Racism in America (with data)

[malchior]

As usual even in the midst of all this - Congress is dysfunctional when responding to violence against blacks. And of course Rand Paul is in the center of it.

[stimpy]

Are people really diluting their thoughts into thinking that racial tensions were any better under Obama?
Have we all forgotten how divided this country was while he was President and all of the rhetoric by the great orator couldn't fix things or make them better? Why should we care what he has to say now when he couldn't heal things when he had the chance?

[El Guapo]

Are people really diluting their thoughts into thinking that racial tensions were any better under Obama?
Have we all forgotten how divided this country was while he was President and all of the rhetoric by the great orator couldn't fix things or make them better? Why should we care what he has to say now when he couldn't heal things when he had the chance?

Sure. Which comments are you responding to exactly?

[Jaymann]

Obama only won the Nobel Peace prize, so what does he know?

[malchior]

[Paingod]

The water has no right to peacefully assemble, right?

[Skinypupy]

Armed thugs destroy private property in the midst of peaceful protests.

[malchior]

More secret police shenanigans at the WH. Seriously we are deep in authoritarian land here. When they fire Esper they'll almost certainly find someone ok with using the military as police in current state.

[LawBeefaroni]

Give 'em a break. Sheesh, they spent over $200 on cool tactical knives they never get to use. This was their chance.

[Unagi]

Are people really diluting their thoughts into thinking that racial tensions were any better under Obama?
Have we all forgotten how divided this country was while he was President and all of the rhetoric by the great orator couldn't fix things or make them better? Why should we care what he has to say now when he couldn't heal things when he had the chance?

LOL- Um, I guess even if I just accepted everything you just presented I would answer with: Sometimes it's nice to hear from someone that seems to actually give a shit about it.

[Alefroth]

Uggh. You just tried to justify it. This is a huge issue I have and why I blew up angrily on Saturday morning. Violence is NOT the answer. To be indifferent to it or even slightly condone it like many on here have is so sad. Indifference to violence is exactly how we got in this mess in the first place and it can't work both ways. It just can't, it sullies the message and to do so is just falling into the trap the extremist on both sides want us to. Be smarter than that.

Sometimes violence IS the answer.

[malchior]

This seems reasonable. Strong Tienanmen Square energy there.

[Zaxxon]

Wow, I miss 6 hours of this thread and it completely devolves into tangents.

Morlac, I love the fantasy land you appear to live in, but just saying that violence is never the answer and everything can be solved through peace and magic simplifies things far too much. As BH has said, as I have said, and as I think others here believe, the violence sucks. I certainly don't condone it. But I understand how after years, decades, a century+ of trying the peaceful methods--only to see the country steadily move to empower white nationalists in the past few years--folks whose lives are significantly negatively impacted on a daily basis might think otherwise. Who the hell am I to tell them that they're just going to have to keep on hoping that maybe the next peaceful protest is the one that turns the tide?

It's not reasonable to say that they're just going to have to deal with it, likely for the rest of their lives, maybe for the lives of their kids, etc, because We Do Things A Certain Way™, when that way has been ineffective for so long.

Back in positive news:

[stimpy]

Are people really diluting their thoughts into thinking that racial tensions were any better under Obama?
Have we all forgotten how divided this country was while he was President and all of the rhetoric by the great orator couldn't fix things or make them better? Why should we care what he has to say now when he couldn't heal things when he had the chance?

Sure. Which comments are you responding to exactly?

The comments that people are breathlessly awaiting his speech, as if anything he has to say will be any different than what he said while he was in charge and couldn't make any measurable change. He'll slam Trump and call for real change, something he himself couldnt achieve.

[Skinypupy]

Back in positive news:

Came to post this. Took them long enough.

Seen on FB this morning: "They have made thousands of arrests, when they really only needed to make three". A gross oversimplification, of course, but it sure would have gone a long way towards calming some of the tensions.

[Paingod]

This seems reasonable. Strong Tienanmen Square energy there.

The only glimmer of hope in any of these incidents is that some of them have been responded to within 24 hours with suspensions, reassignments, and firings of the cops involved. This is another one that we might expect to see hit so fast heads don't stop spinning for a day or two.

[Unagi]

Are people really diluting their thoughts into thinking that racial tensions were any better under Obama?
Have we all forgotten how divided this country was while he was President and all of the rhetoric by the great orator couldn't fix things or make them better? Why should we care what he has to say now when he couldn't heal things when he had the chance?

Sure. Which comments are you responding to exactly?

The comments that people are breathlessly awaiting his speech, as if anything he has to say will be any different than what he said while he was in charge and couldn't make any measurable change. He'll slam Trump and call for real change, something he himself couldnt achieve.

It's not about it being different than before - it's how it will contrast with what Trump's been doing the last few days.

It will remind people how a decent leader goes about the art of talking positively. He'll show strength without being a fucking dickhead.

You sound actually mad that he is about to talk. Worried he's going to make Trump look like an idiot, or a monster? both?

And it's funny you said 'the comments where people are breathlessly awaiting his speech' - but still couldn't actually show one of those.

[Skinypupy]

In case you needed to vomit today, here's the White House's version of "Trump, A Portrait In American Courage"

[Unagi]

Actually a little surprised they released it. and happy.

That video is absurd. It's like an ad for what he did that day to Americans. It's so obviously blind to reality and so , just so tone-deaf to me. How could they think this will help him.... His base doesn't need help, and I think this only helps erode those that are hanging on by a thread.

[Skinypupy]

The better versions

[Paingod]

I've liked this guy's videos for some time, picking apart the legal aspects of popular events. This is his analysis of Trump's actions for his photo op. He lives in DC and almost seems to tear up at times while he's describing what he's seeing. He reminds us that Trump has no "Rock Bottom" and there's always something worse. Buckle up for the next 6 months.

[Unagi]

He'll slam Trump and call for real change, something he himself couldnt achieve.

Actually, you should look at what he's tweeted over the last few days to get a taste of what he's likely to say.

Surprise: He's trying to educate people how to make a change in the police - and it's at the State and Local level.

Are you shocked he didn't lay it on Trump's feet? I assume you are.

[Enough]

Are people really diluting their thoughts into thinking that racial tensions were any better under Obama?
Have we all forgotten how divided this country was while he was President and all of the rhetoric by the great orator couldn't fix things or make them better? Why should we care what he has to say now when he couldn't heal things when he had the chance?

Sure. Which comments are you responding to exactly?

The comments that people are breathlessly awaiting his speech, as if anything he has to say will be any different than what he said while he was in charge and couldn't make any measurable change. He'll slam Trump and call for real change, something he himself couldnt achieve.

So that's it? So it's a really bad idea for our first black president to speak at a time like this because he didn't solve all the racial issues by being the first elected black man to hold our highest office? Did you have a problem with GW's op-ed/letter?

[El Guapo]

Are people really diluting their thoughts into thinking that racial tensions were any better under Obama?
Have we all forgotten how divided this country was while he was President and all of the rhetoric by the great orator couldn't fix things or make them better? Why should we care what he has to say now when he couldn't heal things when he had the chance?

Sure. Which comments are you responding to exactly?

The comments that people are breathlessly awaiting his speech, as if anything he has to say will be any different than what he said while he was in charge and couldn't make any measurable change. He'll slam Trump and call for real change, something he himself couldnt achieve.

So that's it? So it's a really bad idea for our first black president to speak at a time like this because he didn't solve all the racial issues by being the first elected black man to hold our highest office? Did you have a problem with GW's op-ed/letter?

Stimpy's giving a masterclass in anti-anti-Trumpism.

[Skinypupy]

Are people really diluting their thoughts into thinking that racial tensions were any better under Obama?
Have we all forgotten how divided this country was while he was President and all of the rhetoric by the great orator couldn't fix things or make them better? Why should we care what he has to say now when he couldn't heal things when he had the chance?

Sure. Which comments are you responding to exactly?

The comments that people are breathlessly awaiting his speech, as if anything he has to say will be any different than what he said while he was in charge and couldn't make any measurable change. He'll slam Trump and call for real change, something he himself couldnt achieve.

No one is expecting him to "fix" things by making a speech today.

However, whether you like it or not, Obama is a respected leader and will use his influence in that role today to try and calm some of the current hostilities. As opposed to throwing gasoline on it nonstop, as Trump has been doing.

I think many people, myself included, appreciate that gesture.

[morlac]

Uggh. You just tried to justify it. This is a huge issue I have and why I blew up angrily on Saturday morning. Violence is NOT the answer. To be indifferent to it or even slightly condone it like many on here have is so sad. Indifference to violence is exactly how we got in this mess in the first place and it can't work both ways. It just can't, it sullies the message and to do so is just falling into the trap the extremist on both sides want us to. Be smarter than that.

Sometimes violence IS the answer.

Sure I guess, it depends on what you want the answer to be. Of course many Trumpians believe that as well and it will play right into their hands.



Few things to ponder with that...

When?
Who decides?
Against whom?
who decides that?
To what end?
Will we come out better for it? (I believe strongly we would not)

Here's an article that examines the data from the 60's and aligns with how I feel it will play it if we choose that course now.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/ ... e-politics


What we observe in the nineteen-sixties is that there was a nontrivial number of white moderates who were open to policies that advanced racial equality, and were also very concerned about order. The needle that civil-rights activists were trying to thread was: How do you advance racial equality, and capture the attention of often indifferent or hostile white moderates outside of the South, and at the same time grow a coalition of allies? And over time the strategy that evolved was one of nonviolent protest, which actively sought to trigger police chiefs like Bull Connor [in Birmingham, Alabama,] to engage in spectacles of violence that attracted national media and would, in the language of the nineteen-sixties, “shock the conscience of the nation.” So it isn’t just nonviolence that is effective, but nonviolence met with state and vigilante brutality that is effective.

The interesting thing to me that came out of this research was that civil-rights leaders were picking Birmingham and Selma specifically because they had police chiefs with hair-trigger tendencies toward violence. So there was this strategic use of violence by the civil-rights movement, but it was to be the object of violence, not the instigators of violence. At the same time, what was very hard about, with that strategy, is that you had images of people observing their kinfolk being brutalized on television, and that helped fire up a more militant wing of the civil-rights movement, which endorsed violence in self-defense and was much less committed to tactics of nonviolence. When we observed a wave of violent protests in the mid- to late sixties, those white moderates who supported the Democratic Party after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 defected to the Republican Party in 1968. So, when the state was employing violence and protesters were the targets of that violence, the strategy worked well, and when protesters engaged in violence—whether or not the state was—those voters moved to the law-and-order coalition.

[morlac]

Wow, I miss 6 hours of this thread and it completely devolves into tangents.

Morlac, I love the fantasy land you appear to live in, but just saying that violence is never the answer and everything can be solved through peace and magic simplifies things far too much. As BH has said, as I have said, and as I think others here believe, the violence sucks. I certainly don't condone it. But I understand how after years, decades, a century+ of trying the peaceful methods--only to see the country steadily move to empower white nationalists in the past few years--folks whose lives are significantly negatively impacted on a daily basis might think otherwise. Who the hell am I to tell them that they're just going to have to keep on hoping that maybe the next peaceful protest is the one that turns the tide?

It's not reasonable to say that they're just going to have to deal with it, likely for the rest of their lives, maybe for the lives of their kids, etc, because We Do Things A Certain Way™, when that way has been ineffective for so long.

Back in positive news:

Excuse me for calling for a nonviolent resolution and holding a little faith that it will not be. Good job of twisting my call for everyone on both side to admonish the violence as me saying "they're just going to have to deal with it, likely for the rest of their lives, maybe for the lives of their kids, etc, because We Do Things A Certain Way". Of course it's not reasonable to say that, and is not even remotely what
I said. Seriously? How is that any different than what I said earlier and you all calling me out for insinuating everyone is complicit in the violence by not admonishing it? You are painting with the same fucking brush you are accusing me of. Talk about head up your ass fantasy land, If you guys can't see how violence will play right into Trump and his supporters hand than you deserve what you get. Some of the brightest people are the easiest to manipulate.

[hitbyambulance]

other three MSP officers present at George Floyd's murder to be charged with Aiding and Abetting 2nd Degree Murder (and Chauvin's charge to be upgraded to 2nd Degree Murder):

https://www.startribune.com/ellison-wil ... 570984872/

[Alefroth]

Uggh. You just tried to justify it. This is a huge issue I have and why I blew up angrily on Saturday morning. Violence is NOT the answer. To be indifferent to it or even slightly condone it like many on here have is so sad. Indifference to violence is exactly how we got in this mess in the first place and it can't work both ways. It just can't, it sullies the message and to do so is just falling into the trap the extremist on both sides want us to. Be smarter than that.

Sometimes violence IS the answer.

Sure I guess, it depends on what you want the answer to be. Of course many Trumpians believe that as well and it will play right into their hands.



Few things to ponder with that...

When?
Who decides?
Against whom?
who decides that?
To what end?
Will we come out better for it? (I believe strongly we would not)

That's what makes this so complex. There isn't one single or correct answer for those questions. Like others have said before, when you close down every other option over and over and continuously tell someone they are reacting wrong, don't be surprised when they choose the option that gives them the feeling they have power.

[stimpy]

Are people really diluting their thoughts into thinking that racial tensions were any better under Obama?
Have we all forgotten how divided this country was while he was President and all of the rhetoric by the great orator couldn't fix things or make them better? Why should we care what he has to say now when he couldn't heal things when he had the chance?

Sure. Which comments are you responding to exactly?

The comments that people are breathlessly awaiting his speech, as if anything he has to say will be any different than what he said while he was in charge and couldn't make any measurable change. He'll slam Trump and call for real change, something he himself couldnt achieve.

So that's it? So it's a really bad idea for our first black president to speak at a time like this because he didn't solve all the racial issues by being the first elected black man to hold our highest office? Did you have a problem with GW's op-ed/letter?

Solve all???? He didn't solve any. Made them worse, some say. (Insert white supremacy response here).

[El Guapo]

Are people really diluting their thoughts into thinking that racial tensions were any better under Obama?
Have we all forgotten how divided this country was while he was President and all of the rhetoric by the great orator couldn't fix things or make them better? Why should we care what he has to say now when he couldn't heal things when he had the chance?

Sure. Which comments are you responding to exactly?

The comments that people are breathlessly awaiting his speech, as if anything he has to say will be any different than what he said while he was in charge and couldn't make any measurable change. He'll slam Trump and call for real change, something he himself couldnt achieve.

So that's it? So it's a really bad idea for our first black president to speak at a time like this because he didn't solve all the racial issues by being the first elected black man to hold our highest office? Did you have a problem with GW's op-ed/letter?

Solve all???? He didn't solve any. Made them worse, some say. (Insert white supremacy response here).

Do you agree with "some"? Which problems do you and "some" believe made worse?

What do you think about the Obama administration's consent decrees with police departments to curtail police brutality? Also, what did you think of the administration's report on and related consent decrees related to Ferguson?

[Isgrimnur]

[Zarathud]

The comments that people are breathlessly awaiting his speech, as if anything he has to say will be any different than what he said while he was in charge and couldn't make any measurable change. He'll slam Trump and call for real change, something he himself couldnt achieve.

Obama passed reforms that Trump rolled back by order, words and attitude.

During Obama’s term, right wing conservatives marched with their guns, attacked federal officers, and seized federal property without violent police resistance. In Ferguson, Obama backed the press, called for calm and had his Attorney General met with the family and residents. Not ordered an attack for a photo op.

Obama moved the ball forward rather than throwing a pass to the racists.

[$iljanus]

Are people really diluting their thoughts into thinking that racial tensions were any better under Obama?
Have we all forgotten how divided this country was while he was President and all of the rhetoric by the great orator couldn't fix things or make them better? Why should we care what he has to say now when he couldn't heal things when he had the chance?

Sure. Which comments are you responding to exactly?

The comments that people are breathlessly awaiting his speech, as if anything he has to say will be any different than what he said while he was in charge and couldn't make any measurable change. He'll slam Trump and call for real change, something he himself couldnt achieve.

So that's it? So it's a really bad idea for our first black president to speak at a time like this because he didn't solve all the racial issues by being the first elected black man to hold our highest office? Did you have a problem with GW's op-ed/letter?

Solve all???? He didn't solve any. Made them worse, some say. (Insert white supremacy response here).

Do you agree with "some"? Which problems do you and "some" believe made worse?

What do you think about the Obama administration's consent decrees with police departments to curtail police brutality? Also, what did you think of the administration's report on and related consent decrees related to Ferguson?

Fast forward to the current regime:

The last few years of the Obama administration were one of the most productive periods of criminal justice reform in American history. The Obama administration changed sentencing guidelines to reduce the disparity in the treatment of drug crimes that had disproportionately harmed black defendants. As part of an effort to inculcate a “guardian, not a warrior” mindset, it restricted the transfer of surplus military equipment to police departments. Most importantly, it formed consent decrees with more than a dozen police departments to force them to change their practices.

These reforms did not root out brutality and racism. They were mild both in form and intent, undertaken with the goal of conciliating police and their communities, believing that enhancing trust would ultimately create safer conditions for police as well as those who fear them. It was the epitome of evolutionary cultural change.

This was the context for Trump’s nightmarish claims in 2016 that cities were being overtaken by bloodshed and carnage. Whatever wisps of data he could cite to support his wild rhetoric, Trump was drawing a picture borrowed from the imaginations of resentful police who experienced Obama’s carefully drawn nudges as intolerable oppression.

He reversed them swiftly. Trump’s first attorney general, Jeff Sessions, ended the restriction on transferring military equipment to police, reviewed all consent decrees struck by his predecessor, and then restricted their use going forward. “It is not the responsibility of the federal government to manage non-federal law enforcement agencies,” he insisted.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/05 ... eling.html

[Tao]

I watched the video and the first half from inside the store, it appears the young man with the blue shorts has something tucked in his pants, possibly his phone, wallet or a hand-gun (about 1:22), at around 2:28-2:30 as everyone is rushing back inside it definitely appears the man with the blue shorts is holding a hand gun in his right hand. At 2:30 the man with the red and white shirt steps outside and appears to wave his hand in the air then rushes back in the door, if you watch the floor at 2:30 by the door it is clear, at 2:31 there is an object on the floor at 2:37 the man is down and it distinctly looks like a weapon on the floor by the door which the women seems to be pointing at. In the second video the police move up and everyone is scattering, the lead officer appears to point a weapon at the man on the sidewalk with the suitcase as he runs off. At 5:05 it looks like the lead officer is carrying a long weapon, it actually looks to me like a paintball gun with the funky cannister coming out the top. Is it possible he had something to fire pepper balls or were they using paintguns? There is also what appears to be a puff of smoke or possible liquid vapor as the cup is hit, again wondering if he fired a pepperball at the group and someone mistook it for an actual gunshot and returned fire? Or possibly the other officers heard the shot and thought they were under fire? Why did a group of officers converge on a cookout with weapons at the ready?

[Anonymous Bosch]

As BH has said, as I have said, and as I think others here believe, the violence sucks. I certainly don't condone it. But I understand how after years, decades, a century+ of trying the peaceful methods--only to see the country steadily move to empower white nationalists in the past few years--folks whose lives are significantly negatively impacted on a daily basis might think otherwise. Who the hell am I to tell them that they're just going to have to keep on hoping that maybe the next peaceful protest is the one that turns the tide?

One would hope you are an upstanding American that appreciates and values the U.S. constitution and Bill of Rights. Pardon me for pointing this out, but it's unambiguously spelled out in the First Amendment. Americans have the right "peaceably to assemble." If it isn't peaceful, it isn't a lawful protest. It's a violent riot. And violent rioters are criminal enemies of justice and civil liberty.

You're also leaping to the conclusion that such violent acts of destruction must be reactions against the empowerment of white nationalists, when they're more plausibly described as violent opportunists using the cover of legitimate peaceful protests to enact their nihilistic fantasies.

As flawed as we doubtless remain, let's not forget racial progress has been extraordinary in this country; realistically, has any country on Earth ever tried harder to right the racial wrongs that this country has?

[gbasden]

Solve all???? He didn't solve any. Made them worse, some say. (Insert white supremacy response here).

It's certainly true that he made racists more upset because he was black. It's also certainly true that Trump has done everything he can to increase racial tension for his own benefit. I'd love to hear what you think Obama did to make things worse other than having the gall to win the presidency over a white dude.

[Zaxxon]

Excuse me for calling for a nonviolent resolution and holding a little faith that it will not be. Good job of twisting my call for everyone on both side to admonish the violence as me saying "they're just going to have to deal with it, likely for the rest of their lives, maybe for the lives of their kids, etc, because We Do Things A Certain Way". Of course it's not reasonable to say that, and is not even remotely what I said.

I don't think you intended to say that explicitly, but yes--suggesting that violence (or any option) is off the table is in fact implicitly suggesting that we keep on keepin' on with the methods that haven't worked.

Seriously? How is that any different than what I said earlier and you all calling me out for insinuating everyone is complicit in the violence by not admonishing it? You are painting with the same fucking brush you are accusing me of. Talk about head up your ass fantasy land, If you guys can't see how violence will play right into Trump and his supporters hand than you deserve what you get. Some of the brightest people are the easiest to manipulate.

No, that's not correct. This is a complex situation that isn't going to reduce to 'violence bad.' Speaking only for myself, all I'm trying to convey is that 1) It's not unreasonable for Black Americans to feel that acting out via escalated protests that include some violence (eg looting, property destruction) is necessary at this stage, and
2) It's not reasonable for white folks to point fingers at Black folks for the protests as they've played out thus far. We do not have the life experiences to understand the situation as Black folks do.

Does it play into Trump's hands? Sure, the same way that any situation plays into Trump's ability to propagandize to galvanize support with his base. That's not a reason to shut it down, though, as peaceful protests will play into his hands just as well (since the on-the-ground reality has never been a key piece of Trump's messaging).

As exhibit A of this concept, I present to you stimpy's recent posts in this thread--of course Obama did a significant amount of work at improving race relations, criminal justice reform, etc. But a Trump supporter believes that Obama did nothing, in the same vein that Trump did nothing. They see neither the reality of Obama's work, nor the reality of Trump's rollbacks/destruction.

Limiting the response of Black Americans in any way as an attempt to drive the narratives available to Donald Trump is a losing proposition, and not one worth pursuing.

Again, I'd prefer that this all went down peacefully, we had a few marches, and magically equal justice for all materialized at the local, state, and federal level. That was never likely to happen, though, based on ~150 years of prior attempts. I'm not ready to condemn folks who live under the shadow of that history at this time.

One would hope you are an upstanding American that appreciates and values the U.S. constitution and Bill of Rights. Pardon me for pointing this out, but it's unambiguously spelled out in the First Amendment. Americans have the right "peaceably to assemble." If it isn't peaceful, it isn't a lawful protest. It's a violent riot. And violent rioters are criminal enemies of justice and civil liberty.

This is a much better argument (vs the above 'plays into Trump's [tiny] hands'). Indeed, which is why I'd have preferred things to remain peaceful while still being effective. It's a great thing that all worthwhile protests in American history have proceeded according to the laws in force at the time, amirite?

You're also leaping to the conclusion that such violent acts of destruction must be reactions against the empowerment of white nationalists, when they're more plausibly described as violent opportunists using the cover of legitimate peaceful protests to enact their nihilistic fantasies.

I am making no such leap. Clearly some (much? most?) of the violence has been opportunistic. That does not imply that none of it is in reaction to the escalating frustration felt by the oppressed.

As flawed as we doubtless remain, let's not forget racial progress has been extraordinary in this country; realistically, has any country on Earth ever tried harder to right the racial wrongs that this country has?

Uhh. I'm not sure what exactly you mean by this. Can you elaborate? Because we've made some progress, we're neat and things are swell and jolly? I don't believe that's what you mean, but if it's not, then I'm not sure how it serves to suggest that continuing with the tried-and-failed methods of protest would have sufficed. It's clearly true that the country as a whole has not taken racial equality anywhere near truly seriously, certainly not in my lifetime (which began well after the Civil Rights era).

[stessier]

One would hope you are an upstanding American that appreciates and values the U.S. constitution and Bill of Rights. Pardon me for pointing this out, but it's unambiguously spelled out in the First Amendment. Americans have the right "peaceably to assemble." If it isn't peaceful, it isn't a lawful protest. It's a violent riot. And violent rioters are criminal enemies of justice and civil liberty.

This is a much better argument (vs the above 'plays into Trump's [tiny] hands'). Indeed, which is why I'd have preferred things to remain peaceful while still being effective. It's a great thing that all worthwhile protests in American history have proceeded according to the laws in force at the time, amirite?

Growing up in Massachusetts, we are taught rather early on that violence can be an answer. All depends what you are fighting for and against.

[Blackhawk]

Solve all???? He didn't solve any. Made them worse, some say. (Insert white supremacy response here).

Can you please expand on that? I'm not sure what you mean. I know what it looks like you mean, but I'd prefer to give you the benefit of the doubt.