos: +616/-270
    • Gender: Female
  • Co-POY 2011
Reply #127 on: January 17, 2016, 03:49:52 AM
  Should be interesting to see how the Democrats deal with Bernie, once Hillary bites it... something tells me the DNC is not ready for Sanders as the Nominee, similar to how the Republicans are not ready to accept Trump or Cruz...

  Will see if they trot out Joe Biden, with Doctor Biden, or maybe John Kerry, with Ms. Heinz again... are Dems ready for that? Somehow the Republicans need us to believe the answer to any question is Jeb!, and if we won't believe that, then it's Marco Rubio...

  2016 should be an interesting year. We could have the faux Indian in the race by New Hampshire... we shall see...

Some people are like the 'slinky'. Not really good for much,
but they bring a smile to your face as they fall down stairs.


Offline Sensualtravler

  • Freakishly Strange
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,271
    • Woos/Boos: +67/-17
    • Gender: Male
Reply #128 on: January 17, 2016, 11:37:28 AM
After watching a few of the Hillary backers comments, it's not a wonder the US is in the condition it's in. In past years I've never let a candidates party dissuade me from voting for someone I felt was qualified to fill a position, but the Democratic party is sounding more and more like hippocrates  and a party that will do and say anything to win.There are so many unqualified candidate from both parties, it's scary. As Joan said though, "Anyone but Hillary"! I hate the tone of her voice as if she believes anyone voting for another candidate would be an idiot.
She has almost as little qualifications as Obama had, (and everyone knows how few he had/has) and as we all know her election to the US senate in NY she rode in on her hubbies coattails. It surely wasn't because she was qualified.None of her promises she made to the electorates of NY were kept. Just ask the farmers from upstate NY how they feel about her! She passed a few obscure bills that didn't matter to beans simply to show she attended a few Senate hearings. Very few at that. Her position as Secretary of State was a favor from Obamanaton to help grease the way to him being elected. Good deal for her since she knew she was losing her parties nomination anyway. We all know how she handled that position.
It may be an moot point anyway, as she be convicted for her email treason and stupidity.
Biden will never get his parties nomination. That's an automatic loss for them. Even the uninformed voters aren't that desperate. If you thing W said a few dumb things, listen to some of Bidens blunders!
If push came to shove, at the moment I'd probable vote for Cruz (because I tend to be more hawkish than I see the other Republicans being), or Bernie because what he says makes sense to me.
It's a long time to elections and I'll wait to see who fucks up the least.

"ANYONE BUT HILLARY!!".




 
« Last Edit: January 17, 2016, 11:45:12 AM by Sensualtravler »

"To anger a conservative, lie to him. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth."


Offline watcher1

  • POY 2010
  • Burnt at the stake
  • *******
    • Posts: 16,989
    • Woos/Boos: +1722/-57
    • Gender: Male
  • Gentleman Pervert
Reply #129 on: January 17, 2016, 04:09:23 PM
Interesting.  Bernie is also polling well against any of the current Republican contenders.  I guess the years of calling Obama a socialist (when he wasn't) has brought folks to realize socialism is not a horrible thing.

Run Bernie Run!

Socialism is not bad if you want the government to take in taxes a good portion of your hard earned wages. May work in a country like Norway but I highly doubt it would work here.

Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds.


Offline Lois

  • Super Freak
  • Burnt at the stake
  • ******
    • Posts: 11,159
    • Woos/Boos: +768/-57
Reply #130 on: January 18, 2016, 07:20:16 AM
I honestly doubt Bernie could do much with the gridlocked Congress, and I doubt that is changing any time soon.



Offline watcher1

  • POY 2010
  • Burnt at the stake
  • *******
    • Posts: 16,989
    • Woos/Boos: +1722/-57
    • Gender: Male
  • Gentleman Pervert
Reply #131 on: January 20, 2016, 04:17:43 PM
I honestly doubt Bernie could do much with the gridlocked Congress, and I doubt that is changing any time soon.

Bernie seems to have Hillary worrying about the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries now.  And what is up with Chelsea Clinton telling people Sanders would undo Obamacare if he is elected?  If anything, he would add to it.

Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds.


Offline joan1984

  • Burnt at the stake
  • *******
    • Posts: 11,270
    • Woos/Boos: +616/-270
    • Gender: Female
  • Co-POY 2011
Reply #132 on: January 20, 2016, 06:31:07 PM
Chelsea lies, it is in her DNA... Bernie would push further left, always, no matter what the question may be, and in the case of health insurance, he would do away with it and all the insurance companies along with it, AND have the tax payer (YOU) pick up the tab.

Medicare for all.

Sort of like "Hillarycare" back when Bill Clinton was being a driven Democrat, and before the court cases demanded all the backup records, and the Clintons dropped the whole thing... and go away with that, at least so far.

You remember Medicare, right? That is the program that is already flat broke, with unfunded liabilities as far as one may try to predict... It was supposed to be there for Social Security recipients, who now number so many more than retirees who paid into it, than anyone can count.

Bernie calls it (and Hillary before him) "single payer", with the inflection being that the single payer is not YOU, but in fact the single payer will only be YOU.
This is the reason every Nation who tries a socialist system finds it cannot work and their treasury is broke... and the just keep on jacking up the price of Gas!

We have today at least 29 Million uninsured eligible Americans, and untold numbers of the unwashed masses Democrats keep pretending are not to be included, within our borders today. Just about the same number (30 Million) of uninsured that existed BEFORE ObamaCare... hmmm...

ObamaCare must go, in it's entirety, and Bernie's push to go further Left just requires him to point out why ObamaCare does not work today, and cannot work in the future. We only differ on the solution, as to what replaces it, not on the fact that ObamaCare must go.


I honestly doubt Bernie could do much with the gridlocked Congress, and I doubt that is changing any time soon.

Bernie seems to have Hillary worrying about the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries now.  And what is up with Chelsea Clinton telling people Sanders would undo Obamacare if he is elected?  If anything, he would add to it.


Some people are like the 'slinky'. Not really good for much,
but they bring a smile to your face as they fall down stairs.


Offline herschel

  • Freakishly Strange
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,702
    • Woos/Boos: +222/-1
Reply #133 on: January 20, 2016, 11:26:14 PM
All this malarkey about 'the taxpayer' being stuck with the bill for socialist type programs, that's just neoliberal (Hillary and Bill and their Wall Street buddies) hooey to keep all the tax breaks for the ultra-rich and let the working class pay all the bills. If Bernie had his way (which I don't expect as a very real prospect, even if he does get elected) we would go back to a progressive tax, where the ultra-rich individuals and corporations pay their fair share instead of shoving all their money into off-shore accounts and tax  where financial transactions are taxed instead of being tax-free, where bail-outs are for the working class rather than the capitalist pirate
« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 11:38:37 PM by herschel45 »



Offline Lois

  • Super Freak
  • Burnt at the stake
  • ******
    • Posts: 11,159
    • Woos/Boos: +768/-57
Reply #134 on: January 21, 2016, 03:41:38 PM
Bernie would push further left, always, no matter what the question may be, and in the case of health insurance, he would do away with it and all the insurance companies along with it, AND have the tax payer (YOU) pick up the tab.

WE are picking up the tab now, or haven't you noticed?  As Medicare accomplishes the same thing at fraction of the cost, I say removing the insurance companies from the equation and having Medicare for all would save all of us a great deal of money.

"... non-partisan data from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) demonstrate definitively that private insurance is increasingly less efficient than Medicare. The data show that Congress should examine and address the role that private insurance is playing in driving up overall health care costs.

Medicare Has Controlled Costs Better Than Private Insurance

* According to CMS, for common benefits, Medicare spending rose by an average of 4.3 percent each year between 1997 and 2009, while private insurance premiums grew at a rate of 6.5 percent per year. (See Table 13)

* According to a calculation by the National Academy for Social Insurance, if spending on Medicare rose at the same rate as private insurance premiums during that period, Medicare would have cost an additional $114 billion (or 31.7 percent).

* The CBO explicitly stated that its data on relative cost growth should not be used to make the argument that Goodman and Saving make, writing that the relatively low growth rate of all health care expenditures other than Medicare and Medicaid “should not be interpreted as meaning that Medicare or Medicaid is less able to control spending than private insurers.” Goodman and Saving mistakenly suggest that the growth rate of private insurance is the same as the growth rate of all health care expenditures other than Medicare and Medicaid; however, as CBO points out, the growth rate of all health care expenditures other than Medicare and Medicaid includes not just spending by private insurers, but also government programs and out-of-pocket costs paid by the uninsured.

* The CBO has predicted that the rising cost of private insurance will continue to outstrip Medicare for the next 30 years. The private insurance equivalent of Medicare would cost almost 40 percent more in 2022 for a typical 65-year old.

Medicare Has Lower Administrative Costs Than Private Plans.

* According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, administrative costs in Medicare are only about 2 percent of operating expenditures. Defenders of the insurance industry estimate administrative costs as 17 percent of revenue.

* Insurance industry-funded studies exclude private plans’ marketing costs and profits from their calculation of administrative costs. Even so, Medicare’s overhead is dramatically lower.

* Medicare administrative cost figures include the collection of Medicare taxes, fraud and abuse controls, and building costs.

So-called “competition” in the private health care market has driven costs up.
.
* In most local markets, providers have monopoly power. Consequently, private insurers lack the bargaining power to contain prices.

* In most areas, two or three dominant insurers dominate the regional market, limit competition and make it extremely difficult if not impossible for new insurers to enter the marketplace and stimulate price competition.

* Medicare Advantage, which enrolls seniors in private health plans, has failed to deliver care more efficiently than traditional fee-for-service Medicare. Both the CBO and the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), the commission which advises congress on Medicare’s finances, have calculated that Medicare Advantage plans covering the same care as traditional Medicare cost 12 percent more.

* Karen Ignagni, who heads America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the insurance industry’s trade association, has admitted that private plans cannot bargain down provider costs and has asked Washington to intervene.

Medicare Is Publicly Accountable, Private Plans Are Not


When it comes to how much it costs private plans to deliver care, or individual insurer innovations that deliver value, the publicly available data are scarce. Goodman and Saving present only one study on the ways that insurers try to control costs, and this was published by AHIP. Because Medicare is publicly accountable, it allows us to study what works so that we can improve the health care system.

...."


http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2011/09/20/medicare-is-more-efficient-than-private-insurance/



Offline joan1984

  • Burnt at the stake
  • *******
    • Posts: 11,270
    • Woos/Boos: +616/-270
    • Gender: Female
  • Co-POY 2011
Reply #135 on: January 27, 2016, 05:43:46 PM
Hillary’s “blame-men-first”
feminism may prove costly
in 2016

CAMILLE PAGLIA

During her two presidential campaigns, Hillary Clinton has consistently drawn greater support from women than men. Is this gender lag due to retrograde misogyny, or does Hillary project an uneasiness or ambivalence about men that complicates her appeal to a broader electorate?

As a career woman, Hillary is rooted in second-wave feminism, which began with Betty Friedan’s co-founding of the National Organization for Women in 1967, while Hillary was in college. Friedan sought to draw men into the women’s movement and to ally with mainstream wives and mothers. But after a series of ideological struggles, she lost her leadership role and was eventually eclipsed in media attention by the more telegenic Gloria Steinem, who famously said, “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.”

Hillary has unfortunately adopted the Steinem brand of blame-men-first feminism, which defines women as perpetual victims requiring government protections. Hillary’s sometimes impatient or patronizing tone about men, which can perhaps be traced to key aspects of her personal history, may prove costly to her current campaign.

In his biography of Hillary, “A Woman in Charge,” Carl Bernstein detailed the abuse and humiliation regularly visited by her domineering father, Hugh Rodham, on her mother Dorothy. Hillary has tersely admitted the strict physical discipline inflicted upon her and her two younger brothers by their father, who maintained a drill-sergeant atmosphere in their Chicago home.

It is often mistakenly said that by staying in her marriage to the philandering Bill Clinton, Hillary was following the standard pattern of her generation. But it was her rebellious baby-boom generation that spread and normalized once rare and scandalous divorce. In preserving her marriage despite repeated humiliation, Hillary was embracing and reaffirming the painful decisions made by her own mother.

Childhood photos of Bill Clinton show his gregarious, fun-loving charm already fully formed. The young Hillary Rodham, in contrast, looks armored, with a sharp gaze and a tense, over-bright smile. Like many first-born daughters, she became her father’s favorite son, marginalizing her less self-assured and accomplished brothers.

The “enabling” with which Hillary has been charged in her conflicted marriage may actually have been the pitying indulgence and half-scornful toleration that she first directed toward her brothers. She demoted her husband to a fraternal role—the shiftless “bad boy” in chronic need of scolding and spanking. Bill may have acknowledged this a year before his marriage, when he reportedly told Arkansas college student Maria Crider about his future wife: “She gets me started, kicks my butt, and makes me do the things I’ve got to do.”

Hillary’s deep, defensive bonding with her beleaguered mother has been replicated in her close relationship with her daughter Chelsea, who was old enough to witness the trauma of her father’s 1998 impeachment. In her 2008 campaign, Hillary was widely mocked for having fabricated a dramatic story about her and Chelsea running for cover under sniper fire after landing in war-torn Bosnia. In admitting she had misspoken, Hillary claimed she had been “sleep-deprived” at her Washington press conference.

But surely that overwrought action-adventure tale was a strange flashback to an episode from Hillary’s youth, as reported by Mr. Bernstein: the usually stingy Hugh Rodham had once treated his wife and daughter to a shopping spree at a New York department store. Under tight time pressure from Hugh, the two women pulled off their shoes and ran laughing and barefoot together through the store. The non-existent Bosnian sniper fire may have been a shadowy memory of the strafing dictates of an authoritarian father, against whom mother and daughter were united in conspiratorial defiance.

As a teenager, Hillary Rodham adopted her father’s conservatism and campaigned for Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential campaign. In her freshman year at the all-woman Wellesley College, she was president of the Young Republicans club. But her political views so shifted that she wrote her senior thesis on radical activist Saul Alinsky, a Chicago community organizer. Her rejection of Alinsky’s job offer and decision to enter Yale Law School instead (“I need three years of legal rigor”) suggested a newfound feminist determination to break from father figures.

As the class speaker at her Wellesley commencement ceremony in 1969, Hillary went off script to rebut and rebuke the honored guest speaker, Massachusetts senator Edward Brooke, an elegant centrist Republican who was the first African-American elected to the U.S. Senate by popular vote. This incident, which won Hillary a photo spread in Life magazine, can be alternately viewed as a brave generational gesture or an act of crass discourtesy with anti-male overtones.

Hillary’s decision to move to Arkansas to be with Bill, whom she had met in law school, followed her shocking failure of the District of Columbia bar exam. As his most trusted counselor and strategist, she helped guide her husband’s rise to attorney general and governor of Arkansas, but at every point, her professional life, culminating in a partnership at the Rose Law Firm, was at least partly derived from her association with him—not an ideal feminist paradigm.

It was in Arkansas that Hillary’s identity crises began. She endured a cultural displacement and isolation as severe as Jacqueline Kennedy’s when she married Aristotle Onassis and found herself ostracized by his traditionalist Greek cronies. Hillary seems to have had little respect for the Southern gender code, a product of the close-knit agrarian past. She never reconciled herself to the good ole boy fraternity with whom her husband loved to shoot the breeze, and she was wary of the governor’s security detail, whom she suspected of complicity in his infidelities. Insisting at first on keeping her maiden name, she finally surrendered to Southern convention after her husband lost his first gubernatorial reelection bid.

A 1979 photo of Bill and Hillary Clinton arriving at the White House for a dinner honoring the nation’s governors shows her with big, owlish eyeglasses and a mass of nondescript dark hair. Her subsequent fashion and hair transformations, extending through both Clinton presidencies, were astonishing. It was as if Hillary oscillated between her core identity as a gender-neutral social-activist warrior and a florid female persona so foreign to her nature that it sometimes seemed like drag.

Hillary’s most drastic metamorphosis was when she went blonde and acquired blue contact lenses (her eyes are naturally brown). The model for this change may ironically have been Gennifer Flowers, a Little Rock singer who claimed to have been Bill Clinton’s mistress for twelve years. I had the opportunity to see Flowers perform (and briefly speak to her) at her New Orleans nightclub in 2004. Then in her mid-50s, she still radiated a stunning charisma. She had the silky, soothing manner and warm hospitality of the classic Southern woman—far from the “trailer park” realm to which Democratic consultant James Carville viciously consigned Mr. Clinton’s accusers.

When rumors about Flowers surfaced during the 1992 presidential campaign, Hillary defended her husband by vehemently asserting on CBS’s “60 Minutes,” “I’m not sitting here—some little woman standing by my man like Tammy Wynette.” Hillary later apologized to Wynette, but her caustic remark seemed to betray Hillary’s Seven Sisters class bias against a spectrum of Southern women admirable for their own strength, tenacity and grit.

Gennifer Flowers is no historical footnote but rather a ghostly twin, a lingering admonishment to Hillary of everything that second-wave feminism resentfully tried and failed to change in sexual relations. Perhaps it may be impossible for hard-driving career women, schooled in the curt, abrasive Northern style, to give an inch and show that they actually like men as they are. But a top-tier politician like Hillary Clinton is narrowing her presidential chances when she privileges elite professional women at men’s expense.

Camille Paglia is the University Professor of Humanities and Media Studies at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia.  Her most recent book is "Glittering Images." You can write her at <a href="mailto:ask_camille@salon.com">this address</a>.
http://www.salon.com/2016/01/27/camille_paglia_hillarys_blame_men_first_feminism_may_prove_costly_in_2016/

Some people are like the 'slinky'. Not really good for much,
but they bring a smile to your face as they fall down stairs.


Offline MissBarbara

  • Burnt at the stake
  • *******
    • Posts: 16,206
    • Woos/Boos: +3195/-41
    • Gender: Female
Reply #136 on: January 27, 2016, 06:40:34 PM

Hillary’s “blame-men-first”
feminism may prove costly
in 2016

CAMILLE PAGLIA

http://www.salon.com/2016/01/27/camille_paglia_hillarys_blame_men_first_feminism_may_prove_costly_in_2016/



This is an interesting piece. I loved reading what Camille Paglia has to say -- even though, at times, she frustrates the hell out of me.

She leaves out an alternative (and, to my mind, more plausible) reason for Hillary's decision to "stick with" her husband, despite everything: She's an extremely ambitious woman, and has engaged on a long ascent to power since her time as First Lady of Arkansas. Ditching Bill, especially in the late 1990s when all the crises arose, would have been tantamount to ditching plans to ascend to the heights of American political power. Staying by his side, she was able to tread the stepping stones to continue her rise: Activist First Lady, U.S. Senator, Secretary of State, and, now, front-runner for the presidency.






"Sometimes the best things in life are a hot girl and a cold beer."



Offline Katiebee

  • Shield Maiden POY 2018
  • Burnt at the stake
  • *******
    • Posts: 12,197
    • Woos/Boos: +946/-14
    • Gender: Female
  • Achieving world domination, one body at a time.
Reply #137 on: January 27, 2016, 07:09:26 PM
Basically a political marriage.

There are three kinds of people in the world. Those who can count, and those who can't.


Offline MissBarbara

  • Burnt at the stake
  • *******
    • Posts: 16,206
    • Woos/Boos: +3195/-41
    • Gender: Female
Reply #138 on: January 27, 2016, 07:55:05 PM

Basically a political marriage.



Exactly.

Thereby proving, once again, that you can say something in 4 words that it takes me several paragraphs to say...






"Sometimes the best things in life are a hot girl and a cold beer."



Offline Gina Marie

  • So fucking done with it all.
  • Global Moderator
  • Burnt at the stake
  • ******
    • Posts: 9,470
    • Woos/Boos: +1376/-70
    • Gender: Female
  • Rumors Of My Demise Have Been Greatly Exaggerated
Reply #139 on: January 28, 2016, 11:30:55 AM
Exactly.

Thereby proving, once again, that you can say something in 4 words that it takes me several paragraphs to say...

From Shakespeare's Hamlet, 1602:

    LORD POLONIUS
    This business is well ended.
    My liege, and madam, to expostulate
    What majesty should be, what duty is,
    Why day is day, night night, and time is time,
    Were nothing but to waste night, day and time.
    Therefore, since brevity is the soul of wit,
    And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes,
    I will be brief: your noble son is mad:
    Mad call I it; for, to define true madness,
    What is't but to be nothing else but mad?
    But let that go.

I sure do love me some Katie & Barb.