DescentBB

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:21 am**

Will Robinson wrote:It is interesting you acknowledge the government has thousands of parking spaces yet you seem comfortable assuming the reason a few choice lots were barricaded was simply a preset policy to avoid legal issues for leaving a lot that is always unmanned unmanned...
There is a giant leap of faith there to come to that conclusion and then just stop considering the extremely selective nature of installing the barricades! It serves to support your idea of motive almost not at all considering the ratio of lots selected.
It supports my idea of motive perfectly.

I'll say it again since you can't seem to understand my point. I have no idea how many parking spaces there are. A reasonable guess would be in the hundreds or thousands because America is a damn big country. We only have information that 2 or 3 parks had barricades. This seems trivial. I don't have enough information to know which parks are manned or unmanned because I only have a single quote by an outraged person. I don't have access to the national policy for parks and the procedures for closing. And I'll make the point one more time: I think it is silly to jump to the conclusion this is a conspiracy based on so little information. It is more than likely a miscommunication or mistake, or as I said before, bad policy. But as you've proven over the last page you are not comfortable with anything less than someone doing this out of malice. I just don't see the point of taking that hostile view. What is the point?

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 1:43 pm**

Vision you can't have it both ways. You say it is more likely a policy to shut down parking places for fear of law suits than a political stunt. And you say only a few choice places are shut down.
Are you saying the policy was written to avoid possible lawsuits in only a tiny fraction of locations?!?

Maybe you could think outside that box you have yourself backed into!

Here, let me help. Government has shut down all non essential offices. One office that Obama has kept open is one that is asking for examples of how the shutdown has hurt you!

Here they tried to shut down another private location

Here a park ranger tells us he was ordered to make life as difficult as possible!

Need more info or are you seeing the light at the end of that self imposed tunnel vision?!

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:56 pm**

Wow you are totally over the edge flipped out crazy. This is now starting to be fun!

Will Robinson wrote:Are you saying the policy was written to avoid possible lawsuits in only a tiny fraction of locations?!? Maybe you could think outside that box you have yourself backed into!

As I have said in every single post, I have no idea what the policy for the parks is. That's why I think it's probably a mistake or a miscommunication for barricades to be up in certain areas. However, this new article gives me a clue as to why there are these problems. Of course, the article has the characteristic inflammatory style yo love so much, but I'll address that in the end.

Michael Litterst from the article: "It’s a matter that we consider the National Park System to be a single entity...We do not believe it is appropriate or feasible to have some parts of the system open while others are closed to the public."

This is exactly what you would expect from government bureaucracy mixing with the private sector. We have blurry lines between what can and can't be done given the legal framework encapsulating these specific parks. This will be a good thing to address after the shutdown. Bruce O'Connell of Blue Ridge says "he’s essentially private property" which to me reads like there is more to the story. Why just "essentially" and not positively or absolutely? Again, it's not a conspiracy but just a conflict where none was anticipated.

Now regarding the tone of the article, this "intimidation" seems quite far fetched. From the article: "[O'Connell] never heard from the park superintendent nor has he gotten a certified letter, but rather was sent an email from someone in the park business office telling him to close." Ooooohhh a scary email! That sounds like they don't really care all that much if he is open or closed.

From the article: "Asked about the intimidation, he said that may be too strong a word, but 'when you’ve got uniformed rangers directing you to cease operations, that’s what I call intimidation.'' Why would the rangers not be in uniform? O'Connell even says the rangers "were doing their jobs" and he doesn't fault them.

The article uses the word intimidation in the first paragraph to put the reader on edge and set the tone of the story. It is a well known writing trick to color your view of the article (it worked on you, predictably). Even later in the article the person quoted says maybe intimidation is too strong a word -- but by this time the reader is hypnotized because the word has been used 3 out of the 4 times in the article. This is another writing trick to subconsciously move the emotions of the reader.

So no, after taking a critical view of the article I would say even more this is not a conspiracy but simple problems of ill thought out government policy where it intersects with private business sharing National Park space. Case closed.

Also "tunnel vision" is actually pretty funny. I gotta give you points for that, haha.

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:55 pm**

Those tea partiers opening the WWII Memorial still aren't funding it, unless you count their piecemeal attempts to fund only those things that make them look good, and not those things that liberals like. They only did it to look magnanimous and kind-hearted to their white, older male, veteran base. Suckups.

By the way, that parking lot at Mt. Vernon is on federal land. They have the right to close it if they want to make a point.

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:37 pm**

tunnelcat wrote:Those tea partiers opening the WWII Memorial still aren't funding it, unless you count their piecemeal attempts to fund only those things that make them look good, and not those things that liberals like. They only did it to look magnanimous and kind-hearted to their white, older male, veteran base. Suckups.

By the way, that parking lot at Mt. Vernon is on federal land. They have the right to close it if they want to make a point.

Ummm...wrong TC. the parking lot is supposedly co-owned by both Mt Vernon and NPS. If so I could see a interesting lawsuit develop here.

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:45 pm**

Yep, you're right. Dems playing hardball for once in their wussy history.

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 5:15 pm**

Vision, I don't know what kind of people you deal with on a day-to-day business, but this "conspiracy" is really not that far-fetched. It simply amounts to directing a shutdown in order to make it as painful/negative as possible in the minds of the voters, who will then do what the folks steering the boat think they should be wanting to do. It's manipulative and dishonest, but it's hardly inconceivable. Honestly I don't see any room for doubt. I think I can safely say that it would surprise me more if these people were silently even-handed about something that is so crucial to them.

Here's how I see the situation: the Rs are using subversive (but not illegal) political tactics to defeat programs which they apparently had failed to prevent directly. That's underhanded in my mind, but you've got to give it to them that it's not illegal. So the government is shut down because the Ds determined not to debate their earlier victory. At this point everyone is a victim of these two clashing--it's willful collateral damage. I think it could be said that both parties saw the other as being the loser when it comes time to pay for the collateral damage in political currency. I would say it is indisputable that it is generally accepted in the minds of either side that only one must bear the blame when the dust settles, and that is what's at stake here. The best thing that could happen, in my mind, would be for a third party to step in and put an end to the game on behalf of those who have become collateral damage for two irresponsible brawlers under a grossly faulty system. The government should never shut down before spending is cut, IMO--that's backwards. Spending should have been cut all around before it was allowed to even come close to this.

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 5:22 pm**

I should buy a new piece of equipment for work next week and explain that my department will be un/under-staffed for a few months until we have funds for that and payroll.

That should go over big with upper management. I might find that they require staffing as the first priority so that regular business is at least taken care of in the absence of growth. Maybe I should write the president and ask him which they might consider a better stewardship of their money.

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 5:27 pm**

To revisit, anyone please correct me if I'm wrong... in real life, when there is a quarrel, it no longer matters who started it once an innocent party is caught in the cross-fire and hurt--any party that did not give up or control the confrontation to spare the innocent by-stander bears equal responsibility for harm done. Just think about that for a moment, before you even bother to apply it to this political situation. That's how I was raised, anyway.

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 5:34 pm**

tunnelcat wrote:They have the right to close it if they want to make a point.

And that's the "point" isn't it. they don't need to close it, but they chose to close it for political points and to make it hurt for the people. there was no NEED.
just like the WW2 memorial, it's an open air park next to a sidewalk. it's open 24/7/365 and is not patrolled but they chose to put up barricades and put security guards, which it usually doesn't have. just to make it hurt and to make political points. it's not about doing whats right. it's all about making this painful for the people so they can garner more votes in the next election.

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:10 pm**

vision wrote:...

So no, after taking a critical view of the article I would say even more this is not a conspiracy but simple problems of ill thought out government policy where it intersects with private business sharing National Park space. Case closed. ..

You left this out:

“It’s a cheap way to deal with the situation,” an angry Park Service ranger in Washington says of the harassment. “We’ve been told to make life as difficult for people as we can. It’s disgusting.”

Do you maintain that ordering Park Rangers to "make life as difficult for people as possible" is a simple problem of ill thought out government policy?!?

I guess in a literal sense it certainly is ill thought out....and that is exactly the kind of ill intent I'm pointing at from the beginning!
But you seem to be wanting us to believe that kind of abuse of power is just the way government works. You figure someone wrote that into the policy?!? It's in the Park Ranger manual somewhere?!?

Step 4.2: When ever possible, while carrying out your duties, try to make the life of the American citizens as difficult as possible.

That's just an unfortunate bit of instruction that might need looking at later on?!?

Come on!

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 7:39 pm**

Will Robinson wrote:You left this out:
...
But you seem to be wanting us to believe that kind of abuse of power is just the way government works.

I left that part out because I never read the article. You failed to link it properly, you just re-linked to the previous article about Blue Ridge. So no, I don't have a comment about it.

Here is the thing I've said again and again. It takes a lot of evidence for me to see a conspiracy. I'm a skeptical reader and I give people the benefit of the doubt. I'm more inclined to believe people are incompetent rather than evil. My upbringing makes me see the good side of humanity more than the bad and I don't like to jump to conclusions. Often, abuse of power by the government is the result of our mutable legal process. Laws/policies are created knowing they won't cover every situation. When problems arise, as they always do, we amend the laws. And of course it doesn't do any good to make overarching statements about a section of government if there are just a few bad apples. Let's find out who told the ranger to do these things, sit down and ask some questions and see if this person needs to be removed from their position.

Go find the article again and repost.

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 9:47 pm**

I fixed the link and here it is

But what's the point? You have already told us that even if the National Park Service Rangers were ordered to make life as difficult as possible for the citizens you still refuse to accept it is the result of a political strategy.

I can't believe you are that naive to think politicians don't do these things on a regular basis so I will assume you are purposefully refusing to be objective.

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 10:05 pm**

Will Robinson wrote:You have already told us that even if the National Park Service Rangers were ordered to make life as difficult as possible for the citizens you still refuse to accept it is an indication that it is the result of a political strategy.

Here are the problems with that story and your line of thinking. First, that article is a editorial piece, not journalism. If you can't tell the difference we can stop here. Second, because it's not journalism, we have no sources to go by. Look at this excerpt:

'“It’s a cheap way to deal with the situation,” an angry Park Service ranger in Washington says of the harassment. “We’ve been told to make life as difficult for people as we can. It’s disgusting.”'

Who is this angry Park Service ranger? Why did he refuse to give his name? Who told the the rangers to act like this? These are questions a journalist would address and a reader should ask. But of course, that's not what the Washington Times is concerned about. Their only goal is getting people riled up and get more page views. Don't believe me? I just discovered while copy/pasting the above quote that there is hidden social media links embedded in the page to drive more traffic to the site. Check it out for yourself. Talk about sinister....

Sure, maybe this is a political strategy. I have no way of knowing by what you have offered; a few anecdotal stories from a propaganda rag. But my third point is this: the government involves a lot of people on both sides of the spectrum. Do only Democrats run the National Park Service? Would that make any sense at all? Is the entire NPS all on the side of the shutdown? Even all the employees who will go without pay? They are in on it too? This seems very, very unlikely. But if certain people are being blackmailed to do things against their will then they need to come forward because now is the time. Blow the whistle and let's have some names. Until then, this is just business as usual (unfortunately).

Posted: **Fri Oct 04, 2013 10:57 pm**

Why all this talk of conspiracy and speculating how the whole of the Park Service would have to be either on the Dem side or blackmailed! Are you having to recharacterize it to make unbelievable? This is no conspiracy, this is business as usual on both sides. Most of the Rangers are more concerned with getting paid than taking a side that will affect their paycheck. So one has an outspoken conscious or a partisan mouth...not hard to believe. I'm sure MSNBC will counter by morning with a Ranger telling us the opposite...

Obama's ex chief of staff was fond of employing the strategy he described as " Never let a crisis go to waste". He said it often and held to it at every opportunity. This shut down is simply the current crisis they are all trying to make something of.

Obama has had non-essential federal services selectively shut down. However he is keeping open a Whitehouse office that is paying staff to solicit citizens to document their personal stories of hardships due to the shutdown so he can publicize it. He finds that office to be essential!

But you don't want to accept these things are political in nature?!?

OK, don't. It's your prerogative.

The troops overseas don't get to watch NFL because of the shutdown but the budget to fund his political muck raking spin machine office is there because that is essential. Yeah! Team

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:50 am**

Will Robinson wrote:However he is keeping open a Whitehouse office that is paying staff to solicit citizens to document their personal stories of hardships due to the shutdown so he can publicize it. He finds that office to be essential!

What is essential is that there always be a line of communication between the citizens and the government. The crisis affects everyone on both sides of the spectrum. All voices will be heard, half of those voices will blame him, and it will be documented. But I actually, agree this sounds like a bunch of crap. However, there is probably more to this story than you are telling me because I've seen where you get your information from and it's definitely not free of bias.

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:26 am**

Ya know!!!
If I were Joe Biden I'd be worried with the government not paying nonessential personnel and all. Just sayin

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 7:55 am**

vision wrote:
Will Robinson wrote:However he is keeping open a Whitehouse office that is paying staff to solicit citizens to document their personal stories of hardships due to the shutdown so he can publicize it. He finds that office to be essential!
What is essential is that there always be a line of communication between the citizens and the government. The crisis affects everyone on both sides of the spectrum. All voices will be heard, half of those voices will blame him, and it will be documented. But I actually, agree this sounds like a bunch of crap. However, there is probably more to this story than you are telling me because I've seen where you get your information from and it's definitely not free of bias.

I already posted the link to my source for the oh so essential publicize-your-hardships-office. It was a Whitehouse.gov website....
And you are correct, there is a ton of bias coming from that source.

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 11:26 am**

SERIOUSLY?
how do you close an ocean?

Thursday back in South Florida, a day after limits for the National Institutes of Health made headlines, it was the fear of food drying up and a prohibition on fishing in waters of Florida Bay that took center stage.

Charter guides received a message from the National Park Service this week informing them that they are not permitted to take clients fishing in Florida Bay until the feds get back to work. That means that more than 1,100 square miles of prime fishing is off limits between the southern tip of the mainland to the Keys until further notice.

The closing affects not only fishing guides, but anyone with a license to conduct business in the park, including tour operators and paddling guides — anyone with a Commercial Use Authorization permit, said Dan Kimball, superintendent of Everglades and Dry Tortugas national parks.

Biscayne National Park is also off limits. Enforcement rangers will be on duty, Kimball said.

Capt. Mike Makowski, owner of Blackfoot Charters in Key Largo, estimates this eliminates 60 percent to 70 percent of his hunting grounds.

“This is going to put a lot of guys together in a small area close to the park,” Makowski said. “It’s going to be even worse on the weekend when we’re going to have to compete with the recreational anglers.”. . .

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:04 pm**

These resources belong to us, and we're still paying taxes... I think it's pretty off-color that they're trying to restrict it. Makes me want to go camping.

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:48 pm**

Funny, the Obama administration surrenders control of a national forest in Arizona to smugglers.they even posted signs warning us to stay out because of the criminals. But they intend to secure the ocean from law abiding citizens going fishing.

We need to get the Secret Service to sweep the WhiteHouse for back kryptonite. It's the only thing that explains how frikken basackwards this government has become!

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 2:21 pm**

Will Robinson wrote:I already posted the link to my source for the oh so essential publicize-your-hardships-office. It was a Whitehouse.gov website....
And you are correct, there is a ton of bias coming from that source.

I see the website exists, what I don't see is the agenda you imagined. It takes pretty much no staff to run that "department" the White House is keeping open. Everything is done electronically. You can have an intern work an hour or two a week to keep that "department" going. Big flippin' deal. If this can be used to put political pressure on Congress, then I would call this essential.

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 2:39 pm**

So now that they passed a resolution to be sure everyone receives retroactive pay…do you think they will be allowed to go back to work?

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 5:42 pm**

vision wrote:
Will Robinson wrote:I already posted the link to my source for the oh so essential publicize-your-hardships-office. It was a Whitehouse.gov website....
And you are correct, there is a ton of bias coming from that source.
I see the website exists, what I don't see is the agenda you imagined. It takes pretty much no staff to run that "department" the White House is keeping open. Everything is done electronically. You can have an intern work an hour or two a week to keep that "department" going. Big flippin' deal. If this can be used to put political pressure on Congress, then I would call this essential.

So how much manpower does it take to let the troops overseas watch the NFL? Some guy to flip a 'switch' on the computer screen?!? Maybe you could ask that intern to do it while he is in there filtering out the rightwinger complaints....

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 7:27 pm**

Not only is the Obama Administration barricading the World War II Memorial to keep 85-90 year old Veterans out, they are putting cones up on public highways to keep people from taking pictures of Mt. Rushmore during the Government Shutdown! So, blocking scenic viewing areas along a highway is necessary because of a Government Shutdown?

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 7:41 pm**

Will Robinson wrote:Maybe you could ask that intern to do it while he is in there filtering out the rightwinger complaints....

LoL, no need to filter out rightwinger complaints, most people's brains do that already due to their excessive droning on and on and on.

I agree, there are a lot of things related to the shutdown that seem absolutely silly. I have no access to the policies and can't file a request to have it changed unless I know what it is. But here is the thing, you can either complain about it or do something. So which will it be? It it really bothers you then you can do things like organize your community, file a lawsuit against the government, or call your congressperson. If you aren't willing to do these things then you are just adding to the noise.

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 7:49 pm**

"Just adding to the noise", huh? Nothing wrong with talking about something.

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:25 pm**

vision wrote:
Will Robinson wrote:Maybe you could ask that intern to do it while he is in there filtering out the rightwinger complaints....
LoL, no need to filter out rightwinger complaints, most people's brains do that already due to their excessive droning on and on and on.

I agree, there are a lot of things related to the shutdown that seem absolutely silly. I have no access to the policies and can't file a request to have it changed unless I know what it is. But here is the thing, you can either complain about it or do something. So which will it be? It it really bothers you then you can do things like organize your community, file a lawsuit against the government, or call your congressperson. If you aren't willing to do these things then you are just adding to the noise.

Lol, as if there are no left winger complaints!

This is obviously much more of an issue for you than it is for me.
I started a thread with a cynical prediction of the way the media will turn a selective eye away from Obama engaging in typical political tactics...thus enabling him to push the envelope of shameless tactics to new lows.

I have no doubt that if Bush had shut down the things Obama is shutting down the mainstream media would have been in feeding frenzy mode. I just simply know that from experience and have no doubt that many others know it too....even if they feel compelled to make silly excuses for it in this case for their own partisan reasons.
Dan Quayle misspelling potato got more from the mainstream than Obama's shut down stunts have!

But just because I recognize it and find it darkly amusing enough to post on a forum of what, a dozen or so readers, in your mind I'm all worked up? I'm allegedly citing "conspiracy"?
Lol, no, but I am additionally amused at the 'objectivity' to the detriment of objectivity display you have put on.

As for doing something about it...no, this alone doesn't spur me to do anything more than point at it in disgust but then the real problem, as I see it and made clear in my initial post, wasn't with the political hacks behaving as hacks....it is with the media's selective journalistic integrity. And for something like that speaking freely about it is an important step to take in countering it...even if you think my free speech is just noise.

And let's face it, you are the guy who thinks sending employees out to shut down select parking lots and the ocean is just some oddball policy written in the pages of the Park Service manual! Lol! So what you define as noise isn't much concern to me.

Posted: **Sat Oct 05, 2013 9:35 pm**

Will Robinson wrote:I started a thread with a cynical prediction of the way the media will turn a selective eye away from Obama engaging in typical political tactics...thus enabling him to push the envelope of shameless tactics to new lows.

That's cool bro. I only posted here to point out you were wrong about the media ignoring the story. Figured you would want to know since it was the heart of your rant.

Have a nice day.

Posted: **Sun Oct 06, 2013 10:44 am**

vision wrote:
Will Robinson wrote:I started a thread with a cynical prediction of the way the media will turn a selective eye away from Obama engaging in typical political tactics...thus enabling him to push the envelope of shameless tactics to new lows.
That's cool bro. I only posted here to point out you were wrong about the media ignoring the story. Figured you would want to know since it was the heart of your rant.

Have a nice day.

I think you are confusing the mainstream media blaming republicans in their story with my assertion that the main stream media wont be pointing out the contrived political stunt type of shut down choices Obama has made.

Go do a search. See how many there are that take him to task for closing the ocean etc.....it wont take long...

Posted: **Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:43 am**

Las Vegas, NV (KTNV) -- The government shutdown is being felt close to home for some locals. They say they're being forced out of private homes on Lake Mead because they sit on federal land.

Joyce Spencer is 77-years-old and her husband Ralph is 80. They've been spending most of their time in the family ice cream store since going home isn't an option.

The Spencers never expected to be forced out of their Lake Mead home, which they've owned since the 70s, but on Thursday, a park ranger said they had 24 hours to get out.

"I had to go to town today and buy Ralph undershirts and jeans because I forgot his pants," Joyce Spencer told Action News.

The Stewart's Point home sits on federal land, so even though the Spencers own their cabin outright, they're not allowed in until the government reopens.

Park officials said property owners can visit only to retrieve belongings; they sent Action News a statement which reads in part, "Unfortunately overnight stays are not permitted until a budget is passed and the park can reopen."

Joyce Spencer said she's alright in the meantime, staying with nearby family, but the move was a lot to handle as a senior citizen.

"I had to be sure and get his walker and his scooter that he has to go in," Spencer said. "We're not hurt in any way except it might cost me if I have to go buy more pants."

The Lake Mead properties are considered vacation homes; one of the lease requirements to own a plot is people must have an alternative residence.

Regardless, the Spencers said it's their property and they should be allowed in, shutdown or not.

Posted: **Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:44 am**

And yet the democrats make a video of Paul Ryan pushing the elderly off a cliff

Posted: **Sun Oct 06, 2013 1:57 pm**

Why, Ryan's privatization plans for SS and Medicare would probably do just that. The truth happens to hurt.

Posted: **Sun Oct 06, 2013 2:32 pm**

tunnelcat wrote:Why, Ryan's privatization plans for SS and Medicare would probably do just that.

nice ASSUMPTION

The truth happens to hurt.

ignorance is bliss, and stupidity knows no bounds.
There is NO truth in your statement because you have nothing to base it on and no way to prove it now do you

Posted: **Sun Oct 06, 2013 2:44 pm**

anyone with a brain and math skills, to go along with reading a bunch of arcane legalese will come to the conclusion that Ryan's budget would eliminate Medicare within 6 years. Altogether, because there are caps on percent of GDP that can be devoted to certain parts of the budget. It is entirely possible that his budget would cause the elimination of Social Security within a decade. So, not so hot a plan for any adult nearing retirement age.

Posted: **Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:17 pm**

Besides, it's the Republican anti-socialist mantra to destroy all things in the government put there specifically for helping the lowly individual and always has been, ever since FDR and Johnson.

Posted: **Sun Oct 06, 2013 6:03 pm**

Amber Alert Sys just went offline, our children are now SOL if they have anything happen to them!

Posted: **Sun Oct 06, 2013 6:44 pm**

Edit: wrong thread.

Posted: **Sun Oct 06, 2013 7:07 pm**

tunnelcat wrote:Besides, it's the Republican anti-socialist mantra to destroy all things in the government put there specifically for helping the lowly individual and always has been, ever since FDR and Johnson.

Clueless.

Quit listening to the left wing talking points.

Posted: **Mon Oct 07, 2013 5:38 am**

callmeslick wrote:anyone with a brain and math skills, to go along with reading a bunch of arcane legalese will come to the conclusion that Ryan's budget would eliminate Medicare within 6 years. Altogether, because there are caps on percent of GDP that can be devoted to certain parts of the budget. It is entirely possible that his budget would cause the elimination of Social Security within a decade. So, not so hot a plan for any adult nearing retirement age.

Pretty bold statement. Can you, with all your touted brain and math skills, point out just how that would happen?

DescentBB

What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever run it

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru

Re: What a headline...not that any major outlet will ever ru