Get FREE BuzzFlash News Alerts

Email:  

Barack Obama's Church is Not a Threat to Our National Security, But Cheney and McCain Are

THE FIFTH COLUMNIST by P.M. Carpenter

 p

The right's peculiar notion of proportionality lies in one of those intellectual sand traps that one can whack away at for years and yet never come close to dislodging its smug, half-buried target. The notion just sits there, grinning back, confident that logical blows will do it no harm or budge it one bit. It's one of the more stubborn obscenities known to man.

While, for instance, right-wing scribblers were succumbing to the vapors because of one over-the-top preacher's exercising of all three guarantees of the First Amendment, we were "celebrating" the fifth anniversary of an illegal, anticonstitutional, wholly unAmerican foreign war. This, however, merited no similar reactionary dread.

The disproportionality was stunningly obscene, as were its objects of timid affection. 

You want obscene? Our -- their -- president offered that yesterday in spades when he insisted once again that "removing Saddam Hussein from power was the right decision," without noting once again its dreadfully wrongful costs in human and fiscal treasure. 

Obscene? How about the vice president's considered response to ABC News' observation that two-thirds of his citizenry believe the war was never worth waging: "So?"

Obscene? How about about John McCain's latest Baghdad-Boblike pronouncement that we're on the jolly good "precipice of winning a major victory against radical Islamic extremism." Why, to hear you folks whine, one would think this marvelous little war against an amorphous ideology and its centuries-old tactics is dragging on with no end in sight.

Obscene? Pshaw. That -- wretched unAmericanism, presidential recalcitrance, vice-presidential debauchery and would-be presidential imbecility -- is but the stuff of negligible nothings.

Hence it gets a pass from our right-wing scribblers. They have bigger and far more ominous fish to fry; namely, that one, aforementioned preacher who once exercised his First Amendment guarantees in warning that God may indeed "damn" this country if it didn't stop acting more like Beelzebub than Jesus.

With tin foil molded properly on pate, with incense burning and adorned by a Cross, two Stars of David and several cloves of garlic, I journeyed yesterday to the Dark Side, just to take a confirmational peek at what the 15th-century minds of right-wing hysteria were likely saying. And sure enough, there it was, splattered all over the screen, in all its eerie irrelevance and screaming disproportionality.

One of this preacher's parishioners, you see -- I know, this is shocking, but be of strong heart, hale friend -- had heard the preacher's message in his parish and now seeks to convert its hate into love, its disunity into fellowship, its hopelessness into potential. 

The Republic is doomed.

One of the distaff scribblers at Townhall, for example, wrote of the parishioner's speechifying: "Deflect, deflect, deflect.... He cannot disown Wright? Really? This rationale makes no sense to me." Thank you, dear lady, for affirming the clinically manifest.

But I quickly tired of Townhall's third-rate second-rateness so I scurried over to the more sophisticated banality of National Review -- where I found our good friend, the liberal-fascist-fighting Jonah Goldberg, sputtering in apoplectic regret that "Obamaniacs think conservatives just don't get it, that we're mired in the past, that we are motivated by old passions and bigotries." Like, uh, blindingly lily-white conservatism?

And there was Byron York, who perhaps you recall has made a living out of astonishingly proving that the liberal New York Times is liberal. Byron's latest insight was this: "What was surprising, for me, was the number of Obama supporters I spoke to afterward who not only thought the speech was great but also didn't see anything particularly wrong with the 'controversial' remarks of Rev. Jeremiah Wright." In other words, and quite unsurprising, disproportionality met proportionality and was utterly dumbfounded.

Yet let me be not too harsh, for there are thinking conservatives out there. And perhaps the most thoughtful is Andrew Sullivan, who wrote on his own site: "This searing, nuanced, gut-wrenching, loyal, and deeply, deeply Christian speech is the most honest speech on race in America in my adult lifetime.... I have never felt more convinced that this man's candidacy ... is an historic opportunity.... I love this country. I don't remember loving it or hoping more from it than today."

So see? The conservative bug isn't lethal to the conservative mind in every way and with every conservative. And given Mr. Sullivan's brand of it, I don't remember loving it or hoping more from it than yesterday.

Please respond to the commentary by leaving comments below and sharing them with the BuzzFlash community. For personal questions or comments you can contact P.M. at fifthcolumnistmail@gmail.com

THE FIFTH COLUMNIST by P.M. Carpenter




What's Clinton got to do with it?

Stop believing everything Karl Rove puts out about Hillary Clinton. She and her campaign had nothing to do with this flap. Stop the hate. Save it for our enemies, the Republicans.

Righteous Indignation!

Many MSM & regular Righties, and yes, some Independants, have been outraged that Rev. Wright would preach fear of AIDS being used on Blacks. Did the US Government make AIDS and give it to the Blacks of this country? I don't know. Do you? For sure? But I do know that their drug policy, of not allowing needles to be given out to drug users, (thanks Ronnie and Nancy), did make AIDS spread. Especially through the Black communities. Shame!

"The US Government would never do this to a citizen", they say. WTF?

The following CDC article might help the MSM & the American people to understand why they might feel this way.

In 1932, the Public Health Service, working with the Tuskegee Institute, began a study to record the natural history of syphilis in hopes of justifying treatment programs for blacks. It was called the "Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male". http://www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/timeline.htm

"hopes of justifying treatment programs for blacks." Once again, WTF? Why do you need to justify treating ANY human being for a disease? In 1945 they KNEW that there was a treatment for this disease and they used it on Whites. They even refused those Black members of the Armed Services treatment for Syphilis while they were fighting and dying for the United States of America in WWII.

But, all these black men in this "study" were not treated for another 27 years! So, they continued to pass it on to their wives and their unborn children.

Why forty years? They knew what it did to these men's lives, their families after just a couple of months or a couple of years. So, even if you could justify this "study" for a couple of months or years, how can you justify this for a total of 40 years?

A group of idiots and racists must have said "Let's just play this out until they are all dead and then we can autopsy them and see what happens"!

The only reason it was ended before all these Black men died, was because some other idiots sent a group of Black Medical Students down to help in the "research". Funny, these Medical Students were outraged about it. Can't for the life of me, figure out why.

This "study" lasted from 1932 - 1972, that's forty (40) years! It was only stopped because the horrible secret was out. Rev. Wright & others were young men when this was reported. Might this have had an influence on their fears?

If this had happened to me, I would find it very hard to trust the American Government. I would DAMN the American Government!

Rev. Wright grew up with this treatment being talked about in his community. He was a young man when this became known to all America. I don't think he showed anger. There is such a thing as Righteous Indignation! And where better to show that, than in the pulpit!

Also, the American Government has tested many things on us, without our knowledge or consent. I thought the American Government had power, only with the consent of the Governed.

Don't judge a man, until you have walked in his shoes!

Write every television show, every newspaper and magazine in America. Point out the wrong that was done and why we should not judge Rev. Wright for his speeches.

He preached this in his Church, from the pulpit. Black churches are not just places of worship. They are also the only place, for generations, that the Black people could congregate with any hopeful feeling of being safe to discuss the social issues going on in their community. Not always, remember the church bombings wherein several little black girls were murdered in the 1960's?

Has anyone come up with even a hint that Rev. Wright has done any action against America? From what I have read, he built a church, which did good works. He and his fellowship grew and did good deeds in their community.

They made a difference. They obviously, made a difference in Senator Obama's life. He brought him to Christ Jesus.

I have Righteous Indignation against those who are dividing our country on race, on speech and on thought. More importantly, I have Righteous Indignation on those who have failed to follow God's Laws, that they preach on and say they live by, that brought war on Iraq. That have broken faith with the American People. That have sinned against God and us, by lying to us. By breaking their oath of office and not defending the Constitution, but breaking it over and over again. DAMN THEM!

Have you ever

Have you ever EVER heard Obama say anything like this? EVER? However, we hear about rev. Parsley, McCain's spiritual advisor, spewing hate and bigotry. But McCain isn't held accountable. Seeking out the endorsements left and right of hate mongering religious right preachers. But that's alright. In a way, it is. Because Bush, McCain never even try to heal divides in this country. They never try to bring people together. Never. Obama does. Has always done so. Every day of his adult life, he has lived a philosophy that could only be healthy for the country and the world. And this is what would be destroyed. I'm sick to death.

Heal Any Devide?

And what policies of Obama's will heal any devide? Just because Rolling Stone calls him the new hope that does not make it so. I vote for a candidate on policies, not because the press is in love with him. I never said that Obama made any of those statements and truely belive he is a good person, but I do wonder why he associates with that piece of garbage. And more imporntantly, why do the people who support him not criticize him for it instead of being yes men. So far Obama has not stated any policies that are any different than the run of the mill, socialist, Tax and Spend policies of any other Democrat. So no matter how hard the press tries to push this unity thing, I'm not buying it and would like to know one policy of Obama's that will unite both parties. His whole year and a half in the senate gives me no indication of what his policies are and how he is going to heal any devide.

Heal Any Devide?

And what policies of Obama's will heal any devide? Just because Rolling Stone calls him the new hope that does not make it so. I vote for a candidate on policies, not because the press is in love with him. I never said that Obama made any of those statements and truely belive he is a good person, but I do wonder why he associates with that piece of garbage. And more imporntantly, why do the people who support him not criticize him for it instead of being yes men. So far Obama has not stated any policies that are any different than the run of the mill, socialist, Tax and Spend policies of any other Democrat. So no matter how hard the press tries to push this unity thing, I'm not buying it and would like to know one policy of Obama's that will unite both parties. His whole year and a half in the senate gives me no indication of what his policies are and how he is going to heal any devide.

Have you done your research?

"His whole year and a half in the senate gives me no indication of what his policies are and how he is going to heal any devide".

If you have not gone online and looked up what Senator Obama, Senator Clinton and Senator McCain have done, (what they have voted for and against) then you should not be voting in this election.

Our Founding Fathers wanted the citizen's who voted to be informed. To make choices based on hard studying and thinking on the issues. And not just on a gut feeling. To vote for what was best for the "Common Good" for the whole nation. Not just your party, not just your religion, not just your state, not just your kind.

Be a great American and really take the time to study before you vote. That is the least we can be asked to do for our country!

Warning! Dumb Repugnican Crossing

Dumbo, when you learn the difference between socialists and Democrats and when you learn to spell "divide" and use punctuations properly, you might actually get some answers. For now, you get only mockery.

Warning! Typical Liberal

Its typical of a Liberal to want no debate. Policies that require a government to run industries such as health care are absolutely socialist policies. If the only argument you have is my misspelled words, good luck. I'm still waiting for a policy that will bring the country togeather.

Hypocrites

“White America got their wake-up call after 9-11. White America and the Western world came to realize people of color had not gone away, faded in the woodwork, or just disappeared as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns.” Just Words “Black women are being raped daily in Africa. One white girl from Alabama gets drunk at a graduation trip to Aruba, goes off and gives it up while in a foreign country and that stays in the news for months.” Just Words “The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for over 40 years now. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community and wake up Americans concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism.” Just Words These are some quotes from the great Reverend Jeremiah Wright, friend and mentor to Obama. These cruel and racist statements are just a small portion of the crap that has come out of this man's mouth. Liberals give this man a pass, for what reason I haven't a clue. It could be because he is so close to Obama, or even worse, because they are afraid to criticize a black reverend in fear of being called racist. Hate is hate, whatever color person it comes from. Reverend Wright is no different than David Duke. Both preach hate and should be shuned by all. But of course, in politics the hypocrites come out in support of their candidates. If a white version of Reverend Wright were John McCain's reverend, would you be OK with that? Liberals sure didn't like Jerry Falwell, so why are they OK with Reverend Wright?

OK, Let's Debate

Your main claim, I take it, is that the assertions made by Reverend Wright that you quoted are racist. I think that they aren't.

First, let's attempt to agree on what makes an assertion racist. An assertion is racist just in case it involves hatred or intolerance of a person or group of people based upon their race.

Now let's look at the assertions made by Reverend Wright that you quote. Take the assertion: "Black women are being raped daily in Africa. One white girl from Alabama gets drunk at a graduation trip to Aruba, goes off and gives it up while in a foreign country and that stays in the news for months". Is this assertion racist? I think not. Wright is not here exhibiting hatred or intolerance of a person or group of people based upon their race. Rather, he is criticizing certain members of the news media for treating the rape of a white girl from Alabama differently than the rape of an African woman despite the fact that both are equally bad.

Next take: "The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for over 40 years now. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community and wake up Americans concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism". This assertion seems to have three parts: (i) the claim that the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal, (ii) the claim that Palestinians have had to suffer injustice and racism as a result of the Israeli occupation, and (iii) that employing divestment is a potential strategy for making Americans aware of this injustice and racism. None of this involves hatred or intolerance of a person or a group of people based upon their race. (i) and (ii) are simply criticisms of Israel's policies. And these criticisms are not based on hatred or intolerance of a person or a group of people because of their race. Instead, they are based on thinking that performing illegal acts, acting unjustly, and being racist are wrong. Furthermore, (iii) certainly doesn't involve hatred or intolerance of a person or a group of people based upon their race. Rather, Wright is simply mentioning a potential strategy for making Americans aware of activities that he believes are unjust and racist.

Finally, let's look at: "White America got their wake-up call after 9-11. White America and the Western world came to realize people of color had not gone away, faded in the woodwork, or just disappeared as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns". Of the three assertions you quote, this one has the best chance of being racist, since it explicitly mentions race. But I think that it's not racist either. Rather, it is simply a claim to the effect that 9-11 made a certain group of people, the majority of White Americans, realize that they could not ignore Black concerns. Implicit, of course, is a criticism of the majority of White Americans according to which they ignored Black concerns although they should not have. However, none of this seems to involve hatred or intolerance of a person or group of people based upon their race. For, first, there is no reason to think that Wright hates or is intolerant of the majority of White Americans rather than simply thinking that they did something that they shouldn't have. And second, even if Wright does hate or is intolerant of the majority of White Americans, his hatred or intolerance of them is based on the fact that they ignored Black concerns, not on the fact that they are White.

So I think that none of the assertions you quoted are racist. (There may be other problems with them. For instance, some might think that the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories is not illegal and that Wright is misinformed about this. But that would simply mean that Wright's assertion was false, not that it was racist.) If you disagree, you have two options. First, you can argue that my explanation of what it is for an assertion to be racist is mistaken. Doing so would involve finding assertions that clearly are racist but do not involve hatred or intolerance of a person or group of people based upon their race. Second, you can argue that the assertions made by Wright do involve hatred or intolerance of a person or group of people based on their race and explain why the reasons I gave to believe the contrary are mistaken.

Your Punctuation Ain't Makin' it, Wisecracker

Your punctuation, logic and general cluelessness about everything under the sun are all on an equal par, but stick around. Maybe you'll learn something through osmosis.

Dumbo learn something?

Not bloody likely.

Issues anyone?

Can't argue issues or policies right?

See and be sore amazed at the conervative outside native habitat

Let's see--someone with the name Dumbo-Crat-suckit writes a post calling us "hypocrites" in the subject line and whines in his bedwetting conservative style that no one will engage him on the "issues"--or more precisely, that we will not do it "right"--whatever the hell that means. Sheez, the stupidity hurts. Just one piece of advice kids--STAY IN SCHOOL.

We better put it on the table

Rep. Conyers, the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said he would pursue articles of impeachment against Bush should he pursue war in Iran without Congress' approval.

"If Bush goes into Iran, he should be impeached," said Conyers. "And we've sent him a letter to that affect."

Huffington Post report

We all need to contact our Congressmen and demand a pledge from them to impeach Bush if he attacks Iran without Congressional approval.

I seriously doubt that Bush and Cheney would succeed or even try to use an attack on Iran as a ruse for canceling the election. When Rudy Guillani tried to use 911 to cancel NY's mayoral election, he got an immediate and resounding dope slap.

If Bush tried to stage such a coup following an attack on Iran, he might have to also bomb New York, San Francisco, and a lot of other U.S. cities.

It's not that I think Bush and Cheney are not immoral enough to try this, it's that I'm pretty confident that they have little loyalty left among military officers. They've squandered most of their loyalty away. Picking another unnecessary war for our greatly over-extended military would infuriate most officers. I doubt very much that they would be willing to order their men to fire on American citizens who would protest a Bush-Cheney coup.

What I do worry a lot about is this: If the U.S. suffers a disastrous "terrorist" attack in September or October, Bush and Cheney might at least try it. Whether such a coup would be successful, I wouldn't dare venture a guess. They would probably declare marshal law and if that goes smoothly enough, they could be in a strong enough position to cancel the election. I fear our Democratic Congress would not have the guts to stop the coup. The only way they could do that would be through impeachment and far too few of them would have the guts following a serious "terrorist" attack.

As for public reaction to a Bush-Cheney coup, I don't have much faith in either the intelligence or courage of most Americans. One can usually get them to give up their constitutional rights simply by threatening to take away their TV remote control.

Tis true, impeachment should

Tis true, impeachment should have been on the table all along. One should not unilaterally disarm when radicals occupy the White House. Of course, we must remember the impeachment is merely an indictment, and I wonder if there is a crime greivous enough for Bush/Cheney to commit which might compel the senate GOPers to vote to remove them in a trial. This is how far their party has sunk. Attacking Iran? I believe we could get our do-nothing House to finally impeach, but the GOP-cons sitting in judgement in the senate would likely want to name an airport after them rather than convict. Nevertheless, your post is well-taken--we must continue to pressure our legislators to stand up for the rule of law, regardless of the ultimate outcome.

Superb Commentary!

For all that have open minds, Obama’s speech on racism will one day be rated as one of the “historical” speeches of the era that truly attempted to bridge the gap of racial divisiveness and waded into the contemporary philosophy on racism in America. Most black leaders tend to discuss the issues that affect their community while overlooking the greater picture - which Obama attacked head-on and spoke with an eloquence and insight into the core problems that have been dividing our nation for decades. When I heard his speech, I was struck at the conciliatory bent of his speech as he attempted to bring us all together on the same page - thus adding to a coalition that seeks to understand and solve the issues that divide our society. His platform is one of radical change that represents the people rather than the corporatism that has guided this country for decades. That, in itself, makes Obama a target for every right-wing pundit that still believes that America can only be governed by white males or females that are symptomatic of the core issues that must be changed in order to pull ourselves out of the downward spiral the GOP has engineered to retain and hold on to power - no matter the consequences to the American people. I attempted to write on the subject myself, but failed miserably. I suggested that Obama, if he is elected to the presidency, will not be America’s first black President - which I believe offended blacks and whites alike. It was unintentional, but nevertheless, it’s the truth, and I finished my commentary with this last paragraph which I sincerely believe is indicative of the truth: Playing The Race Card And Understanding Who Stacked The Deck I also see the Obama Presidential bid differently than others; everyone is holding their breath to see if the United States will elect its first black President, however, I’m curious to see if we will elect the first Presidential candidate that is representative of the melting-pot known as The United States and understand that it’s not a black or a white man running for President, it’s Barack Obama, the combination of both and a product of our society who is undoubtedly, first and last, just another American. My intentions were good, but I failed to understand that racism, especially as it concerns the rabid right is still alive and well in America, as indicated by the increase in hate groups throughout this nation LINK - many of which are inspired by right-wing evangelicals that are not held to the same level of scrutiny and investigation that Obama must answer while Hagee, Dobbs, and Falwell have preached similar albeit negative messages for as long as I can remember; it’s definitely a double-standard, and one that fires a bullet into the heart of fairness and applying a standard that is applicable to everyone, not just those the GOP are attempting to undermine and distort a message that was meant to heal rather than divide. William Cormier

And not only that...

Where is the outrage concerning Ann Coulter's saying that somone should assassinate members of the supreme court? Or how about that model of Americanism, the late Francis Schaeffer (a founder of the religious right movement), who compared the US to Nazi Germany and the USSR? The reaction to his "inflammatory" statements was for him to be invited to the White House by Reagan and Bush and to become friends with Jack Kemp. No distancing there! We've had Pat Buchanon saying that 9/11 was the fault of those who tolerate gays, Rush Limbaugh disparaging American troops, and a whole host of religious wingnut leaders calling this country morally corrupt and declaring that liberals are traitors. Where, indeed, is the rightwing outrage for these insults? (I refuse to call them "conservatives," as they are anything but. "Radicals" is a more apt label, and "batshit nutjobs" is even more accurate.) And, of course, as this article points out, all of this is nitpicking nonsense compared to the war, the destruction of the ecomony, lack of health care, and a multitude of other sins. I'm just saying...

So Very Human

And thus has it been since the rise of Cro-Magnon--the eternal battle of the liberal VS conservative brain. There is no winning this war--until and unless we evolve as a species. Progressives are doomed by the gods to be the party of Sysiphus--rolling the boulder of dunderheaded conservatism up the hill (as we have throughout recorded history) for every advancement in science, knowledge and civil rights that we have been fortunate enough to enjoy. Some things never seem to change. Just keep pushing that boulder, folks.

Just keep pushing that boulder, folks.

Thanks! It helped me to see this not in the moment, but in the continuing struggle. I really needed that!

I am pushing, but getting tired. I believe that all of us can work together to move that boulder up the hill further now, toward the light of a More Perfect Union.

Remember, with work we become stronger. And the only time anything has changed in America, right from the start, is when the people demanded it and were willing to do the hard work to achieve it.

Yes WE Can!

I know, Hillary tried to take over that truism. But she showed her true colors by the chanting of her believers, yelling "YES SHE CAN"! Hillary is all about her. Obama is all about we. Together we can work to bring a More Perfect Union to America.

Hurry, we can not wait much longer. The world can not wait much longer. Yes We Can!

Martin Luther King , Mohamed Ali, and Archimedes

Those old enough to remember the viscous vilification of Martin Luther King and of Mohamed Ali, when he became a Black Muslim and denounced America's racism and genocidal war in Vietnam, should know that long after the foul rants of right-wingers and racists are forgotten, Barack Obama's campaign will be honored.

King and Ali are American icons and heroes because they had the strength, courage, and moral fiber to speak truth to racist, right-wing power in America. Win or lose come November 4, Barack Obama has secured a place for himself in American history. We are already much richer for it.

I also remember something a high school math teacher told me about the Ancient Greek mathematician, Archimedes. When Archimedes told an invading soldier to get off of the numbers he was writing in the beach sand, the soldier killed him with his sword.

Nobody remembers the name of the soldier.

Well said...

I'm putting my own spin on things. The right/Clinton supporters must be absolutely petrified of the increasingly realistic idea of Obama becoming president. They must be shaking in their boots. Why else would they fly off the handle about all of this. They are trying to convince us that Wright raged on like his short clip every Sunday and Obama just sat there and let his kids watch that hateful man. Gimme a break. Obama followed a colossal smear with the most classy, thought provoking, challeging political speech of our time! I'm not the least bit offended by Wright's sermons, at least no more offended than any other sermon I've heard by any other religious figure. He's no more or less offensive than the evangelical movement that's for God-damn sure god-damn it! It's fear they're preying on and to this white, liberal, community college educated, middle class, male with red-neck tendencies it's completely transparent, paper thin and patently absurd.

He let his kids watch that hateful man......

The best lessons my children have learned in life, were when they heard, saw or read something which they questioned and we discussed it in depth. No thoughts or words can damaged someone, as long as they have someone to discuss these ideas with. Children learn best from the world around them, if they have parents who teach, talk and lead a life filled with examples in their home.

What will we tell the children? Tell them the truth. Teach them about all sides of an issue and trust in their "better angels" self to go toward the light, to become the more perfect human beings than we are.

My four year old son was taught in Bible School, that a little boy pulling a cats tail was committing a sin. When he got into the car at the end of that day, he discussed this with me. He was bothered by that. He came to the conclusion that it was not a sin, just plain stupid. If you pull a cats tail, you probably will get bitten and scratched and you will not do that again. This was the conclusion a four year old came up with. No sin, just a lesson learned. He decided right then, to never go back. Because what they were teaching him was stupid.

From the times that I have seen these two girls of the Obama's, I believe that they are well adjusted and bright. They have two incredible parents whom I am sure, teach them well. After listening to Senator Obama's speach about Race, I have no doubts that they are teaching their children to love Jesus, other people of all races and America.

I Really Really Hope this Blows Over

Things were looking so good. I knew they would go all out racist on his campaign, but I didn't how how they'd pull it off, or just how agonizing it would be to watch our one real hope to pull ourselves out of this mess possibly slip away.