Home Blog Page 2518

Video: President Obama Discusses Growing the Economy and Reducing the Deficit

1



A full transcript of President Obama’s remarks is on the “flip.” The bottom line? We need to pay down the deficit in a balanced way; “we can’t just cut our way to prosperity;” we should lock in middle class tax cuts now; those making more than $250,000 per year need to pay more. In other words, we’re talking about everything we just had an election about, and what the majority of Americans voted for…

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT

East Room

1:08 P.M. EST

    THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  (Applause.)  Thank you so much.

(Applause.)  Thank you very much, everybody.  Everybody, please have a seat.  (Applause.)

Well, good afternoon, everybody.  Now that those of us on the campaign trail have had a chance to get a little sleep — (laughter) — it’s time to get back to work.  And there is plenty of work to do.

As I said on Tuesday night, the American people voted for action, not politics as usual.  You elected us to focus on your jobs, not ours.  And in that spirit, I’ve invited leaders of both parties to the White House next week, so we can start to build consensus around the challenges that we can only solve together. And I also intend to bring in business and labor and civic leaders from all across the country here to Washington to get their ideas and input as well.    

At a time when our economy is still recovering from the Great Recession, our top priority has to be jobs and growth.  That’s the focus of the plan I talked about during the campaign. (Applause.)  It’s a plan to reward small businesses and manufacturers that create jobs here, not overseas.  It’s a plan to give people the chance to get the education and training that businesses are looking for right now.  It’s a plan to make sure this country is a global leader in research and technology and clean energy, which will attract new companies and high-wage jobs to America.  It’s a plan to put folks back to work, including our veterans, rebuilding our roads and our bridges, and other infrastructure.  And it’s a plan to reduce our deficit in a balanced and responsible way.

Our work is made that much more urgent because at the end of this year, we face a series of deadlines that require us to make major decisions about how to pay our deficit down — decisions that will have a huge impact on the economy and the middle class, both now and in the future.  Last year, I worked with Democrats and Republicans to cut a trillion dollars’ worth of spending that we just couldn’t afford.  I intend to work with both parties to do more — and that includes making reforms that will bring down the cost of health care so we can strengthen programs like Medicaid and Medicare for the long haul.

But as I’ve said before, we can’t just cut our way to prosperity.  If we’re serious about reducing the deficit, we have to combine spending cuts with revenue — and that means asking the wealthiest Americans to pay a little more in taxes.  (Applause.)  That’s how we did it in the 1990s, when Bill Clinton was President.  That’s how we can reduce the deficit while still making the investments we need to build a strong middle class and a strong economy.  That’s the only way we can still afford to train our workers, or help our kids pay for college, or make sure that good jobs in clean energy or high-tech manufacturing don’t end up in countries like China.

Now, already, I’ve put forward a detailed plan that allows us to make these investments while reducing our deficit by $4 trillion over the next decade.  I want to be clear — I’m not wedded to every detail of my plan.  I’m open to compromise.  I’m open to new ideas.  I’m committed to solving our fiscal challenges.  But I refuse to accept any approach that isn’t balanced.  I am not going to ask students and seniors and middle-class families to pay down the entire deficit while people like me, making over $250,000, aren’t asked to pay a dime more in taxes.  I’m not going to do that.  (Applause.)

And I just want to point out this was a central question during the election.  It was debated over and over again.  And on Tuesday night, we found out that the majority of Americans agree with my approach — and that includes Democrats, independents, and a lot of Republicans across the country, as well as independent economists and budget experts.  That’s how you reduce the deficit — with a balanced approach.  

So our job now is to get a majority in Congress to reflect the will of the American people.  And I believe we can get that majority.  I was encouraged to hear Speaker Boehner agree that tax revenue has to be part of this equation — so I look forward to hearing his ideas when I see him next week.

And let me make one final point that every American needs to hear.  Right now, if Congress fails to come to an agreement on an overall deficit reduction package by the end of the year, everybody’s taxes will automatically go up on January 1st —  everybody’s — including the 98 percent of Americans who make less than $250,000 a year.  And that makes no sense.  It would be bad for the economy and would hit families that are already struggling to make ends meet.

Now, fortunately, we shouldn’t need long negotiations or drama to solve that part of the problem.  While there may be disagreement in Congress over whether or not to raise taxes on folks making over $250,000 a year, nobody — not Republicans, not Democrats — want taxes to go up for folks making under $250,000 a year.  So let’s not wait.  Even as we’re negotiating a broader deficit reduction package, let’s extend the middle-class tax cuts right now.  Let’s do that right now.  (Applause.)

That one step — that one step — would give millions of families — 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small businesses — the certainty that they need going into the new year.  It would immediately take a huge chunk of the economic uncertainty off the table, and that will lead to new jobs and faster growth.  Business will know that consumers, they’re not going to see a big tax increase.  They’ll know that most small businesses won’t see a tax increase.  And so a lot of the uncertainty that you’re reading about, that will be removed.

In fact, the Senate has already passed a bill doing exactly this, so all we need is action from the House.  And I’ve got the pen ready to sign the bill right away.  I’m ready to do it.  (Applause.)  I’m ready to do it.  (Applause.)      

The American people understand that we’re going to have differences and disagreements in the months to come.  They get that.  But on Tuesday, they said loud and clear that they won’t tolerate dysfunction.  They won’t tolerate politicians who view compromise as a dirty word.  Not when so many Americans are still out of work.  Not when so many families and small business owners are still struggling to pay the bills.

What the American people are looking for is cooperation.  They’re looking for consensus.  They’re looking for common sense. Most of all, they want action.  I intend to deliver for them in my second term, and I expect to find willing partners in both parties to make that happen.  So let’s get to work.

Thank you very much, everybody.  Thank you.  (Applause.)

                  END            1:15 P.M. EST

Analysis: Right-Wingnut Return on Investment in Election 2012 Was an Abysmal #FAIL

2

A brand new analysis of spending by outside groups in the 2012 election cycle would be hilarious if it weren’t so…actually, it IS hilarious! 🙂 Below is a ranking, from most to least effective (the percentage is the amount of money spent that actually led to the desired result), of major groups’ “return on investment” – ROI – for their spending during this campaign season).

As you skim through this and look at the color scheme, I think you’ll quickly notice a pattern: the pro-Republican outside groups had a generally abysmal ROI, including just 1.29% for supposed “genius”/”Bush’s brain” Karl Rove’s American Crossroads group, and an even worse 0.81% ROI for the NRA Political Victory Fund. In stark contrast, progressive, pro-Democratic, pro-women, and pro-environment groups generally had excellent ROIs, including around 98% for Planned Parenthood, 78% for the LCV, 74%/84% for SEIU, etc. On the “flip,” I’ll throw out a few ideas why this disparity might be the case, but first here are the raw numbers.

Planned Parenthood Votes: 98.58%

Planned Parenthood Action Fund: 97.82%

Majority PAC (goal: “Protect the Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate”): 87.86%

SEIU: 84.65%

SEIU Committee on Political Education: 73.99%

Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC): 79.73%

League of Conservation Voters (LCV): 78.17%

Worker’s Voice: 76.14%

Women Vote!: 73.16%

Congressional Leadership Fund (Pro-Republican, run in part by Bob McDonnell’s buddy Fred “Nixon’s corrupt Jew counter” Malek): 60.64%

American Action Network (goal: “create, encourage and promote center-right policies based on the principles of freedom, limited government, American exceptionalism, and strong national security.”): 60.33%

Americans for Tax Reform (Grover Norquist’s group; pro-Republican): 57.35%


Independence USA PAC (Michael Bloomberg’s group, supports candidates of both parties): 45.74%

House Majority PAC (goal: “hold Republicans accountable and help win back the House Majority for Democrats”): 46.46%

AFSCME: 44.60%

Patriot Majority USA (liberal): 42.52%


Club for Growth Action (right wing): 41.37%

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) 39.17%

National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC): 31.63%

Freedomworks for America (pro-Republican): 24.51%

National Republican Senatorial Committee: 24.05%

Ending Spending Action Fund (anti-Democratic/pro-Republican): 15.34%

Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies (Karl Rove; pro-Republican): 14.40%

Now or Never PAC (pro-Republican): 14.30%

NRA Institute for Legislative Action: 10.25%

U.S. Chamber of Commerce (basically an arm of the Republican Party): 6.90%

American Future Fund (Koch brothers; pro-Republican): 5.57%

Americans for Responsible Leadership (shadowy right-wing group): 1.96%

American Crossroads (Karl Rove; pro-Republican): 1.29%

NRA Political Victory Fund: 0.81%

So, what’s going on here? I chatted with two super-savvy Democratic political strategists this morning, and they made a few points worth repeating.

*First of all, this is a huge embarrassment/meltdown for the right-wing groups, an almost total waste of their money and a repudiation of their entire strategy. Gotta love it.

*Part of the problem is that these groups’ messages were not in alignment with the Romney campaign’s, also without the organizing technology and techniques Democrats figured out after 2004.

*The Republicans completely failed to message effectively to minority groups. To the extent they DID message, it was hostile, such as “self deportation,” “takers vs. makers,” the whole “welfare” nonsense, the “47 percent,” etc. The point is, Republicans communicate, just not in a way that’s going to win them any supporters. #FAIL

*Bottom line: the right-wing groups were extremely ineffective, for a variety of reasons, and basically wasted hundreds of millions of dollars of the Koch brothers’, Sheldon Adelson’s, the fossil fuel industry’s, and others’ unholy money. What a shame, huh? 🙂

“Jim Crow” Scene on Election Day in Annandale: “Korean people stand in a separate line!”

1

Completely outrageous.

On Election Day, Leo Kim, 34, drove a group of elderly Korean Americans to the polls in Annandale, Va., a Washington suburb. They quickly found themselves in a scene out of the Jim Crow era.

After presenting proper identification, authorities demanded that the seniors say their names and home addresses out loud in English — a tough proposition for some with limited English skills. The poll workers had made similar demands on the other voters.

The Korean American seniors “felt bullied,” explained Glenn Magpantay, Democracy Program Director with The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund. He said multiple voters complained about similar treatment to his office. “They all had their IDs. They thought that would help.”

When poll workers grew frustrated that the seniors didn’t understand the instructions, they ordered all the Korean Americans waiting to vote to form a new line. “Korean people stand in a separate line,” Leo recalled the poll worker calling out to everyone. Leo’s group complied.

“Then they started taking the white voters,” Magpantay said. “The Koreans had to wait.”

It’s amazing, not to mention completely unacceptable, that something like this can happen in America anywhere/anytime, let alone in Northern Virginia in the year 2012. Wow.

P.S. This is the same community that Annabel Park and Eric Byler so brilliantly organized in 2006 for Jim Webb. In part, Annabel and Eric did this by making them aware of George Allen’s remarks that there was a “real Virginia,” and that it didn’t include places like Annandale. It’s amazing that 6 years later, that same George Allen was on the ballot in Annandale and that THIS happened.

P.P.S. My understanding is that this incident took place at the Columbia precinct (Annandale Fire Station, Co. #8), which President Obama won with 64% of the vote.

UPDATE: According to Fairfax County Democratic Committee (FCDC) Chair Cesar Del Aguila, much of the problem in this precinct resulted from “old, outdated, manual poll books,” combined with communications difficulties. According to Del Aguila, this situation – to his knowledge, anyway – was “not anything deliberate.” Still, he acknowledges, it wasn’t good and “we have to do a better job” in the future…

Photo from the Annandale VA blog

Vote for “Turkey of the Year”: Bob McDonnell or Ken Kookinelli?

0

Wow, tough choice!  

 

Dear Lowell,

Turkey of the Year Award3.jpgLast year, we kicked off our first “Turkey of the Year” award to honor the Virginian who acted the biggest fool. For this year's award, the race comes down to Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and our reigning turkey, Governor Gob McDonnell. It's too close to call so we need your help! Both Bob McDonnell and Ken Cuccinelli have made picking a winner a real turkey shoot – but we need to know which was the worst for you. So vote (again) today:

  • Vote for Ken Cuccinelli – The Attorney General's a strong contender for this year's Turkey, based on his record of manipulating his office and the law for his own partisan political agenda. Bullying the State Board of Health in an attempt to shut down women's health clinics and limit access to safe and legal abortion has earned him a spot on our ballot.
  • Vote for Bob McDonnell – Our reigning Turkey took the top prize last year for his outrageous budget gimmicks. This year's nomination isn't too far off that mark: 3 years into his term, Virginians are still waiting for the transportation solutions McDonnell promised. While we're sitting in traffic, he's maxed out the state credit card and proposed tolls on I-95. Is it enough to earn him the top prize two years in a row?

Just because the robocalls and campaign ads are over doesn't mean you have to stop voting. Combat your post-election withdrawal by casting a ballot for our “Turkey of the Year.”

Vote now and tell us why McDonnell or Cuccinelli is your “Turkey of the Year!”

Anna Scholl
ProgressVA

Virginia News Headlines: Friday Morning

8

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Friday, November 9.

*Warmer still: Extreme climate predictions appear most accurate, report says (Uh, guys? We need to do something about this NOW! “Skeptics” and “deniers?” Go f*** yourselves.)

*Let’s Not Make a Deal (To say the obvious: Democrats won an amazing victory,” except for the House. On that front, “President Obama has to make a decision, almost immediately, about how to deal with continuing Republican obstruction. How far should he go in accommodating the G.O.P.’s demands? My answer is, not far at all. “)

*Republicans start review to find out what went wrong (Uhhh…your party’s seen by many Americans as extremist, intolerant, misogynistic and nuts?)

*GOP’s rejection of higher tax rates an obstacle to debt deal (Speaking of extremist and nuts…)

*Republicans To Obama On Taxes: Let’s Compromise By Not Raising Taxes (Ditto.)

*State of denial (“The real blow to Republicans may be not that they failed to take the White House, but that they did not lose more heavily.” So true. The question is, are they like Germany after World War I?)

*A new America speaks

*The emerging America (“While Wattenberg’s party, the GOP, has taken to looking at this new America with anxiety and fear, he was right. What the world saw this week was a picture of America at its best: edgy, experimental, open-minded – and brilliantly diverse.”)

*McAuliffe confirms he’s in the 2013 race for governor (Get ready for lots and lots of Bill Clinton next year – and Hillary Clinton, Chelsea Clinton, George Clinton…well, maybe not the last two, but you get the idea.)

*Warner likely to stay in Senate with McAuliffe making second Virginia governor run

*Warner: There are 70 votes in U.S. Senate for debt deal (We’ll see. Meanwhile, what about the Teapublican House?)

*Bolling on ’13: ‘Firebrand’ can’t win Virginia (Bolling’s argument against Cuccinelli clearly has to be electability, plus experience and the backing of key Republicans like Bob McDonnell. I still don’t think he can beat Kookinelli, but what other choice does Bolling have other than run again for LG or quit?)

*McDonnell wants agencies to find potential budget cuts

*Seventh time’s the charm? Virginia senator tries again for early voting (Nope, the Republican House won’t pass this, but thank you for trying Senator Howell!)

*McDonnell holds off on state health care exchange (“Says information lacking; D.C., Maryland push to meet target” #FAIL)

*Will Rick Boucher be the last Democratic congressman from Southwest Virginia? (Sadly, it’s possible…ugh.)

*Editorial: Victories for marriage equality (“Voters went 4 for 4 Tuesday on same-sex couples. Sadly, Virginia will not soon follow.”)

*Editorial: Don’t leave your vote in limbo (“Voters who cast provisional ballots should visit their registrar before noon.”)

*Richmond officials grilled on Redskins deal

*Opponents of $80m Arlington pool cry foul

*Police Prevent UVA Students from Attending Public Board Meeting

Terry McAuliffe Announces for Governor of Virginia

4

Interesting, given that Mark Warner supposedly is still mulling over whether to throw his own (large) hat in the gubernatorial ring. Stay tuned… 

Dear Lowell,

I am as excited as you that President Obama was re-elected with the help of Virginia and Tim Kaine will be our next Senator. We voted to keep moving our country forward with a President and Virginia Senators who fight for the middle class.

Overall, the message from America to Washington was clear: Forget party labels and start immediately working together for job growth and fiscal responsibility. On Election Night, I spent hours helping to make sure voters in Henrico County knew that if they were in line by the time polls closed, they had a right to vote even if it meant waiting for quite a while. As the President said on Tuesday, if citizens are waiting in lines for hours to vote, we simply have to fix that. It's something both parties can easily agree on.

After Tuesday, one thing is certain: Everyone needs a break from politics. This was an especially long and hard-fought election and now is the time for Washington to come together and solve some of the country’s most urgent issues around taxes, spending and our deficit.

I realize that after any election some people’s immediate question is about the next campaign. I want to be straightforward with you: I plan on running for Governor of Virginia in 2013.

Over the past four years, I’ve traveled to every corner of Virginia for over 2,400 meetings and events. It is absolutely clear to me that Virginians want their next Governor to focus on job creation and common sense fiscal responsibility instead of divisive partisan issues. If we want Virginia to be the best place for business, we need leaders who prioritize economic growth and move beyond the political issues that are designed to divide us.

2013 will be a new year, a new campaign, and a critical time to decide the future of the Commonwealth. Until then, I will be spending the holidays with my family, continuing my work in business, and listening to your ideas for Virginia’s future.

Enjoy the weekend with your family and the well-deserved break from politics.

Please stay in touch,

Terry

 

Second-Term Agenda: It’s Time for Action on Climate Change, Including a Carbon Tax

2

With the election (thankfully, finally!) over and President Obama reelected (hallelujah!), it’s time to start focusing on priorities for a second term. In my mind, other than the country’s economy and fiscal situation, the #1 item on the “to-do” list for the next four years is clearly dealing with climate change. This isn’t just a “special interest,” it’s a grave threat to the planet we all call home. The fact is, if we don’t take strong action very soon, we’re going to be witnessing a lot more storms like Hurricane Sandy, along with melting ice caps, rising sea levels (and acidification of the oceans), mass extinctions (eventually including our own if we’re not careful), and other outcomes too awful to contemplate.

Fortunately, we can do something about all this, and it’s a huge undertaking, but it’s not really that complicated. Simply stated: we need to switch from an economy powered by the carbon-based fuels (coal, oil, natural gas) of the 18th and 19th centuries to one powered by the non-carbon-based energy sources (solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, wave, and of course energy efficiency) of a modern, 21st century economy. The broad question, is mankind capable of rising to this enormous, existential challenge before it’s too late? More specifically, is the our country’s political system capable of doing anything this big?

Here’s the question posed by one of the best thinkers on all this, David Roberts of Grist:

President Obama made a nod to climate change in his reelection victory speech, but does he actually intend to act on the issue in his second term? Will he follow up on his 2008 promise to slow the rise of the oceans, or will he stick with his oil-, gas-, and pipeline-loving “all of the above” energy strategy? And could he get anything through Congress anyway?

My answer: an “all of the above” energy strategy may sounds good to focus groups, but it doesn’t keep the planet inhabitable for generations to come. It’s time we get serious and stop goofing around here, which is what we’ve been doing.

Thus, in the first term, we had a convoluted effort, hijacked in large part by fossil fuel industries, to put a price on carbon in a convoluted, roundabout way, with massive subsidies to fossil fuel corporations thrown in to sweeten the deal. This was the  core conservative idea, now bizarrely demonized by conservatives, called “cap and trade.” Unfortunately, although there’s a lot to say for that conservative idea, once it got into the “sausage factory” of our political system, it turned into something truly ugly. And then it didn’t pass anyway. Lose-Lose.

So, why didn’t we just put a price on carbon directly, via a carbon tax, revenue neutral or not? Simple: neither party wanted to say the word “tax,” let alone be seen by voters as imposing one on them. Ergo, the smoke-and-mirrors cap-and-trade scheme (a too-clever-by-half move idea from conservatives if we’ve ever seen one), which Republicans quickly relabled as “cap and tax,” thus putting the dreaded “t” word in there and turning it into political poison, despite all the convolutions. In sum, “cap and trade” turned into the worse of all worlds – overly complicated, too many giveaways to corporations, labeled a “tax” anyway, AND didn’t pass! Well, that idea’s dead and buried now, so what next?

My proposal is simple: let’s go back to the core concept here and not get overly complicated: simply put a TAX on the bad stuff you don’t want (e.g., pollution), while lowering taxes on the good stuff you DO want (e.g., savings, income). Thus, a carbon tax, one which can be 100% revenue neutral if we want (just give back all the proceeds from the tax in a fair manner to the American people), or partly revenue neutral (e.g., only give back money to those making under a certain income threshold, let’s say $250,000 a year, while using the rest of the money for clean energy R&D, home and business energy efficiency, etc.).

But wait, you say, wouldn’t anti-taxers like Grover Norquist oppose this, and wouldn’t this violate Barack Obama’s pledge not to raise taxes on those making under $250,000 a year? On the first point, let’s face it, Norquist isn’t likely to support anything reasonable on any subject, as he’s a my-way-or-the-highway extremist. We simply need to marginalize that guy – and others, like the Chamber of Commerce, who do the fossil fuel industry’s bidding – to the extent possible. But for reasonable, sane Republicans, the concept of taxing a “bad,” making polluters pay, and correcting a clear market failure (by internalizing a massive externality), should be eminently reasonable and consistent with conservative philosophy (note: there used to be reams of environmentally responsible Republicans, from Teddy Roosevelt through Richard Nixon through George HW Bush…).

As for Obama’s won’t-raise-taxes-on-the-middle-class pledge: as stated above, there’s no reason why people earning under $250,000 per year can’t be given back every penny of the carbon tax – whether in cash and/or in subsidies for solar panels, home energy retrofits, etc. – so that it’s NOT a net tax increase. So much for that problem.

Three final points. First, in addition to saving earth’s environment from certain catastrophe, putting a price on carbon will send tremendously powerful signals to entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, investors, corporations, etc. that clean energy – wind, solar, etc. – is the way to go, while dirty energy – coal, oil, and to a lesser extent natural gas – are far less so. This should jump start a massive explosion in clean energy – an industry that’s already doing well regardless – that will quickly transform our economy to one powered by clean, domestic, inexhaustible, job-creating, non-carbon-emitting energy sources. Second, in the context of reforming our country’s tax structure, we should use carbon as the model for taxing “bads” (e.g., pollution, shipping jobs overseas, sprawl, wahtever) and rewarding “goods” (clean energy, building businesses in America, smart growth). Finally, we should seriously consider using a carbon tax as a way to simultaneously slash our country’s deficit while investing in the clean energy economy of tomorrow. That would be a tremendous win-win-win, giving us a cleaner and healthier, more secure, and more economically prosperous country for the foreseeable future. Other than the entrenched fossil fuel interests and the politicians they’ve bought and paid for, who would be against this? Got me.

Election Reveals Serious Problems for GOP (Heh Heh)

15

The chorus of Republicans agonizing over the results Tuesday –  a re-elected Democratic president, all the Democratic incumbent senators re-elected, the loss of two seats in the Senate and up to eight in the House – reveal for all to see a party that is floundering in the confusion of an emerging world it doesn’t understand.

The GOP lost the unmarried women’s vote 68% to 30%. Overall, their “gender gap” was almost 12%. With women comprising 51% of the country, and a larger part of the electorate, that’s no way to win a national election. The gap with Latino voters was even worse. While they accounted for 10% of all voters, Romney only got 29% of their vote. Almost 75% of  Asians went for President Obama. All voters under the age of 44 gave a majority of their votes to the President, who also maintained his margin of 93% among African-Americans.

We all learned in this election season that Republicans often have a difficult time with arithmetic. Nothing shows that more than the fact that they assumed the electorate in 2012 would be 78% white. It turned out to be 72%.

Republicans have lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. Simply muffling the voices of the crazies in their party like Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock won’t change the fact that almost 90% of the Republican members of Congress are older, white males who seem tone deaf to the concerns of the changing demographics of the nation. Republicans have spent decades using fear, prejudice and voter suppression to get their candidates elected. The time has come for them to return to responsible conservatism and end their foray on the dark side.

As for my party, the Democratic Party, we have to find a way to engage our voters in every election, not just once every four years. When turnout is high, Democrats win. When some of us stay home, we lose. That problem needs to be faced in Virginia right away. 2013 is closing in fast.  

Video: “Bobby” McDonnell’s “Dear Friend Pat Robertson Takes on “Fifty Shades of Gray”

0



No gray in THIS guy’s world (or his “dear friend,” Virginia Governor “Bobby” McDonnell), that’s for sure! LOL