I'm working on a piece on the Mountain Valley pipeline in WV right now. When I went to visit family this past weekend the presence is astounding, pipe pre-staged everywhere and thousands of workers in temporary campgrounds stretching across 6 counties. So much pipe is on the ground the only thing I can compare it to is seeing Basra as they rebuilt the port facilities. But all that influx, while good for the consumer economy, is temporary, and after the 18mth-2 years of construction those folks will move on with nothing residual in the way of development. So I think you point about this being the apex of NG in WV is probably valid barring some technological breakthrough/deposit finding.
Every now and then a human trafficking story will pop up in the media, but this new age slavery of vulnerable peoples-often minorities, immigrants, those with mental health issues, drug dependencies, etc-is grossly underreported.
Hear hear. I told a friend privately that had Blankenship won I was personally going to go to WV and campaign for Manchin, and I meant it. No way was I going to stand by while that blight was put on my beloved home state. Thankfully didn't come to that.
In sticking to the points we do agree with for a moment, I do not trust Trump Administration with this at all. I think he is pulling out of the deal as his "win" with little plan as to what to do next. I don't like the JCPOA but if you are going to kill it you better have a plan B and other than the sanctions he announced today I've yet to see a plan. My fear is this will be like declaring a "win" over ISIS collapse and then moving to something else while chaos ensues as it did there.
Agree that sanctions alone do not work. we have sanctioned Cuba, Korea, and Iran among others for decades with various degree's of non-success to show for it. They are a tool, but too often used alone and ineffectively.
I would differ that its quibbling around the edges. Amano can say, and mean it, when he says everything they are inspecting is complying, but when there are areas they are not allowed to inspect, such as military bases, that really doesn't mean a whole lot. The inspections are only as good as the access. My argument is in a country nearly the size of Alaska with some truly forboding terrain and a regime that likes its secrets, I'm skeptical even on the best of terms they would be successful inspecting everything. That Iran openly rejects access to certain sites only reinforces this opinion.
Doing "something" isn't an altogether unfair charge but I still contend that it wasn't just War or agreementd. You cannot blame Obama solely for something that goes back to the Carter administration as far as origins to these issues. I do believe this agreement made things worse not better, which is of course a matter of opinion and debate. The financial windfall the JCPOA and associated events brought to Iran, to me, outweigh almost everything gained, even if you take the gains at face value. While we disagree on how far they may or may not have come to a weaponized device, they certainly have not lost any ground from wherever they were.
There is no mystery to it at all. Obama did the agreement, and under the exact same authority that he did it Trump undid it. You can argue as to whether he should or not (I think he should not, you think he should have) but there is no rationale that Trump doesn't have the right to pull out of it. Whether he should or not is a debate.
Iran has everything to do with assessing their own compliance because the JCPOA language allows it. Just one example is that they have refused IAEA access to all military bases, and the IAEA doesnt press the issue out of fear of giving Trump an "excuse" to end the agreement (obvious todays events change that sentiment). Section T of the agreement is so vaguely worded when discussing the IAEA authority to inspect “activities which could contribute to the development of a nuclear explosive device” that Russia effectively told Iran to ignore it and the IAEA Dir. Gen. Amano said "“Our tools are limited...In other sections, for example, Iran has committed to submit declarations, place their activities under safeguards or ensure access by us. But in Section T I don’t see any (such commitment).". U.N. Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2231 endorsed the deal while also limiting ballistic missle testing, since violated by the Iranian regime. That resolution also has a travel limit that the head of the Quds forces has repeatedly and publically flaunted. Everyone is not agreeing that Iran is complying. Not even close, unless you are prepared to add the UN Security Council, IAEA Dir. Gen. Amano, Rueters, Nikki Haley, Der Speigel, and many others to some vast conspiracy.
Congress has the enumerated power to ratify treaties in the US system of government, so yes, if you cannot do something within that framework it should not be done. That should apply equally to Obama, Trump, and whoever follows him.
All the idicators you are referring too are data points collected at the whim of the Iranian regime, with no penalty if they are not truthful. Pointing to getting 100% on a grade-it-yourself test, it is absolutely fair to then look at the history and characteristics of the test taker.
The SALT treaties are interesting but I'm not sure how much of a comparison you can make here. Those were much more two countries on-relatively-equal terms. Quite the assumption that the Iranian threats are impotent, if they are really that impotent then why the urgency to make the JCPOA in the first place, or now to save it?
limited options for Obama is fair, and to be fair to Obama it's not like there is a "win" here as there was a lot of mistakes made prior to his administration that lead to this point. I would argue his administration further limited those options when the decision was made that, apparently, a deal must be struck with Iran at all cost instead of working through the normal channels for a treaty of this kind.
So what should be done instead? If the JCPOA had stood on its own without the cash transfer, and as we learned later the 5 nations of the security council making side deals changing the scope of it, it probably would have been a stronger document and argument. By whatever measure you want to use, sanctions at the time were putting pressure on the regime to the point they wanted that fiscal relief. Could that have continued? yes but who knows if that alone would have brought significant change. Assuming as much means assuming, as you pointed out earlier, the Russias and Chinas of the world are going to not throw them a lifeline. There is an issue here with you assertion of "where is the bomb. Everyone, Obama administration included as part of their argument for urgency, stated they were close. So the question is were they not that close, has the deal crippled their production, or are they hiding it better. I personally suspect a combo of 1 and 3, but might be wrong.
So base on your assumption there, their obvious answer to them fearing US aggression is to promise to wipe a third country off the map and that is perfectly logical and excusable? Is that your argument? The regime that is oppressing the Iranian people is not in any way accountable for their years of actions and funding of worldwide terrorism, its all a logical response to what "they hear from this country"?
Trump can unilaterally withdraw it because President Obama unilaterally imposed it. Which is why presidents unilaterally doing any deal such as this is a bad idea on general principle. It wasnt going to happen anyway isnt an excuse, rather that proves why you have a process. Congress, elected representives of the people, did not want it approved.
The lead up to the JCPOA; if the option was to bomb them or else then you are asserting that the Commander-in-Chief at the time, Barack Obama, was going to bomb Iran if there was no agreement. We know that was never going to happen, intoning "neocon" does not change that. President Obama picked a course he wanted, and when congress wouldnt go along he acted. That decision had the consequence that it could then be withdrawn on the whim of his successor.
If you want to take Iran's word for it that they are complying, do you also believe them when they chant "death to America" and when Khamenei states "“It is the mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to erase Israel from the map of the region.” If they are to be believed, we must believe them in all things.
on A) Nothing would have been preferable to giving the Iranian Regime billions both in sanction relief and millions in strait cash for little to show for it, as their military spending went up over 40% since then. It is a false argument to say it was bomb them or sign this deal with no other option.
B) Define and cite "succeeded in closely monitoring Iran" when we have decades of corruption and complicity on the part of the IAEA, and the wording of the agreement gives Iran wide latitude (changed 24-hour access to "daily" access, etc), has on restricting inspectors from sites they really don't want looked into with no penalty whatsoever. You cannot say "of course they are not trustworthy" then put your hope in an agreement that doesn't hold them accountable anyway. Read the actual text of the JCPOA there are no penalties at all to violating or delaying inspections other than "snapback" to previous sanctions, which is a hollow threat since they previously mentioned money transfer already relieved the regime.
C)I don't think he has a plan, and the sanctions will take time to set in after the financial windfall the JCPOA gave the Iranian regime. Europe wants to do business with Iran, so we will see if their is a coalition of the willing to enforce sanctions. I doubt it, but we will see.
Just my own opinion on this separate from the news items:
A) This was inevitable when the Obama administration circumvented the normal process for treaties and cut Congress out of their clear power to ratify. One way or the other it was not going to be continued once a R president or Congress came to power. Should have done it the right way to start with.
B) Just about every defense of the deal relies on some amount of trusting a country whose standing policy and Friday chant is "Death to Israel, Death to America" to be a fair and good faith partner.
C) In withdrawing from this agreement, Trump had better have some plan going forward, which I suspect he does not. The very real possibility is this will bring even more chaos not because of the JCPOA, but he will declare a win then ignore any fall out and not plan for what is next. (see Fall of ISIS)
Correct, West Virginia is one of only nine jurisdictions with a single appellate court. With Supreme Court seats an elected "non-partisan" 12-year term of office in WV, as you can imagine WVSCA has vast writ powers and original jurisdiction in proceedings. This has long been a point of contention. Matter of fact, recently the Supreme Court has been dealing with a spending and appropriation scandal that has some calling for change.
More specifically, the selfie of a firearm in what otherwise would have nothing to do with it but the weapon is there to get the attention, such as the "graduation photo" thing a few weeks ago. The point wasn't your right to carry, it was to get attention. "I'm at the range working on my skills" is very different to me than "I'm going to go viral, watch this".
Steel is an excellent parallel. My family has a long history of working both so it is a comparison I use frequently myself. When people, and I do too sometimes, think steel mills they are still thinking of open furnaces and hellscape scenes. Thats still partially true for the blast furnaces, but the reality is the new steel processes and production facilities are more like surgery wards than the mills of old; super hi-tech, leaned out, and almost entirely automated. This article is excellent in describing the new breed of production but its the photo's that really strike you. A dozen techs and a few computer programers run the place. Blast furnaces are still dirty, labor intensive work but even that is starting to be automated. What Youngstown Sheet and Tube needed 27K workers in the 50's to do only takes a couple hundred now, and those jobs are highly specialized. The age of mass general labor in steel and coal is over. Thus, no, those jobs, at that level, are never coming back.
Black powder rifles are sacred where I come from, so respect for that.
Travis Bickel types are the extreme of course, but I think there is legitimate criticism of what some have dubbed "Gun Porn". It gets so over the top. Wannabes is a good term for a lot of them. I can remember editing and cropping weapons out of pictures I sent home from Iraq specifically for the (then very young) children to see. Not that they didn't know what weapons were or had a respect for them, with the connotation of me being gone it was just unnecessary. I have plenty of them but not for showing off. I grew up hunting, surrounded by and frequently carrying weapons, and I think it is very clear the "selfie" "facebook" generational shift of promoting your own personal brand at all times has brought out the worst in some gun enthusiast, as it has in all niche genres.
Blankenships crack about "Mitch's China Family" has a lot of history and some long running fueds. Elain Choa (from Taiwan, but I doubt Don bothered to note the difference), Mitch's wife, was W. Bush's labor Secretary in the '00s. There is way to much there for a comment post, but basically now-Senator Joe Manchin (who Blankenship was once friends with now hates) was the Governor of WV at that time and started cracking down on safety at the state level. Depending on whose version you believe Choa's Labor department started trying to clear a huge backlog of safety issues with the mines, oversaw by MSHA. MSHA was resistant for years to changing their methods, until they were finally forced to do so. So of course operators like Massey, run by Blankenship, starts crying foul when the hard edges return to regulation that had been lax for years with a combination of corruption and incompetence. So generally speaking, Labor Dept or the State would issue violations, and Blankenship was running to MSHA and uses their not-up-to-date rules to circumvent the crackdown in court. That was the environment that, at least in WV, Sago and Upper Big Branch disasters happened in.
I could have articulated it better, just as much my fault. As far as ads go, Morriseys where he drops Seneca Rocks on Washington didn’t exactly cover him in glory, especially considering his address is technically included in the DC Metro Statistical area.
Yes I'm aware of the closed primary, that was my point. When you see, like they were running last night, a union guy talking about supporting him understand that supporter is most likely a registered Dem and won't be voting today. Same goes with the polling showing him doing well. It might be accurate, but those they are polling might well be excluded from to the primary vote. Trump got a lot of those guys but that doesn't help Blankenship here. He needs R's, and I get feeling R turnout is not going to be great today. Might be wrong we will see.
The union miners supporting him are Democrats. For a lot of WV, especially the older generation, Democrat means something much different than the current national connotation. The old term "Blue Dogs" still very much applies there, and a lot of them voted Trump while still registered Democrat. Registration is misleading in a state in flux as WV is. As you correctly point out, turnout is key, especially in a three way race where breaking 30% might well win it for you.
On “Morning Ed: Law & Order {2018.05.09.W}”
Being on the I95 corridor it's been quite the local issue here, and even smaller ports such as nearby Wilmington are getting caught up in it
On “King Coal: West Virginia’s Abusive Love”
I'm working on a piece on the Mountain Valley pipeline in WV right now. When I went to visit family this past weekend the presence is astounding, pipe pre-staged everywhere and thousands of workers in temporary campgrounds stretching across 6 counties. So much pipe is on the ground the only thing I can compare it to is seeing Basra as they rebuilt the port facilities. But all that influx, while good for the consumer economy, is temporary, and after the 18mth-2 years of construction those folks will move on with nothing residual in the way of development. So I think you point about this being the apex of NG in WV is probably valid barring some technological breakthrough/deposit finding.
On “Morning Ed: Law & Order {2018.05.09.W}”
Every now and then a human trafficking story will pop up in the media, but this new age slavery of vulnerable peoples-often minorities, immigrants, those with mental health issues, drug dependencies, etc-is grossly underreported.
On “About Last Night: Primary Results From Election Day”
Hear hear. I told a friend privately that had Blankenship won I was personally going to go to WV and campaign for Manchin, and I meant it. No way was I going to stand by while that blight was put on my beloved home state. Thankfully didn't come to that.
On “Election Day for Primary Voters”
amen
On “President Trump Withdraws US From Iran Deal”
In sticking to the points we do agree with for a moment, I do not trust Trump Administration with this at all. I think he is pulling out of the deal as his "win" with little plan as to what to do next. I don't like the JCPOA but if you are going to kill it you better have a plan B and other than the sanctions he announced today I've yet to see a plan. My fear is this will be like declaring a "win" over ISIS collapse and then moving to something else while chaos ensues as it did there.
Agree that sanctions alone do not work. we have sanctioned Cuba, Korea, and Iran among others for decades with various degree's of non-success to show for it. They are a tool, but too often used alone and ineffectively.
I would differ that its quibbling around the edges. Amano can say, and mean it, when he says everything they are inspecting is complying, but when there are areas they are not allowed to inspect, such as military bases, that really doesn't mean a whole lot. The inspections are only as good as the access. My argument is in a country nearly the size of Alaska with some truly forboding terrain and a regime that likes its secrets, I'm skeptical even on the best of terms they would be successful inspecting everything. That Iran openly rejects access to certain sites only reinforces this opinion.
Doing "something" isn't an altogether unfair charge but I still contend that it wasn't just War or agreementd. You cannot blame Obama solely for something that goes back to the Carter administration as far as origins to these issues. I do believe this agreement made things worse not better, which is of course a matter of opinion and debate. The financial windfall the JCPOA and associated events brought to Iran, to me, outweigh almost everything gained, even if you take the gains at face value. While we disagree on how far they may or may not have come to a weaponized device, they certainly have not lost any ground from wherever they were.
On “NY Attorney General Eric Schneiderman Accused of Abusing Women”
Funny how that always works out that way.
On “President Trump Withdraws US From Iran Deal”
There is no mystery to it at all. Obama did the agreement, and under the exact same authority that he did it Trump undid it. You can argue as to whether he should or not (I think he should not, you think he should have) but there is no rationale that Trump doesn't have the right to pull out of it. Whether he should or not is a debate.
Iran has everything to do with assessing their own compliance because the JCPOA language allows it. Just one example is that they have refused IAEA access to all military bases, and the IAEA doesnt press the issue out of fear of giving Trump an "excuse" to end the agreement (obvious todays events change that sentiment). Section T of the agreement is so vaguely worded when discussing the IAEA authority to inspect “activities which could contribute to the development of a nuclear explosive device” that Russia effectively told Iran to ignore it and the IAEA Dir. Gen. Amano said "“Our tools are limited...In other sections, for example, Iran has committed to submit declarations, place their activities under safeguards or ensure access by us. But in Section T I don’t see any (such commitment).". U.N. Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2231 endorsed the deal while also limiting ballistic missle testing, since violated by the Iranian regime. That resolution also has a travel limit that the head of the Quds forces has repeatedly and publically flaunted. Everyone is not agreeing that Iran is complying. Not even close, unless you are prepared to add the UN Security Council, IAEA Dir. Gen. Amano, Rueters, Nikki Haley, Der Speigel, and many others to some vast conspiracy.
"
You have a point...
"
We're good. Just folks talking.
"
Congress has the enumerated power to ratify treaties in the US system of government, so yes, if you cannot do something within that framework it should not be done. That should apply equally to Obama, Trump, and whoever follows him.
All the idicators you are referring too are data points collected at the whim of the Iranian regime, with no penalty if they are not truthful. Pointing to getting 100% on a grade-it-yourself test, it is absolutely fair to then look at the history and characteristics of the test taker.
"
The SALT treaties are interesting but I'm not sure how much of a comparison you can make here. Those were much more two countries on-relatively-equal terms. Quite the assumption that the Iranian threats are impotent, if they are really that impotent then why the urgency to make the JCPOA in the first place, or now to save it?
"
limited options for Obama is fair, and to be fair to Obama it's not like there is a "win" here as there was a lot of mistakes made prior to his administration that lead to this point. I would argue his administration further limited those options when the decision was made that, apparently, a deal must be struck with Iran at all cost instead of working through the normal channels for a treaty of this kind.
So what should be done instead? If the JCPOA had stood on its own without the cash transfer, and as we learned later the 5 nations of the security council making side deals changing the scope of it, it probably would have been a stronger document and argument. By whatever measure you want to use, sanctions at the time were putting pressure on the regime to the point they wanted that fiscal relief. Could that have continued? yes but who knows if that alone would have brought significant change. Assuming as much means assuming, as you pointed out earlier, the Russias and Chinas of the world are going to not throw them a lifeline. There is an issue here with you assertion of "where is the bomb. Everyone, Obama administration included as part of their argument for urgency, stated they were close. So the question is were they not that close, has the deal crippled their production, or are they hiding it better. I personally suspect a combo of 1 and 3, but might be wrong.
"
So base on your assumption there, their obvious answer to them fearing US aggression is to promise to wipe a third country off the map and that is perfectly logical and excusable? Is that your argument? The regime that is oppressing the Iranian people is not in any way accountable for their years of actions and funding of worldwide terrorism, its all a logical response to what "they hear from this country"?
"
Trump can unilaterally withdraw it because President Obama unilaterally imposed it. Which is why presidents unilaterally doing any deal such as this is a bad idea on general principle. It wasnt going to happen anyway isnt an excuse, rather that proves why you have a process. Congress, elected representives of the people, did not want it approved.
The lead up to the JCPOA; if the option was to bomb them or else then you are asserting that the Commander-in-Chief at the time, Barack Obama, was going to bomb Iran if there was no agreement. We know that was never going to happen, intoning "neocon" does not change that. President Obama picked a course he wanted, and when congress wouldnt go along he acted. That decision had the consequence that it could then be withdrawn on the whim of his successor.
If you want to take Iran's word for it that they are complying, do you also believe them when they chant "death to America" and when Khamenei states "“It is the mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to erase Israel from the map of the region.” If they are to be believed, we must believe them in all things.
"
on A) Nothing would have been preferable to giving the Iranian Regime billions both in sanction relief and millions in strait cash for little to show for it, as their military spending went up over 40% since then. It is a false argument to say it was bomb them or sign this deal with no other option.
B) Define and cite "succeeded in closely monitoring Iran" when we have decades of corruption and complicity on the part of the IAEA, and the wording of the agreement gives Iran wide latitude (changed 24-hour access to "daily" access, etc), has on restricting inspectors from sites they really don't want looked into with no penalty whatsoever. You cannot say "of course they are not trustworthy" then put your hope in an agreement that doesn't hold them accountable anyway. Read the actual text of the JCPOA there are no penalties at all to violating or delaying inspections other than "snapback" to previous sanctions, which is a hollow threat since they previously mentioned money transfer already relieved the regime.
C)I don't think he has a plan, and the sanctions will take time to set in after the financial windfall the JCPOA gave the Iranian regime. Europe wants to do business with Iran, so we will see if their is a coalition of the willing to enforce sanctions. I doubt it, but we will see.
"
Just my own opinion on this separate from the news items:
A) This was inevitable when the Obama administration circumvented the normal process for treaties and cut Congress out of their clear power to ratify. One way or the other it was not going to be continued once a R president or Congress came to power. Should have done it the right way to start with.
B) Just about every defense of the deal relies on some amount of trusting a country whose standing policy and Friday chant is "Death to Israel, Death to America" to be a fair and good faith partner.
C) In withdrawing from this agreement, Trump had better have some plan going forward, which I suspect he does not. The very real possibility is this will bring even more chaos not because of the JCPOA, but he will declare a win then ignore any fall out and not plan for what is next. (see Fall of ISIS)
On “King Coal: West Virginia’s Abusive Love”
Correct, West Virginia is one of only nine jurisdictions with a single appellate court. With Supreme Court seats an elected "non-partisan" 12-year term of office in WV, as you can imagine WVSCA has vast writ powers and original jurisdiction in proceedings. This has long been a point of contention. Matter of fact, recently the Supreme Court has been dealing with a spending and appropriation scandal that has some calling for change.
On “Oliver North to Become President of NRA”
More specifically, the selfie of a firearm in what otherwise would have nothing to do with it but the weapon is there to get the attention, such as the "graduation photo" thing a few weeks ago. The point wasn't your right to carry, it was to get attention. "I'm at the range working on my skills" is very different to me than "I'm going to go viral, watch this".
On “King Coal: West Virginia’s Abusive Love”
Steel is an excellent parallel. My family has a long history of working both so it is a comparison I use frequently myself. When people, and I do too sometimes, think steel mills they are still thinking of open furnaces and hellscape scenes. Thats still partially true for the blast furnaces, but the reality is the new steel processes and production facilities are more like surgery wards than the mills of old; super hi-tech, leaned out, and almost entirely automated. This article is excellent in describing the new breed of production but its the photo's that really strike you. A dozen techs and a few computer programers run the place. Blast furnaces are still dirty, labor intensive work but even that is starting to be automated. What Youngstown Sheet and Tube needed 27K workers in the 50's to do only takes a couple hundred now, and those jobs are highly specialized. The age of mass general labor in steel and coal is over. Thus, no, those jobs, at that level, are never coming back.
On “Oliver North to Become President of NRA”
Black powder rifles are sacred where I come from, so respect for that.
Travis Bickel types are the extreme of course, but I think there is legitimate criticism of what some have dubbed "Gun Porn". It gets so over the top. Wannabes is a good term for a lot of them. I can remember editing and cropping weapons out of pictures I sent home from Iraq specifically for the (then very young) children to see. Not that they didn't know what weapons were or had a respect for them, with the connotation of me being gone it was just unnecessary. I have plenty of them but not for showing off. I grew up hunting, surrounded by and frequently carrying weapons, and I think it is very clear the "selfie" "facebook" generational shift of promoting your own personal brand at all times has brought out the worst in some gun enthusiast, as it has in all niche genres.
On “King Coal: West Virginia’s Abusive Love”
Blankenships crack about "Mitch's China Family" has a lot of history and some long running fueds. Elain Choa (from Taiwan, but I doubt Don bothered to note the difference), Mitch's wife, was W. Bush's labor Secretary in the '00s. There is way to much there for a comment post, but basically now-Senator Joe Manchin (who Blankenship was once friends with now hates) was the Governor of WV at that time and started cracking down on safety at the state level. Depending on whose version you believe Choa's Labor department started trying to clear a huge backlog of safety issues with the mines, oversaw by MSHA. MSHA was resistant for years to changing their methods, until they were finally forced to do so. So of course operators like Massey, run by Blankenship, starts crying foul when the hard edges return to regulation that had been lax for years with a combination of corruption and incompetence. So generally speaking, Labor Dept or the State would issue violations, and Blankenship was running to MSHA and uses their not-up-to-date rules to circumvent the crackdown in court. That was the environment that, at least in WV, Sago and Upper Big Branch disasters happened in.
"
I could have articulated it better, just as much my fault. As far as ads go, Morriseys where he drops Seneca Rocks on Washington didn’t exactly cover him in glory, especially considering his address is technically included in the DC Metro Statistical area.
"
Yes I'm aware of the closed primary, that was my point. When you see, like they were running last night, a union guy talking about supporting him understand that supporter is most likely a registered Dem and won't be voting today. Same goes with the polling showing him doing well. It might be accurate, but those they are polling might well be excluded from to the primary vote. Trump got a lot of those guys but that doesn't help Blankenship here. He needs R's, and I get feeling R turnout is not going to be great today. Might be wrong we will see.
"
The union miners supporting him are Democrats. For a lot of WV, especially the older generation, Democrat means something much different than the current national connotation. The old term "Blue Dogs" still very much applies there, and a lot of them voted Trump while still registered Democrat. Registration is misleading in a state in flux as WV is. As you correctly point out, turnout is key, especially in a three way race where breaking 30% might well win it for you.